Really, McQuaid? Really.

[Digger]

Pfffft. Another post with wishful thinking and selective hate.
Shall I really look for links to show you the general confusion about emails/timeline in nearly any media around that time ?
I will exempt you from that ![/QUOTE]

There;s a surprise.

 

[Cobblestoned]

I did declare it a lie - when you claim that you are going to do something and then not do so, that is a lie.

Why should I have to email the UCI for something they offered to produce?

You said: "The right and authorized people will get (have gotten) these papers" - can you name one person who has reported or even seen these "lab letters"?

sorry, "should have gotten"
I totally forgot that "subjunctive" is a must and that everyone follows this rule strictly.
Hell, good that I am not that strict.
Lets have a look at your posts so that I can ask some stupid questions about proves in some of your present tense posts.
But I´ll just wait till i am bored and desperate.

 

[Cobblestoned]

Pfffft. Another post with wishful thinking and selective hate.
Shall I really look for links to show you the general confusion about emails/timeline in nearly any media around that time ?
I will exempt you from that ![/QUOTE]

There;s a surprise.

This search/work for these links is not worth for one single second for me to waste, because you know I am right.
When there is one thing I have learned in this forum: Don´t waste time with ridiculous discussions. Wasted time.

And again - I am not a dog you can go for a walkie with. It´s a principle for me now, not to bring any links if some hater asks for them.

I don´t really care about what you think of me then. Its so much fun to watch the hyenas go in to "bloody" mode, just because someone refuses to do their work - always in mind that they actually know what I am talking about.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

sorry, "should have gotten"
I totally forgot that "subjunctive" is a must and that everyone follows this rule strictly.
Hell, good that I am not that strict.
Lets have a look at your posts so that I can ask some stupid questions about proves in some of your present tense posts.
But I´ll just wait till i am bored and desperate.

No need to apologise - so no-one has received or reported the 'lab letters' and they are not on the UCI website.

So when McQuaid said:

The letters will also soon be published on the UCI website in a sign of transparency.

..... it was a lie.

 

[Digger]

This search/work for these links is not worth for one single second for me to waste, because you know I am right.
When there is one thing I have learned in this forum: Don´t waste time with ridiculous discussions. Wasted time.

And again - I am not a dog you can go for a walkie with. It´s a principle for me now, not to bring any links if some hater asks for them.

I don´t really care about what you think of me then. Its so much fun to watch the hyenas go in to "bloody" mode, just because someone refuses to do their work - always in mind that they actually know what I am talking about.

Because you can't produce them - just like you can't substantiate your points to Dr. M with any links. Cheers.

 

[Cobblestoned]

No need to apologise - so no-one has received or reported the 'lab letters' and they are not on the UCI website.

So when McQuaid said:
..... it was a lie.

Again: I am not McQuaid and I don´t know his definition of "soon".
Perhaps he changed his mind, or it is actually not allowed or whatever.
he can´t be that stupid and not have some documents. This would be too bold for a real gangster.

But lets just stop here.

Haters are always 100 % right and -like always - have every single prove for that. Is that ok for you ?
You can read how it happened in this article/post there. All proven by fantasy.
Please don´t doubt the haters, don´t ask any questions to them and please let them just hate in peace.
I am so sorry that I interfered your "discussion" and that I didn´t demand any proves .

 

[Cobblestoned]

Because you can't produce them - just like you can't substantiate your points to Dr. M with any links. Cheers.

You really mean this serious, hmmm ?
Really sad that I am such a good, stubborn guy with much compassion.
I won´t go for walkie just to destroy you.

Dr. M ? You mean Dr. F ?
Besides that "walkie" thing, I have a problem with bringing on well known, but not proven names. Last is the main problem, you know and I already told ya that.
I hate that when other people do that, and it would contradict if I would do that, too.

All the names I mentioned earlier are proven by (Italian) lawsuits.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Again: I am not McQuaid and I don´t know his definition of "soon".
Perhaps he changed his mind, or it is actually not allowed or whatever.
he can´t be that stupid and not have some documents. This would be too bold for a real gangster.

But lets just stop here.

Haters are always 100 % right and -like always - have every single prove for that. Is that ok for you ?
You can read how it happened in this article/post there. All proven by fantasy.
Please don´t doubt the haters, don´t ask any questions to them and please let them just hate in peace.
I am so sorry that I interfered your "discussion" and that I didn´t demand any proves .

To the highlighted above - are you sure? Because the deceit of saying he will show the 'lab letters' 'soon', appears to have worked a treat on you.
I didn't call Pat stupid - I called him a liar.

As for the rest of your post - what question of yours have I refused to answer? I can only think of some that you have refused, does that make you a 'hater'?.

 

[Tubeless]

You speculators will always be right. So no problem. I would never doubt that.
Just ask him or the UCI by email, if there is so much urgent need for these spectactulare papers.
The right and authorized people will get (have gotten) these papers, if they need it.
I don´t need them and I don´t know what "soon" means for the UCI. But if you want you can declare that as a "lie", just do it.

I don´t trust Pat 100 %. The only person I trust 100 % is my mother.
But his reaction came relatively fast or "soon". Too fast for a lie and corruption.

It is a little too obvious that McQuaid has something to hide. Too many inconsistencies in his statements (one donation, no two), too many carefully chosen words (control vs. sample), too many commitments with no follow-through (donation receipts, lab letters) and too much talk about "it would have been preferable to handle such matters within the cycling family".

The fact that UCI has chosen to not make positives public is not unique to UCI. This is known / rumored to have happened in the past within national sports associations - e.g. US Track & Field. Which was one of the reasons why national anti-doping efforts were taken away from the national sports governing bodies - USADA vs. US Cycling.

But UCI has gotten the reputation of being the least transparent of the international sports governing bodies and indeed has clearly chosen many times in its history to "handle things privately withing the UCI". Cycling has been threatened to be excluded from the Olympics several times for its doping ways - the one event where UCI is not in charge of testing. Which sport had the most positives in Peking 2008?

If McQuaid would openly / honestly speak about his attitude, it would likely go along the lines that "we're trying to clean up the sport gradually, without destroying it with big scandals". All in the collective interest of cycling and the teams. To him, taking a donation from someone like Armstrong is not a bribe - it's part of the healing process. He no doubt sees himself as a doer of good, and any criticism directed at him or the UCI as "unfair, unwarranted and unjust". Talk about living in a bubble.

 

[Digger]

You really mean this serious, hmmm ?
Really sad that I am such a good, stubborn guy with much compassion.
I won´t go for walkie just to destroy you.

Dr. M ? You mean Dr. F ?
Besides that "walkie" thing, I have a problem with bringing on well known, but not proven names. Last is the main problem, you know and I already told ya that.
I hate that when other people do that, and it would contradict if I would do that, too.

All the names I mentioned earlier are proven by (Italian) lawsuits.

Oh please do Because all I need is Pat's words and those contradictions speak for themselves. As do Sylvia Schrenk.
And it was Dr Maserati - you have continually refused (unable to?) answer the questions he has asked of you. I don't believe he has been anything but civil, yet you will not answer.


Pat is best buds with Hein. Hein meanwhile told **** Pound that extra and proper testing would mean speeds dropping from 42 km/h to 26 km/h, which would in turn mess up things for the spectators.

 

[Darryl Webster]

Cobblestoned= Cobblers. Just not worth bothering with.

 

[Cobblestoned]

To the highlighted above - are you sure? Because the deceit of saying he will show the 'lab letters' 'soon', appears to have worked a treat on you.
I didn't call Pat stupid - I called him a liar.

As for the rest of your post - what question of yours have I refused to answer? I can only think of some that you have refused, does that make you a 'hater'?.

You can be sure that I "located", who is a hater and who not.
Sorry for some "slip of the pen", when the virtual hyenas surround me.
Another reason for the subjective delay (for the lie ) could be, that this are "pending proceedings". Just my thoughts.
I will be the first to come here and say that I was wrong, if these documents/proves never appear or are never proven and confirmed by authorities. Of course this must be trustful authorities, otherwise it´s a lie.

This is a characteristic you will never find at any "Lance won´t/will"- hater. Never saw that.

I must follow the "Tatort" on TV further with full concentration again now.

 

[Cobblestoned]

Cobblestoned= Cobblers. Just not worth bothering with.

Uh, the personal-insults-train is starting again. On a really low level.
Thanks for that !

Would be very interesting to know, if you will ever get a warning for that one.
But I was told, that the Admins, Mods can´t read every post.

I will never complain officially. Perhaps you have the luck and this could be one of the posts the Admins/Mods don´t notice.
Have a nice day.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

You can be sure that I "located", who is a hater and who not.
Sorry for some "slip of the pen", when the virtual hyenas surround me.
Another reason for the subjective delay (for the lie ) could be, that this are "pending proceedings". Just my thoughts.
I will be the first to come here and say that I was wrong, if these documents/proves never appear or are never proven and confirmed by authorities. Of course this must be trustful authorities, otherwise it´s a lie.

This is a characteristic you will never find at any "Lance won´t"- hater. Never saw that.

I must follow the "Tatort" on TV further with full concentration again now.

You see if Pat issues the 'letters' then its not a lie - so your post makes little sense.

Its been 3 months, the UCI have a PR team, they regularly update their website and twitter, with new results etc.
It was a lie - and you bought it.

For the rest of your post - you must have missed Lances comments.

 

[Cobblestoned]

You see if Pat issues the 'letters' then its not a lie - so your post makes little sense.

Its been 3 months, the UCI have a PR team, they regularly update their website and twitter, with new results etc.
It was a lie - and you bought it.

For the rest of your post - you must have missed Lances comments.

You can make that "posts".
That was already clear for me from the beginning, when I started posting in here today.
But i did it anyway, because it was onesided and the haters and assumpters <(own creation) looked like lonely for me.

I won´t follow your thoughts anyway. Perhaps some pieces.
You have the manpower - thats your only advantage
But you can´t make the absolute truth just by majority and change my mind and thoughts.

 

[pmcg76]

Looking through some old mags during the week, seen a piece in Cycling Weekly in regards to the 1997 Giro. It seems there was a story circulating in the papers about teams knowing beoferhand when they were going to be tested for haematocrit levels. Apparently, various well known doctors were passing the info onto the teams. Where the doctors were getting the info from, well....UCI were mentioned of course. This was confirmed by the paper in question who rightly predicted what teams were going to be tested.

Personally, I just think McQuaid is a continuation of Verbruggen, I remember the interview Verbruggen gave Cycle Sport in 96/97 and it was an insult, just pure BS and of course shown up for what it was by Festina 98. I have had zero faith in UCI since then regardless of who is their head but McQuaid is a real joke.

I would have no doubt about UCI covering up positive tests especially if it concerned the golden egg as has been alleged by Landis. I would just like to see independent testing and I think that would help clean up the sport.

 

[ChrisE]

You seem to trust Pat, and to show this give a quote from him - which contains another Pat lie.

Where are the 'letters' confirming his side of the story? 3 months later and still no sign.

Caitlin has them.

 

[ChrisE]

Looking through some old mags during the week, seen a piece in Cycling Weekly in regards to the 1997 Giro. It seems there was a story circulating in the papers about teams knowing beoferhand when they were going to be tested for haematocrit levels. Apparently, various well known doctors were passing the info onto the teams. Where the doctors were getting the info from, well....UCI were mentioned of course. This was confirmed by the paper in question who rightly predicted what teams were going to be tested.

Personally, I just think McQuaid is a continuation of Verbruggen, I remember the interview Verbruggen gave Cycle Sport in 96/97 and it was an insult, just pure BS and of course shown up for what it was by Festina 98. I have had zero faith in UCI since then regardless of who is their head but McQuaid is a real joke.

I would have no doubt about UCI covering up positive tests especially if it concerned the golden egg as has been alleged by Landis. I would just like to see independent testing and I think that would help clean up the sport.

Of course LA/JB is not the only team that had protection. Only LA's "donation" came out due to SCA and his big mouth in that press release. I find it hard to believe no other big names in the TdF got busted during that GT for the years LA was winning the 7 in a row. All the other GTs had their scandals during this time but not the TdF. I may have posted this before but it is a fact that should make people wonder.

Ferrari per FL is not the only doc with forewarning, or teams for that matter IMO. I would bet a large sum of $ that there were donations made by many others over the years.

Yes, independent testing is the only way to clean up the sport, and sanctioning by one overall body instead of the individual countries. But, how long until that is corrupt? There is much more incentive to cover up positives than outting them - financial mainly in terms of lost revenue due to loss of sponsorship and ridicule in the press.

The problem with cycling is that it's income is mainly due to sponsorship. That's a big problem and a problem that makes cleaning up the sport counteractive to human nature.

 

[Benotti69]

....

The problem with cycling is that it's income is mainly due to sponsorship. That's a big problem and a problem that makes cleaning up the sport counteractive to human nature.

i doubt too many sports would survive in their current form without sponsorship or tv rights. fans contribute very little in ticket sales nowadays in most of the worlds most popular sports...

european football being a great example, where fans tickets cannot cover players wages never mind the daily running costs of the club.

 

[ChrisE]

i doubt too many sports would survive in their current form without sponsorship or tv rights. fans contribute very little in ticket sales nowadays in most of the worlds most popular sports...

european football being a great example, where fans tickets cannot cover players wages never mind the daily running costs of the club.

You forgot merchandising, and concessions. That is a big hole cycling's income.

 

[Barrus]

You forgot merchandising, and concessions. That is a big hole cycling's income.

Still the majority of income with football and quite some other sports come ot of sponsorship

 

[The Hitch]

Still the majority of income with football and quite some other sports come ot of sponsorship

I dont know which football you are reffering to, but in football, in england, tickets for a game premier league game cost £45 - £90 ($70-140)

Times that by 40 000 + attendance and the average team isprobably getting more money a week from that than from sponsorship

 

[thehog]

I dont know which football you are reffering to, but in football, in england, tickets for a game premier league game cost £45 - £90 ($70-140)

Times that by 40 000 + attendance and the average team isprobably getting more money a week from that than from sponsorship

Season ticket holders ae at 8000+ per year but thats a drop in the ocean to shirt sales. When Beckham joined Real Madrid they made over 35 million on shirt sales alone! In one year.

 

[Cobblestoned]

Season ticket holders ae at 8000+ per year but thats a drop in the ocean to shirt sales. When Beckham joined Real Madrid they made over 35 million on shirt sales alone! In one year.

For Zidane, Beckham and Ronaldo shirts together it was something about 250.000.000

 

[Benotti69]

Season ticket holders ae at 8000+ per year but thats a drop in the ocean to shirt sales. When Beckham joined Real Madrid they made over 35 million on shirt sales alone! In one year.

well they are still massively in debt. so sponsorship and ticket sales are not making profits for them. Barcelona massively in debt. Man U only covering the % payments on the debt not actually repaying their debt. 3 of the biggest clubs in the world and best attended stadiums in the world, all in debt. go figure!