Primož Roglič

Page 22 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Omertà is the word

Cycling is such a niche sport with very endogamic culture. And doping is big part of that culture, its been like that forever. When you see Riis, Matxin, Neil Stephens, etc. as WT managers (even people like Intxausti after what happened to him at Sky found a managerial role teaching the new generations...), Contador, Wiggins, Jalabert, even Santi Perez (lel) commentating on TV, a gazillion other riders with shady past working as PR for bike brands, organizing races, etc. you know its in everybody's best interest to shut up and play along. The current culture/rules rewards them for doing so. Plus lets be honest, for most these people to be part of the cycling scene is all they have. To shut up is the logical, socially accepted, profitable decision, in the current context.

What is more surprising is how riders that are somehow kicked out of the scene for breaking unwritten rules (so you would assume no economic interest anymore), they also prefer to keep it quiet, which could speak about other reasons there and what someone hinted about it being "dangerous".

To break the circle you need to change the rules that reward this behavior, period. Or else someone experiencing an epiphany moment à la Manzano :screamcat:
 
Omertà is the word

Cycling is such a niche sport with very endogamic culture. And doping is big part of that culture, its been like that forever. When you see Riis, Matxin, Neil Stephens, etc. as WT managers (even people like Intxausti after what happened to him at Sky found a managerial role teaching the new generations...), Contador, Wiggins, Jalabert, even Santi Perez (lel) commentating on TV, a gazillion other riders with shady past working as PR for bike brands, organizing races, etc. you know its in everybody's best interest to shut up and play along. The current culture/rules rewards them for doing so. Plus lets be honest, for most these people to be part of the cycling scene is all they have. To shut up is the logical, socially accepted, profitable decision, in the current context.

What is more surprising is how riders that are somehow kicked out of the scene for breaking unwritten rules (so you would assume no economic interest anymore), they also prefer to keep it quiet, which could speak about other reasons there and what someone hinted about it being "dangerous".

To break the circle you need to change the rules that reward this behavior, period. Or else someone experiencing an epiphany moment à la Manzano :screamcat:
This is why I believe in amnesty. I know it sounds crazy and I won't say I am not. I just can't make anything else make sense when everything is a mess. Truth and reconciliation commission.

I mentioned danger as I am thinking about UAE and Bahrain being authoritarian states. Which could be potentially be dangerous for a journalist.
 
This is why I believe in amnesty. I know it sounds crazy and I won't say I am not. I just can't make anything else make sense when everything is a mess. Truth and reconciliation commission.

I mentioned danger as I am thinking about UAE and Bahrain being authoritarian states. Which could be potentially be dangerous for a journalist.
That notion was bandied about around the same time Armstrong was exposed. People here probably know more than me, but it never came to fruition.
You had a bunch of riders and sports directors admit what took place on an individual level, but my understanding is the kingpin -- i.e. Armstrong and others -- continued to carry weight by nixing the idea. Guy was not going to say everything, because quote everything probably extended past his team's doping plans.
p.s. Good point regarding UAE and Bahrain. They should never have been granted world tour status.
p.p.s. I hope I don't get suspended for stating an opinion.
 
Reactions: noob
That notion was bandied about around the same time Armstrong was exposed. People here probably know more than me, but it never came to fruition.
You had a bunch of riders and sports directors admit what took place on an individual level, but my understanding is the kingpin -- i.e. Armstrong and others -- continued to carry weight by nixing the idea. Guy was not going to say everything, because quote everything probably extended past his team's doping plans.
p.s. Good point regarding UAE and Bahrain. They should never have been granted world tour status.
p.p.s. I hope I don't get suspended for stating an opinion.
I agree. I honestly don't think there should be teams from authoritarian states, nor races in those states. Which imo means no Hungary or Turkey either. (I don't like Almeida going to UAE)

I keep wondering about Armstrong. If there was someone above him or if he was above everyone. I could also see Armstrong being too proud and his team mates too afraid of him to speak. He's clearly in the dark triad. The question to me is only if someone above him was even more dangerous.
 
UCI & ASO?

Whatever we know about FIFA/UEFA corruption, that can be easily applied to other sports. You can pay, you are safe. Simple....
It wouldn't surprise me if UCI & ASO know what's happening at Bahrain&UAE but because of financial reasons they stay quiet.
We saw that countries from Middle East are not afraid of breaking the rules with their money in other sports. Qatar 2022 scandal and how clubs owned by guys from there break the fair-play rules makes me think the philosophy there is "no matter what we have to win".
 
Reactions: noob
Sep 22, 2020
5
2
530
It wouldn't surprise me if UCI & ASO know what's happening at Bahrain&UAE but because of financial reasons they stay quiet.
We saw that countries from Middle East are not afraid of breaking the rules with their money in other sports. Qatar 2022 scandal and how clubs owned by guys from there break the fair-play rules makes me think the philosophy there is "no matter what we have to win".
Economically it would not be rational to really search for doping, as long as the results for the main publicum seems reasonable. The doping scandals in the 00's damaged the sport, so the easy way is to keep it under control some positive doping results for a small teams and mid peleton riders but let the big boys do there stuff, like in other sports. I mean in football is much much money at stake that for me it seems unbeliveable that all this is clean. But the most people dont think at doping in football, because the manage they (FIFA, UEFA ...) things clever.
Ja, i know it seems like it is a conspiracy theory, but from a monetary point of view its the rational way to handle the doping topic.

Enough offtopic, to Roglic itself. Of course i do not belive that he is clean, in my view, since i watch cycling, no grand tour winner is clean. But he had an reasonable developement and sometimes seems human (TDF ITT 2020 Stage 20 or giro 2019), and his vuelta wins were, in my oppinion, against rather weak competition (Bernal not 100% after covid, Mas in my view more a top 5-10 rider atm, Lopez, well Lopez is Lopez). At least he was not sitting in the lotto train and attacked or followed the attacks (Bernal).

I hope he is in form at the Tour 2022 and comes through the first week without crash, because if he is in form he is in my oppinion the only one who can challenge Pogacar.
 
That notion was bandied about around the same time Armstrong was exposed. People here probably know more than me, but it never came to fruition.
You had a bunch of riders and sports directors admit what took place on an individual level, but my understanding is the kingpin -- i.e. Armstrong and others -- continued to carry weight by nixing the idea. Guy was not going to say everything, because quote everything probably extended past his team's doping plans.
p.s. Good point regarding UAE and Bahrain. They should never have been granted world tour status.
p.p.s. I hope I don't get suspended for stating an opinion.
There were some sorts of reduced punishments for coming forward but few participated. That sort of initiative seemed to pass with the times and most accepted that Sponsors' aversion to bad publicity and the flight of money out of the sport sorted things out. Teamwide and institutional doping was too risky and the old-style "everyone did it" former riders were allowed to slink back into the sporting management.
I'll echo that Good Point about UAE and Bahrain: they are the sponsors and their country's policies on so many things would suggest they could give zero sh*ts. The UCI needs them enough that they would just blame and ban riders rather than end a team. UAE has what Armstrong and Weisel sought: ownership of big events that would place their operation in the "too big to fail" category. I can only imagine where we'd be today if they had successfully purchased the Tour's organization. They already owned the UCI pretty much and that wasn't quite enough.
 
Reactions: the delgados
As for Roglic; he hasn't done anything insanely otherworldly to suggest he is beyond the medical technology of other Tour contenders. His progression has been measured, although some season-long superior form sometimes looks really....unreal.
 
There were some sorts of reduced punishments for coming forward but few participated. That sort of initiative seemed to pass with the times and most accepted that Sponsors' aversion to bad publicity and the flight of money out of the sport sorted things out. Teamwide and institutional doping was too risky and the old-style "everyone did it" former riders were allowed to slink back into the sporting management.
I'll echo that Good Point about UAE and Bahrain: they are the sponsors and their country's policies on so many things would suggest they could give zero sh*ts. The UCI needs them enough that they would just blame and ban riders rather than end a team. UAE has what Armstrong and Weisel sought: ownership of big events that would place their operation in the "too big to fail" category. I can only imagine where we'd be today if they had successfully purchased the Tour's organization. They already owned the UCI pretty much and that wasn't quite enough.
Could you go into more detail about your last couple points? I am not familiar and am curious.
 
What events does UAE all own and what is the real benefit they give to the UCI other than being a team involved in the sport?
Not to get too far from the Primoz topic...they own the UAE Tour, the roads they race on, the airports you'd fly into and the bikes their team rides on. Pretty complete control of that environment. As for systematic doping; I doubt the "team" management does much except monitoring their risk and the riders are responsible.
 
There were some sorts of reduced punishments for coming forward but few participated. That sort of initiative seemed to pass with the times and most accepted that Sponsors' aversion to bad publicity and the flight of money out of the sport sorted things out. Teamwide and institutional doping was too risky and the old-style "everyone did it" former riders were allowed to slink back into the sporting management.
I'll echo that Good Point about UAE and Bahrain: they are the sponsors and their country's policies on so many things would suggest they could give zero sh*ts. The UCI needs them enough that they would just blame and ban riders rather than end a team. UAE has what Armstrong and Weisel sought: ownership of big events that would place their operation in the "too big to fail" category. I can only imagine where we'd be today if they had successfully purchased the Tour's organization. They already owned the UCI pretty much and that wasn't quite enough.
I'm far out of what might be considered the loop, which is why I'm surprised to learn that Armstrong and Weisel sought ownership of big events. I ditched the "Move" (or whatever it's called) Armstrong Youtube channel a while back because it was too weird listening to two guys who are banned from the sport talking as if everything going on is on the up and up.
The UAE/Bahrain thing reminds me of the golfer Phil Mickelson, who was willing to use a barbaric regime as leverage to challenge the PGA tour to pony up more money for the players. Morals go out the window when ego and big-time cash is involved.
 
I'm far out of what might be considered the loop, which is why I'm surprised to learn that Armstrong and Weisel sought ownership of big events. I ditched the "Move" (or whatever it's called) Armstrong Youtube channel a while back because it was too weird listening to two guys who are banned from the sport talking as if everything going on is on the up and up.
The UAE/Bahrain thing reminds me of the golfer Phil Mickelson, who was willing to use a barbaric regime as leverage to challenge the PGA tour to pony up more money for the players. Morals go out the window when ego and big-time cash is involved.
Phil Mickelson is a relevant parallel. He is seeking to jump to shared ownership after years of well-compensated "sport"under the thumb of the PGA. Don't want to get into how much money is in that activity but it's beyond what is reasonably imaginable.

Armstrong, his management team and Weisel's finance ability sought to captivate the sport. He was the prime draw for the major sponsors: USPS, Trek, Oakley and major races....but in the end the real money security is in event, franchise and venue control, and the insulation from UCI federation sanctioning it could bring. The UCI was a slave to the growth at that point and the ASO events in particular; and loath to start any damaging scandals. The LA/Weisel goal was to make money when you no longer compete through endorsements and promotion. Think Tom Brady and Russel Wilson seeking a chunk of NFL team ownership as the long term payout. Several MLB (baseball) players have already accomplished the bridge from player taking ownership stakes as a serious future investment. Cycling's competitors feeble claim to a bigger share often references the NFL, etc. as justification for wanting more. Sadly voiced, IMO.

Armstrong via Weisel's money sought to purchase ASO and control of their events. I don't think anyone knew how serious ASO would take such an offer; but they could certainly exploit any bid for future financing and negotiations with media, venues, etc. In the end it went nowhere. Looking back, a cynical person would think that Armstrong & Co. were hoping to protect the legacy franchise from his eroding "credibility" as a clean rider. His cancer foundation and other significant financial interests relied on the resurrected image he had built and the good graces of the UCI would help preserve that in that rumored plan.
What happened: we all know. USPS, race promoters, Guarantor insurance policy companies and anyone that had lost a race that Lance bribed other riders to win began to sue. Weisel faded from view as he had his own issue with sketchy stock IPOs to deal with and history played out.

UAE owning the team, being chief sponsor, bike supplier and venue owner can insulate from much grief. That, and their history would suggest that a level of cheating to win for glory is not a public relations problem. Barbaric or not; it's a better Armstrong-type business model.

Back to Primoz....please. He has little of that insulation and needs to be that much better IMO.
 
Reactions: the delgados

ASK THE COMMUNITY