- Jan 20, 2013
- 897
- 0
- 0
Cycle Chic said:Do you want me to tell you when Pat picked his nose and on what day and time
Its not rocket science....who is going to benefit from this huge influx of revenue to Cycling ? all the teams...sponsors climb onboard....money money money.....do you think the Teams' Management wouldn't all be interested in a particular Team winning to boost the money pot ?
Did you hear any cries of dismay from Movistar or Liquigas last year when Sky took over ? no ! because they are benifitting from the increase in ££££££££'s.
Who benefitted from Lance winning the Tour all those years ? EVERY TEAM IN THE PELOTON that's who !
It's not money money money to precis your words and that of the famous song by ABBA. It is winning winning winning, as this is the lucrative part that gives the sponsors funding the teams a return on their investments, and generates, (in turn) money. And in and of it's self there is nothing wrong with this as with out it there would be no TdF if it didn't generate money - it would be like women's stage racing a dying sport.
Problem is winning has historically taken doping doping doping, although you are adamant it is not to do with doping, which leads me to believe - that you believe 1. In the new clean era, or 2. Sky's marginal gains, or 3. Both.
If money money money is being generated through "race fixing" alone, you need to provide evidence and justify this position, I am not convinced.
The basic tenant of your conspiracy theory may well have some validity regarding UK, Australia and South Africa being in the forefront of the racing and being given a UCI push. But could be very naïve to assert it has nothing to do with doping?
