Pereiro goes berserk

[GotDropped]

Not quite. The press broke the cycling part of the story but lost their nerve when it came to calling out their football they lost their appetite for blood. One can only surmise that they realised that they'd be killing the golden goose.

If the press had the names of the football players, someone would have released them... even if it was only anonimously. I believe it was covered up from further up. I don't deny that there is a different treatment of cyclist to other sports, but I still think that you are far better off being a doper in Spain, than in any other country as Spain has a doping culture and the results are far more important than morals and the truth.

 

[hrotha]

Glad you mentioned Roberto Heras... our friend wikipedia again:

http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roberto_Heras#Dopaje

"En el 2011 la justicia ordinaria dio la razón al corredor quedando anulado su positivo por diferentes irregularidades en el tratamiento de las pruebas y en la realización de los análisis."

So, in 2011, 6 years after being stripped of his Vuelta title for being positive for EPO with both the A and B samples, and 6 years after the UCI stripped him of his vuelta title and everything seemed buried and forgotten, a Spanish court disregarded the positive test for different irregularities and therefor proved Roberto Heras to be innocent...

You could then mention that the RFEC and/or the Spanish antidoping agency appealed.

 

[GotDropped]

You could then mention that the RFEC and/or the Spanish antidoping agency appealed.

Wasn't aware of it and I am trying to find a link for it, but can't. But it is just proof yet again of the Spanish authorities covering up dopers.

 

[GotDropped]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSEGxYUiRTM

In this video there is an interesting part just after 10:25 where the journalist says this to Pereiro:

"Maybe if there were lots of people like me who report(condemn) these things that have happened (Pereiro interupts saying "but the first person who condemns is me") - (The journalist continues) If some of you had of gone public and shown your face and pointed out publicly the ones that have swallowed and the ones that have injected maybe cycling would be better of now. But it was easier to just shut up and swallow. And you know all about that. And this isn't just a moderm thing. And there are some cyclists who complete very clean, and others who aren't clean at all. It's true, isn't it? Or not?"

To which Pereiro responds: "No". Is silent for a short moment, then start talking about how cyclist pay 10% of their wages for antidoping.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

We don't know if he did, or didn't have anything to do with puerto because as you said, of the 130 or so names only a cuarter have come out. We will never know... but Pereiro sure as hell knows. But puerto wasn't the only place to dope yourself in Spain. So, whether or not he was involved in puerto is regardless, the puerto case is just an indication of how doping is tolerated and covered up in Spain. One thing is for sure, if Oscar Pereiro was a clean rider, his opinions would be very diferent than the ones he has now. He would be disgusted with riders like Valverde for ruining his career and stealing his results... but he is not, because he is just as guilty as the rest of them.

And as has been said, Pereiro was likely a Losa client. The only names connected to Abarcá in Operación Puerto were Zaballa and Valverde, who were relatively recent acquisitions (Valverde's involvement in Puerto dates back to 2004, when he was with Kelme). They most likely went elsewhere, or were a don't ask don't tell team.

If Óscar Pereiro was a clean rider, then some of his opinions would be very different than the ones he has now.

But the opinions he expressed on this TV show - those of hating the way he gets mocked and derided for being a cyclist while other sports stars get a free pass, of resenting the way doping is covered up and not even talked about in other sports when it dominates discussion in cycling - I don't see why or how those would be any different if Óscar was clean. He'd still be fed up of the mistreatment of his sport compared to others. He wouldn't have gone on Punto Pelota to run down other cyclists. Because that wasn't what he was there for.

A lot of people who seem against Pereiro because he didn't raze the house down, tell them about how he was a doper and which cyclists are at it don't seem to grasp that he had gone onto a football show to talk about football. It was only when one of the hosts made a joke about cyclists and drugs that this started. Pereiro was not there to talk about cycling, and only did so when goaded into it. Punto Pelota is not a show about cycling, and its audience - and hosts - don't give a damn about whether cyclists are doping, other than to laugh at them once in a while. Pereiro was there to talk about football, and that's why he talked of the doping of Zidane, of Guardiola, of Gurpegui, and not the doping of Valverde, Contador or Heras.

If Pereiro wants to come clean, he can do it via much more responsive channels than Punto fricking Pelota. At least credit him with SOME intelligence.

 

[GotDropped]

And as has been said, Pereiro was likely a Losa client. The only names connected to Abarcá in Operación Puerto were Zaballa and Valverde, who were relatively recent acquisitions (Valverde's involvement in Puerto dates back to 2004, when he was with Kelme). They most likely went elsewhere, or were a don't ask don't tell team.

If Óscar Pereiro was a clean rider, then some of his opinions would be very different than the ones he has now.

But the opinions he expressed on this TV show - those of hating the way he gets mocked and derided for being a cyclist while other sports stars get a free pass, of resenting the way doping is covered up and not even talked about in other sports when it dominates discussion in cycling - I don't see why or how those would be any different if Óscar was clean. He'd still be fed up of the mistreatment of his sport compared to others. He wouldn't have gone on Punto Pelota to run down other cyclists. Because that wasn't what he was there for.

A lot of people who seem against Pereiro because he didn't raze the house down, tell them about how he was a doper and which cyclists are at it don't seem to grasp that he had gone onto a football show to talk about football. It was only when one of the hosts made a joke about cyclists and drugs that this started. Pereiro was not there to talk about cycling, and only did so when goaded into it. Punto Pelota is not a show about cycling, and its audience - and hosts - don't give a damn about whether cyclists are doping, other than to laugh at them once in a while. Pereiro was there to talk about football, and that's why he talked of the doping of Zidane, of Guardiola, of Gurpegui, and not the doping of Valverde, Contador or Heras.

If Pereiro wants to come clean, he can do it via much more responsive channels than Punto fricking Pelota. At least credit him with SOME intelligence.

Yes agree, but he used the same old "Have I ever test positive? NO!" in order to win an argument. That for me made me lose a lot of respect for what he was trying to defend. And what is he saying? That the cycling cheats get treated diferently to the soccer cheats. He should be happy and proud that cycling is trying to clean itself up.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Yes agree, but he used the same old "Have I ever test positive? NO!" in order to win an argument. That for me made me lose a lot of respect for what he was trying to defend. And what is he saying? That the cycling cheats get treated diferently to the soccer cheats. He should be happy and proud that cycling is trying to clean itself up.

Maybe it's hard to be happy and proud when your kid is ashamed of people turning up to test you all the time, and when you suffer mockery and derision because of your profession from the kind of troglodytes on that show who praise people you know have done everything you've done and worse, and that being on there and them not being able to resist taking unnecessary potshots at cycling despite it being irrelevant to the discourse was the straw that broke the camel's back?

Remember, Pereiro was the guy that got tested in the hallway of a restaurant a couple of years back because the testers insisted on testing him despite turning up at the wrong time, so they came to the restaurant, couldn't do the test in the toilet so stripped him down in the restaurant to conduct the tests. It's easy to get annoyed when you compare that treatment to Gennaro Gattuso refusing a sanctioned drug test, and everybody just kind of accepting it.

 

[Albatros]

Then you would be aware that there were times when it was possible and impossible to be competitive. Which shows the obvious flaws in your argument in calling them all dopers.

That does not apply to this era as far as I can see. The speed average is very similar to years where doping was widespread. They may confiscate your machine gun, but you still have the shotgun, the pistol and a knife, and God knows if more inventions are on their way. You think the cheats ever stop? Well, some they do, but they are quickly replaced by others. Just look at the history of doping.

If I had ignored it you would be able to show it instead of making up something that is irrelevant.

Nope. It is very relevant. You discard the possiblitity that the great majority may be at it and I say that it is very possible and in some cases proven. Festina team is a good example. Was it that only cheaters joined that team, or that maybe the culture in cycling "forced" them to cheat? And I quote the word force because as I say cheating is part of human nature and being honest too, even if it sounds paradoxical.

Now you are saying that there are riders who do not dope - good to see your pessimism lifting.

The also rans, and I am not even sure about it . When you read that bags of blood in the hundreds and whole teams are being sussed out it does not paint a very positive picture.

Out of curiosity, what is the percentage of dopers you believe still exist in cycling big races nowadays?

 

[El Pistolero]

Out of curiosity, what is the percentage of dopers you believe still exist in cycling big races nowadays?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SiMHTK15Pik

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Nope. It is very relevant. You discard the possiblitity that the great majority may be at it and I say that it is very possible and in some cases proven. Festina team is a good example. Was it that only cheaters joined that team, or that maybe the culture in cycling "forced" them to cheat? And I quote the word force because as I say cheating is part of human nature and being honest too, even if it sounds paradoxical.

Christophe Bassons rode for Festina, so even there nobody was "forced" to cheat.

 

[hrotha]

Yes agree, but he used the same old "Have I ever test positive? NO!" in order to win an argument. That for me made me lose a lot of respect for what he was trying to defend. And what is he saying? That the cycling cheats get treated diferently to the soccer cheats. He should be happy and proud that cycling is trying to clean itself up.

That I certainly agree with.

 

[GotDropped]

Maybe it's hard to be happy and proud when your kid is ashamed of people turning up to test you all the time, and when you suffer mockery and derision because of your profession from the kind of troglodytes on that show who praise people you know have done everything you've done and worse, and that being on there and them not being able to resist taking unnecessary potshots at cycling despite it being irrelevant to the discourse was the straw that broke the camel's back?

Remember, Pereiro was the guy that got tested in the hallway of a restaurant a couple of years back because the testers insisted on testing him despite turning up at the wrong time, so they came to the restaurant, couldn't do the test in the toilet so stripped him down in the restaurant to conduct the tests. It's easy to get annoyed when you compare that treatment to Gennaro Gattuso refusing a sanctioned drug test, and everybody just kind of accepting it.

Everything you say makes sense, and I totally agree with you. But, if Pereiro was clean, it wouldn't bother him. He would just have to tell his kid that people cheat, and for that reason he has to help the testers catch the cheats. What bothers Pereiro is that he lived a lie, and was reminded of that lie every time the testers knocked on his door.

 

[Berzin]

Everything you say makes sense, and I totally agree with you. But, if Pereiro was clean, it wouldn't bother him. He would just have to tell his kid that people cheat, and for that reason he has to help the testers catch the cheats. What bothers Pereiro is that he lived a lie, and was reminded of that lie every time the testers knocked on his door.

Are you going to make Periero your one-man crusade? Was the Pope vetted anywhere near this level?

Get a life.

 

[DirtyWorks]

.... He should be happy and proud that cycling is trying to clean itself up.

Another pet peeve of mine and this isn't a personal attack. Just so you and hopefully anyone else may be informed.

The UCI is not interested in ACTUALLY having dope-free fields. They need the appearance of a strong doping program, but *MANY* simple facts surrounding their doping practices lead one to the conclusion very little has changed.

I think many would agree that the TdF in 2011 was cleaner/slower. There are too many other dope-reminiscent race performances in 2011 to suggest the cleanliness extended to other events. 2012?/13? will go faster again as UCI assumes control of all testing for all cycling federations.

 

[craig1985]

IIRC the reason why many Spanish Puerto riders couldn't get suspended as doping wasn't a criminal offence in Spain at the time, unlike in France, Italy, Germany etc. where if you dope you are actually breaking the law, and they weren't able to apply the law retrospectively when doping did become a criminal offence post Puerto.

 

[GotDropped]

Thats just bull. Of course they could have been suspended from their sports. They couldnt be charged with a criminl offence, but you dont need to be charged with criminal offence to be suspended for doping. Valverde has been suspended for his participation in op and hehasnt been retrospectively charged criminally.

 

[hrotha]

Thats just bul. Of course they could have been suspended from their sports. They couldnt be charged with a criminl offence, but you dont need to be charged with criminal offence to be suspended for doping. Valverde has been suspended for his participation in op and hehasnt been retrospectively chaged criminally.

But the thing (the official explanation anyway) is that they couldn't use evidence from a criminal case in a sports jury because doping wasn't illegal in itself.

Personally I'm sure they could have found a way though. You don't even need a specific anti-doping law when you have laws against tax fraud and drug trafficking.

 

[BroDeal]

IIRC the reason why many Spanish Puerto riders couldn't get suspended as doping wasn't a criminal offence in Spain at the time, unlike in France, Italy, Germany etc. where if you dope you are actually breaking the law, and they weren't able to apply the law retrospectively when doping did become a criminal offence post Puerto.

They could have been charged with standard fraud, not the actual act of doping. They did not need a special sporting fraud law to go after them. They never had the will to do it.

 

[Benotti69]

I also imagine there are laws against taking/handling medicines which are prescription only without the correct prescription.

 

[GotDropped]

But the thing (the official explanation anyway) is that they couldn't use evidence from a criminal case in a sports jury because doping wasn't illegal in itself.

Personally I'm sure they could have found a way though. You don't even need a specific anti-doping law when you have laws against tax fraud and drug trafficking.

You're exactly right, and that is what I am getting at when I say it is the authorities that protect the cheats.

 

[GotDropped]

Are you going to make Periero your one-man crusade? Was the Pope vetted anywhere near this level?

Get a life.

I don't think you even deserve a response, but I will respond to you even if you haven't shown me the same level of respect.

People who do not understand Spanish have said they have more respect for Pereiro when they didn't even understand what he was talking about. I was just explaining from my point of view as a Spanish speaker what I understand to be what Pereiro was defending, and for that reason I have said what I have said (read all my posts). I have nothing against the guy, I don't even know him.

But Pereiro isn't the problem here, the Spanish system is that turns a blind eye to cheats and protects them as best it can.

 

[robertocarlos]

If Spanish authorities were not able to suspend then, why didn't the uci?

 

[Cobblestoned]

I don't think you even deserve a response, but I will respond to you even if you haven't shown me the same level of respect.

People who do not understand Spanish have said they have more respect for Pereiro when they didn't even understand what he was talking about. I was just explaining from my point of view as a Spanish speaker what I understand to be what Pereiro was defending, and for that reason I have said what I have said (read all my posts). I have nothing against the guy, I don't even know him.

But Pereiro isn't the problem here, the Spanish system is that turns a blind eye to cheats and protects them as best it can.

The most ridiculous thing is, that they even handled their own Spanish riders involved differently.
Some got a slap, some scape goats, some just got on, some just dissappeared in silence.....
Sure there were some agreements, deals or amnesty. Inside thing.

As for Valverde, Prince of Spain is behind him.

Anyway, the main reason for the stuck and surpressed situation was "fútbol". Some digged too deep.

 

[GotDropped]

If Spanish authorities were not able to suspend then, why didn't the uci?

Please elaborate, I'm not sure you have read the thread, or if I just don't understand your question.

 

[Polish]

Pro Cycling is the CrackHead DrugAddict Panhandler of ProSports.
It is true. You know it is true.
Sure, some cycling teams are tryng to go straight.
That is commendable. Other sports don't have "clean teams".

And it is true when the crackhead points to the other professions and says "you guys do drugs too!"

Yes, that is true.
But cycling is still the crackhead drugaddict panhandler of sports.
That does not change.

It could change though. A few more years of clean Giro's, TdF's, and AToC's and cycling could become a productive member of the pro sport society again.