When they finally realised that unlike Liggett, Sherwen actually remembers some of the things he learnt about cycling.pmcg76 said:A little off-topic, just finished watching the end of ToC live stream, I havent heard P & P for a while now and it seems that Sherwan does most of the the commentating whilst Phil adds the colour now. When did this change happen?
The people who believed those statements never heard of Niklas Axelsson.Bavarianrider said:You are amking a fair point. The fact that Lance spoke out so agressively against drugs, including all his cancer history stuff certainly made many many people believe him. Heck those statements where he said "i had cancer you must be a total fool if you think i would take any drugs after going through this", are just so disgusting, but it made people belive him. What a fraud this man is.
How are we meant to clean up today's péloton when all the DSes, team owners etc are from the bad old days? We have to clean up the problems of yesteryear before we can clean up the problems of today. Otherwise it's pretty arbitrary - "Riis and Armstrong, that was in the past. Let it go." Especially when you consider that Alejandro Valverde was finally suspended in 2010 for an offence dating back to 2004 - a time before the end of the timeframe in the Lance case.Murray said:If only that were true. Cycling is addressing the problems it used to have. The riders involved are either retired or in the twilight of their careers. In the meantime a rider who has tested positive is leading the Giro. Instead of focusing on what happened 10 years ago they should address what's happening now.
Maybe Contador will confess when he's long retired, but by then it will be too late to matter.
Let's also point out that what is happening now is the UCI's business - but the UCI aren't the ones investigating Lance. Nor are USAC, whose job it is to regulate the sport in the USA. This is the feds. The feds are not here to police cycling, they have no interest in the sport. The feds are here to clear up potential fraud, in the form of people spending what is indirectly taxpayers' money on PEDs. What this means for who won the Tour de France is irrelevant to them. So far the UCI appears to have been content to let the investigation run its own course and get on with its job of policing the sport today, which is what it should be doing. It should be doing the job more competently, granted, but at least it's doing what it should.