Ochowicz taking fans for idiots!

May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/ochowicz-no-contradiction-in-bmcs-handling-of-ballan-and-santambrogio

Ballan told Cyclingnews that he was due to meet with investigators in Mantova on May 12. While Ochowicz was not sure of the precise nature of his two riders’ encounters with members of the inquiry, he said that he was aware that both Ballan and Santambrogio had been in contact with investigators in Mantova.

I know that they’ve had contact with the magistrate, but I do not have access or confirmation to what degree anything was discussed,” he said.

Ochowicz also admitted that BMC’s own contact with Ballan and Santambrogio had been limited during their period out of competition.

“They were sanctioned, so there wasn’t really any dialogue going on during the sanction period, other than when we reinstated them,” he said. “They had informed us that they had further communications with or attempted to have further communications with the magistrate involved but I don’t know if that happened or not.”
This guy is such an Ahole. His riders were interviewed and he cant talk to them about it? He is employing them FFS!

Hey Och, phone them, email them, fax them, telegram or failing that drive the couple of 100 kilomtres and meet them.

BMC/Phonak whatever, doping team for sure. It really gives one the safe warm feeling that Evans rides on a clean team:rolleyes:

I really find it difficult to believe that a team owner cannot contact a national federation who are investigating 2 of his riders to ask some simple questions and get a feeling for whether they are in trouble or not.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Benotti69 said:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/ochowicz-no-contradiction-in-bmcs-handling-of-ballan-and-santambrogio



This guy is such an Ahole. His riders were interviewed and he cant talk to them about it? He is employing them FFS!

Hey Och, phone them, email them, fax them, telegram or failing that drive the couple of 100 kilomtres and meet them.

BMC/Phonak whatever, doping team for sure. It really gives one the safe warm feeling that Evans rides on a clean team:rolleyes:

I really find it difficult to believe that a team owner cannot contact a national federation who are investigating 2 of his riders to ask some simple questions and get a feeling for whether they are in trouble or not.
Yep. He's getting a little testy too...

Ochowicz refuted the suggestion that the time frame should not impact on a team’s decision-making process over an ethical matter such as doping.

“We don’t know if it’s an ethical matter or not,” he said. “We don’t know that or not. Do you know that? Well, do you know if it’s an ethical issue or not?”

Cyclingnews then reminded Ochowicz of the grave allegations against Ballan published by Gazzetta dello Sport in May. The Italian newspaper quoted transcripts of alleged conversations between Ballan and Nigrelli from April 2009, in which they discuss the use of growth hormone and EPO. It was also reported that investigators suspected Ballan of having undergone blood transfusions.

“Who have they been accused by?” Ochowicz said. “I don’t think it is [an ethical matter], they haven’t been accused by anybody. There have been speculative accusations, but there hasn’t been any official accusation of any kind.”
Normally mild mannered Och is tiring of Novitsky's microscope buried up his backside perhaps? Swiss bank accounts anyone?
 
Oct 29, 2009
77
0
0
Wow, talk about a doofus. This guy contradicts himself throughout the entire article. Now, Och has never been thought of as an honest guy with integrity from what I've heard, but this article makes him and his BMC program look like a complete sham. Wonder if he'll eventually be caught in the web that is the Lance investigation too. That would be nice so we could finally rid our sport of these idiotic cancers.
 
Aug 3, 2009
3,217
1
0
jmax22 said:
Wonder if he'll eventually be caught in the web that is the Lance investigation too. That would be nice so we could finally rid our sport of these idiotic cancers.
Who? This guy?

 
May 14, 2009
147
0
0
Moose McKnuckles said:
People like Och are a real cancer to this sport. Fitting that he's feeding at the old Phonak trough.
I agree. What kind of advice is Phinney getting from his parents that would impel him to associate himself with Lance/the Hog and then this guy?
 
Aug 3, 2009
3,217
1
0
GoGarmin said:
I agree. What kind of advice is Phinney getting from his parents that would impel him to associate himself with Lance/the Hog and then this guy?
Davis and Och have been friends for almost thirty years, going all the way back to 7-11 in 1983.
 
May 26, 2009
3,687
1
0
There is a moral issue here with the opinions presented....

Unless I am mistaken there is indeed no court order or a suspension blocking either of those riders not to compete.

Yet you guys agree the riders need to be punished already????

I'm sorry guys, but this is becoming a rabid lynch mob. Whatever Ballan did wrong, he does not need to be kept in limbo. As long as there is no official subpoena or suspension notification he should be allowed to race.

We are not having caveman justice anymore.
 
May 3, 2010
2,662
0
0
GoGarmin said:
I agree. What kind of advice is Phinney getting from his parents that would impel him to associate himself with Lance/the Hog and then this guy?
Hate to say it but I don't think he stands a chance. It shows the fallacy of hoping that the next generation will be cleaner.

If Phinney wants to ride clean his best bet is to join FDJ ;) but he's got no hope at Phonak II with Och.

If Armstrong is a boil on the **** of the sport, Och is a skidmark in the pants of the sport.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Franklin said:
There is a moral issue here with the opinions presented....

Unless I am mistaken there is indeed no court order or a suspension blocking either of those riders not to compete.

Yet you guys agree the riders need to be punished already????

I'm sorry guys, but this is becoming a rabid lynch mob. Whatever Ballan did wrong, he does not need to be kept in limbo. As long as there is no official subpoena or suspension notification he should be allowed to race.

We are not having caveman justice anymore.
The above is not the topic of this thread.
 
Jul 14, 2009
2,499
0
0
GoGarmin said:
I agree. What kind of advice is Phinney getting from his parents that would impel him to associate himself with Lance/the Hog and then this guy?
Ochowicz has had the longest running pro program in the US. He can get access to cash and races that other teams can't. He rode bikes with Phinney's mom and dad before they were married. I would think any parents would want the best for their kid. Given the choices I think Och is the right decision. Be careful about the 6 degrees rule in US bike racing..most people and things are linked to Lance after a degree or two, the way it is and the way it will be for another decade or so.
 
May 26, 2009
3,687
1
0
Scott SoCal said:
The above is not the topic of this thread.
The hell it isn't....

The OP:

BMC/Phonak whatever, doping team for sure. It really gives one the safe warm feeling that Evans rides on a clean team
The OP, the one making the thread, makes the connection with doping. Clearly he feels BMC should have sanctioned them.

Ocho being evasive is no proof of doping.

Furthermore, the whole article is about sanctioning these riders by BMC. So how can you straightfaced say "this is not the topic of the thread".
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Franklin said:
The hell it isn't....

The OP:



The OP, the one making the thread, makes the connection with doping. Clearly he feels BMC should have sanctioned them.

Ocho being evasive is no proof of doping.

Furthermore, the whole article is about sanctioning these riders by BMC. So how can you straightfaced say "this is not the topic of the thread".
Name of thread: Ochowicz taking fans for idiots!

The body of the OP;

This guy is such an Ahole. His riders were interviewed and he cant talk to them about it? He is employing them FFS!

Hey Och, phone them, email them, fax them, telegram or failing that drive the couple of 100 kilomtres and meet them.

BMC/Phonak whatever, doping team for sure. It really gives one the safe warm feeling that Evans rides on a clean team

I really find it difficult to believe that a team owner cannot contact a national federation who are investigating 2 of his riders to ask some simple questions and get a feeling for whether they are in trouble or not.
The conclusion of the OP tying back to the title of the thread:

I really find it difficult to believe that a team owner cannot contact a national federation who are investigating 2 of his riders to ask some simple questions and get a feeling for whether they are in trouble or not.

Your off-topic post;

There is a moral issue here with the opinions presented....

Unless I am mistaken there is indeed no court order or a suspension blocking either of those riders not to compete.

Yet you guys agree the riders need to be punished already????

I'm sorry guys, but this is becoming a rabid lynch mob. Whatever Ballan did wrong, he does not need to be kept in limbo. As long as there is no official subpoena or suspension notification he should be allowed to race.

We are not having caveman justice anymore.

"I'm sorry guys, but this is becoming a rabid lynch mob. Whatever Ballan did wrong, he does not need to be kept in limbo. As long as there is no official subpoena or suspension notification he should be allowed to race."

Where does this have anything to do with the OP?
 
Feb 22, 2011
465
0
0
Mrs John Murphy said:
Hate to say it but I don't think he stands a chance. It shows the fallacy of hoping that the next generation will be cleaner.

If Phinney wants to ride clean his best bet is to join FDJ ;) but he's got no hope at Phonak II with Och.

If Armstrong is a boil on the **** of the sport, Och is a skidmark in the pants of the sport.
Don't worry; Och likes Och's credibility.
 
This is actually sad to me, and shows just how far the sport has sunk. I'm old enough to remember the early days of Team 7-11 and Och trying to elevate them to the level of a Tour team, and succeeding. What a world of difference 25 years makes. Like many others, Och seems to have followed Armstrong completely over to the dark side.
 
Jun 19, 2009
5,220
0
0
Franklin said:
There is a moral issue here with the opinions presented....

Unless I am mistaken there is indeed no court order or a suspension blocking either of those riders not to compete.

Yet you guys agree the riders need to be punished already????

I'm sorry guys, but this is becoming a rabid lynch mob. Whatever Ballan did wrong, he does not need to be kept in limbo. As long as there is no official subpoena or suspension notification he should be allowed to race.

We are not having caveman justice anymore.
I'd agree with them being legal. On the other hand Ochowicz isn't taking any fans anywhere he hasn't visited before.
 
Murray said:
If there's no sanction, they should ride... period.
Between your post and the Franklin post a little before it, how many times does the plain fact the federation is enabling the doping have to be brought up?

As long as the federation is aggressively managing positives/warnings away, there's no way you can rely on the federation to act as a safety mechanism of any kind. And then there's how the dope testing process as outlined in the first half of the article in this thread http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=13889 is creating a field full of false negatives.
 
May 26, 2009
3,687
1
0
DirtyWorks said:
Between your post and the Franklin post a little before it, how many times does the plain fact the federation is enabling the doping have to be brought up?

As long as the federation is aggressively managing positives/warnings away, there's no way you can rely on the federation to act as a safety mechanism of any kind. And then there's how the dope testing process as outlined in the first half of the article in this thread http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=13889 is creating a field full of false negatives.
If a rider is caught: Sanction him.

What else can you do?

Sanction based on rumors? I'm staunchly anti-doping, but that's just wrong.
 
May 26, 2009
3,687
1
0
Scott SoCal said:
Name of thread: Ochowicz taking fans for idiots!
Let's use logic.

1. Och takes fans for idiots. Reason: the statements in the article.
2. The statements in the article only talk about not sanctioning Ballan and Santambrogio due to there not being legal proceedings. All Ochowicz says is that he hasn't heard a thing.
3. Ochowicz should know more considering his position. Now had this been a normal job I'm not sure how this would work.. as my boss would have trouble getting legal details about me, but this being a federation issue makes privacy and legality a different ballgame.
4. It's easy to agree with the Op and so far I'm not faulting the sentiment .
5. But what the Op does not mention is that it seems rather logical that BMC protects his riders. Not just because it's good for them... but simply because it's a legal can of worms if you implicate an employee without evidence.
6. And as cherry on the cake the OP jumps to BMC being a doping team. As he is still talking about the article we can only interpret this that this is yet another example of "protecting dopers". Otherwise this reference would not explicitly be made.

Any way you slice it or dice it... the main gripe is Ochowicz not throwing his riders under the bus.


Where does this have anything to do with the OP?
As I pointed out and will point out again: this is about Ochowicz statements. Clearly the OP vehemently disagrees with Och's policy of not sanctioning the mentioned riders. Considering he calls it a "doping team" we also see that the judge and jury have reached a verdict....

Let me be very clear: had this been about my boss and me being mentioned in a criminal affair I certainly would want my boss being evasive. If not I might sue the company for destroying my job. My boss can take actions as soon as there are legal proceedings against me. Before that time he just has to treat me like any other employee. And he sure as hell should not make statements that can hurt my case. If he has evidence one way or the other: then he can go to the magistrate and sanction me. If not he should keep his mouth shut.
 
Feb 22, 2011
465
0
0
Franklin said:
Let's use logic.

1. Och takes fans for idiots. Reason: the statements in the article.
2. The statements in the article only talk about not sanctioning Ballan and Santambrogio due to there not being legal proceedings.
3. Then the OP jumps to BMC being a doping team. As he is still talking about the article we can only interpret this that this is yet another example of "protecting dopers". Otherwise this reference would not explicitly be made.

As I pointed out and will point out again: this is about Ochowicz statements. Clearly the OP vehemently disagrees with Och's policy of not sanctioning the mentioned riders. Considering he calls it a "doping team" we also see that the judge and jury have reached a verdict....
Which goes back to the actual, original point: how can Och know for certain what is going on with his riders or whether in/action is appropriate if he is incapable of doing anything more than sitting in a darkened room alone?
 
May 26, 2009
3,687
1
0
skippythepinhead said:
Which goes back to the actual, original point: how can Och know for certain what is going on with his riders or whether in/action is appropriate if he is incapable of doing anything more than sitting in a darkened room alone?
What would you want that Ochowicz said?

1. Throw them under the bus. This seems harsh and dangerous due to legal issues.
2. Be smart and thus vague.

I truly don't see another option. Even if he did know more, all he says would influence the case (which one way or the other seems to be stalling) and would open him and his employer (BMC) up for legal trouble.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Franklin said:
Let's use logic.

1. Och takes fans for idiots. Reason: the statements in the article.
2. The statements in the article only talk about not sanctioning Ballan and Santambrogio due to there not being legal proceedings.
3. Then the OP jumps to BMC being a doping team. As he is still talking about the article we can only interpret this that this is yet another example of "protecting dopers". Otherwise this reference would not explicitly be made.




As I pointed out and will point out again: this is about Ochowicz statements. Clearly the OP vehemently disagrees with Och's policy of not sanctioning the mentioned riders. Considering he calls it a "doping team" we also see that the judge and jury have reached a verdict....

Let me be very clear: had this been about my boss and me being mentioned in a criminal affair I certainly would want my boss being evasive. If not I might sue the company for destroying my job. My boss can take actions as soon as there are legal proceedings against me. Before that time he just has to treat me like any other employee. And he sure as hell should not make statements that can hurt my case. If he has evidence one way or the other: then he can go to the magistrate and sanction me. If not he should keep his mouth shut.
Ok. One more time, here is what the OP highlighted;

“I know that they’ve had contact with the magistrate, but I do not have access or confirmation to what degree anything was discussed,” he said.

here is the Op's conclusion;

I really find it difficult to believe that a team owner cannot contact a national federation who are investigating 2 of his riders to ask some simple questions and get a feeling for whether they are in trouble or not.

Clearly the OP never wrote squat about "vehemently disagrees with Och's policy of not sanctioning the mentioned riders.". Those are your conclusions, not the OP.

As to this;

Let me be very clear: had this been about my boss and me being mentioned in a criminal affair I certainly would want my boss being evasive. If not I might sue the company for destroying my job. My boss can take actions as soon as there are legal proceedings against me. Before that time he just has to treat me like any other employee. And he sure as hell should not make statements that can hurt my case. If he has evidence one way or the other: then he can go to the magistrate and sanction me. If not he should keep his mouth shut.
Your analogy is missing something. Had you been mentioned in a criminal affair in the context of doing your job, whether you would want your boss to be evasive is irrelevant. Had you done (been accused of publicly) something criminal in the course of your job I'd guess your boss would ask you a few questions about it and what your involvement actually was, would he not?

Och sitting back saying he 'knows nothing' is patently false and, as the OP states, playing the fans as idiots.
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
What are you guys talking about, he's making sure none of his BMC riders are doping, and working damn hard at it!!! :)
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Franklin said:
What would you want that Ochowicz said?

1. Throw them under the bus. This seems harsh and dangerous due to legal issues.
2. Be smart and thus vague.

I truly don't see another option. Even if he did know more, all he says would influence the case (which one way or the other seems to be stalling) and would open him and his employer (BMC) up for legal trouble.
Why couldn't he have said something like..." yeah, this is not really new. So far, no charges have been filed and we really don't have much new information. It would be unfair to hold them out of competition, so until such time as there is more information we are going to allow them to do their job. It's the right thing to do".

Instead he says he has not discussed the matter with either his riders or the authorities. Personally I don't believe that but perhaps that's the way he operates.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Ripper The Clinic 29
Similar threads
Taking the Pi** Pidcock

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS