Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[Dr. Maserati]

Depends on what jurisdiction you're talking about, of course. But bearing in mind somebody has just been successfully sued in the UK for tweeting and accusing a politician of child abuse, you can see the parallels. I have seen comments in here more or less accusing individual riders of doping.

Surely the burden of proof should lie on the individual attempting to prosecute a doping offence? It's a question of the rule of law. You can't go around pointing fingers, such attempts would be laughed out of a courtroom.

It's a simple question, how do you know if these allegations are libelous are not?
Unless you are one of these accused, then you don't.

This is an Internet forum, not a court of law.

 

[Matty_Tucks]

It's a simple question, how do you know if these allegations are libelous are not?
Unless you are one of these accused, then you don't.

This is an Internet forum, not a court of law.

I believe that you are innocent until otherwise proven. Whether this be anti-doping regulations or criminal law, the principle should be and is the same. Even a basic look over USADA's Reasoned Decision shows how much effort it takes to put into "prosecuting" somebody for a doping offence. That's the way it should stay.

I'm merely pointing out that you all sit here and point fingers, without much care for due process. If you armchair experts genuinely thought you had a well-articulated point and a solid case, I'm sure you would go ahead and contact the doping authorities?

 

[Franklin]

I believe that you are innocent until otherwise proven. Whether this be anti-doping regulations or criminal law, the principle should be and is the same.

Did you read Dr's "This is an Internet forum, not a court of law." before you posted this drivel?

Even a basic look over USADA's Reasoned Decision shows how much effort it takes to put into "prosecuting" somebody for a doping offence. That's the way it should stay.
I'm merely pointing out that you all sit here and point fingers, without much care for due process. If you armchair experts genuinely thought you had a well-articulated point and a solid case, I'm sure you would go ahead and contact the doping authorities?

It's truly strange when a poster like you uses a baseballbat to smash his own windows. By pointing towards the reasoned decision you point to exactly the area where this forum was not only right, it was also remarkably accurate.

Your mocked "armchair experts" not only clearly know a lot more about these matters as you shown earlier with your amusing "university" claim. It's really okay if you don't know these things, but it's wise to do make at least the effort to check these claims* before accusing people.

* Your photo rant is even more out of place if we look at the university comment which you clearly hadn't looked into.

 

[Matty_Tucks]

Did you read Dr's "This is an Internet forum, not a court of law." before you posted this drivel?

It's truly strange when a poster like you uses a baseballbat to smash his own windows. By pointing towards the reasoned decision you point to exactly the area where this forum was not only right, it was also remarkably accurate.

Your mocked "armchair experts" not only clearly know a lot more about these matters as you shown earlier with your amusing "university" claim. It's really okay if you don't know these things, but it's wise to do make at least the effort to check these claims* before accusing people.

* Your photo rant is even more out of place if we look at the university comment which you clearly hadn't looked into.

This is truly my own experience here. I'm suggesting that having ridden with these people on previous occasions, I find it extremely unlikely that they might be doping too.

My photo rant? You should re-examine the points you are trying to make. You're clearly using them for dramatic effect. What matters is the detection of doping products in blood, and in the absence of that, I think it's just pure bluster. Outside of the issue of doping, nobody would stand for it. I for one am glad that we pay scientists to look after this, not experts on philosophical fallacies or amateur risk analysts.

You may well be right about the reasoned decision. But I don't think that affects my general point. Eventually, we have to take the word of an expert who says that Armstrong blood doped. That provides a definitive conclusion for all.

 

[DirtyWorks]

This is truly my own experience here. I'm suggesting that having ridden with these people on previous occasions, I find it extremely unlikely that they might be doping too.

More information please. What circumstances? How often? How many grand tours?

No one ever said dopers can't be nice people. Some are. Doper Levi Leipheimer(sp) seems to get a collective thumbs up on a personal level. Just don't race against him because he'll likely cheat.

 

[DirtyWorks]

You may well be right about the reasoned decision. But I don't think that affects my general point. Eventually, we have to take the word of an expert who says that Armstrong blood doped. That provides a definitive conclusion for all.

Well, maybe the former head of WADA will change your mind. He's just restated this point for about the 1000'th time. The plain spoken advocacy for cleaner sport is likely what got him fired anyway.

No appetite to catch the cheats, admits ex-head of WADA drugs agency Pound

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/ot...o-appetite-catch-drug-cheats--****-Pound.html

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I believe that you are innocent until otherwise proven. Whether this be anti-doping regulations or criminal law, the principle should be and is the same. Even a basic look over USADA's Reasoned Decision shows how much effort it takes to put into "prosecuting" somebody for a doping offence. That's the way it should stay.

I'm merely pointing out that you all sit here and point fingers, without much care for due process. If you armchair experts genuinely thought you had a well-articulated point and a solid case, I'm sure you would go ahead and contact the doping authorities?

This is an Internet forum, no one here is prosecuting anyone.

If your beliefs are so strong then I suggest not reading here, or even the main media and only check official sites for your doping news.

 

[Franklin]

My photo rant? You should re-examine the points you are trying to make. You're clearly using them for dramatic effect.

Considering you use the word 'Libel" and then go on a legal spin I'd say rant is pretty accurate. It's certainly not evenheaded factual discussing these things.

What matters is the detection of doping products in blood, and in the absence of that, I think it's just pure bluster.

Get of your high horse Matty. The slander against Betty had nothing to with the detection of doping, so you are ay-okay with it? Betty is no doping expert so her testimony was useless? Being associated with doping doctors is fine in your book?

Outside of the issue of doping, nobody would stand for it. I for one am glad that we pay scientists to look after this, not experts on philosophical fallacies or amateur risk analysts.

Stop with the inane strawmen. We are not prosecuting people in here (nor are we accusing fellow posters of libel).

You may well be right about the reasoned decision. But I don't think that affects my general point. Eventually, we have to take the word of an expert who says that Armstrong blood doped. That provides a definitive conclusion for all.

Except that there indeed was no failed test and thus no detection of doping products in the blood

Sorry Matty, I stress again, if you do not want to do some research about your claim you come out looking really out of your depth. And clearly that's happening here. The claims you make are seriously flawed. That's not my opinion, that's just looking at the facts.

 

[Matty_Tucks]

This is an Internet forum, no one here is prosecuting anyone.

If your beliefs are so strong then I suggest not reading here, or even the main media and only check official sites for your doping news.

Why would I do that? Existing news sites are perfectly adequate at reporting doping-related stories.

@DirtyWorks.

What is at play here is a distortion of my views. I never stated whether or not I believed the authorities do enough to go after dopers well enough or not.

In fact, they probably don't in a lot of cases. **** Pound might well be right. But I'm in favour of reinforcing those organisations charged with catching cheaters with more money and more experts with a genuine conviction to catch cheaters.

In all other walks of life, we usually favour strengthening our hand with those who know what they're doing. If there is a car crash, we use a collision investigator. If they're aren't enough good collision investigators, we ask for the existing one's to be sacked or better trained. That may well be the case in cycling, if the one's at the top have a case to be answered for. Accusing those at the top, also requires evidence of course. I believe that before doing the accusing ourselves, we should use those with better know-how to do it first. I take issue with people believing that they are better placed than trained scientists. Let us remember that there are ample people in a position to tell who is cheating and who is not.

@Franklin. There is some evidence to suggest that he would fail today's doping tests, am I wrong?

 

[BYOP88]

In America you get a feast of clean sport in the NFL, MBL, NBA...

I'm guessing you mean MLB?

Yeah American sports are dirty but no more dirty than European/rest of the world sports.

 

[Franklin]

Why would I do that? Existing news sites are perfectly adequate at reporting doping-related stories.

If you really buy that I have a ranch in Austin which is in tip top condition. Just sign here.

seriously Matty, you say you don't believe the governing instances are doing enough, but you think the existing newssites are perfectly adequate?

I'll be nice and help you a bit: Outside of Dutch Newspapers there has been little or no reporting on the ruling that implicated the Rabo Team managers with being aware of Rasmussen fraud from day 1. You would never have read about it if there weren't some pesky internet goers throwing up questions about Leinders.

So think long and very hard about it: Without the community (not the clinic in that case) leinders could have stayed a bit longer tainting even more the innocent people at Sky. Had these people done what you suggest, namely shut up untill the real experts would have commented what would have happened?

@Franklin. There is some evidence to suggest that he would fail today's doping tests, am I wrong?

That truly has nothing to do with either your point or the reasoned decision

Why are you throwing up these clouds of dust and erect strawmen?

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

I'm guessing you mean MLB?

Yeah American sports are dirty but no more dirty than European/rest of the world sports.

Obvious typo is obvious...

I know of few other sports where doping at such a young age is tolerated and actually encouraged as in American Football.

 

[blackcat]

Obvious typo is obvious...

I know of few other sports where doping at such a young age is tolerated and actually encouraged as in American Football.

weightlifting!

 

[Ferminal]

Cycling..!

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Swimming !

 

[Mr. McQ]

Swimming !

What facts do you know about swimming?

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

Cycling..!

Up until recently doping was something that many riders would have to face up to once they attempted to go professional i.e. Late teens and early twenties. In American football if it rife at a much earlier age from my understanding.

I could believe weightlifting is another one but I barely follow it bar (no pun intended) the Olympics.

 

[Ferminal]

Up until recently doping was something that many riders would have to face up to once they attempted to go professional i.e. Late teens and early twenties.

So no doping in the club scene on the continent? Who is in control of the Italy/Spain/France/Belgium amateurs in the fierce competition for contracts? Not to mention those further out East (hello Szczepaniaks, Zakarin... can probably add Novikov).

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

So no doping in the club scene on the continent? Who is in control of the Italy/Spain/France/Belgium amateurs in the fierce competition for contracts? Not to mention those further out East (hello Szczepaniaks, Zakarin... can probably add Novikov).

I am happy to be corrected but most of the stories of pros that I have heard/read about that ended up doping are when they are a bit older (Hence the 1000 days rule).

And when you say club scene that implies any age group at an amateur level. But are you saying that doping is prevalent among cyclists in their mid teens?

 

[Ferminal]

The better ones probably did start doping later as they were good enough to get a contract clean.

When did Kreuziger's maniac father get him on a program? What about the Moser family deal? At what age did Ricco get his Hct exemption? Who was Burrow riding for when he used EPO at 21?

It all trickles down, the pro teams have affiliations with the amateur clubs and coaches who are strongly integrated into the world of cycling. What institutional barriers are in place to discourage doping? I don't think there is any doubt of some doping at u23 level, who knows at what age it starts. I don't think age itself is an issue, more that at a younger age there is less certainty on the returns you're going to get.

 

[ianfra]

I have been told by an Italian MTB cyclist that doping in Italian sport (not just cycling) is under the control of the Mafia. The person I met was a former champion who knew the score.

 

[SundayRider]

There has been quite a few age group triathletes in the US caught for doping some of them at an advanced age too - 40/50+. I'm sure there is a problem in the UK as well. Especially with certain events being over subscribed and needing qualifying times etc. It's a misconception that athletes only dope for money.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

The better ones probably did start doping later as they were good enough to get a contract clean.

When did Kreuziger's maniac father get him on a program? What about the Moser family deal? At what age did Ricco get his Hct exemption? Who was Burrow riding for when he used EPO at 21?

Not sure if those are rhetorical or literal questions? Either way I don't know the answers?

It all trickles down, the pro teams have affiliations with the amateur clubs and coaches who are strongly integrated into the world of cycling. What institutional barriers are in place to discourage doping? I don't think there is any doubt of some doping at u23 level, who knows at what age it starts. I don't think age itself is an issue, more that at a younger age there is less certainty on the returns you're going to get.

I think age is an issue. The more prevalent doping is at the younger age then the more it will be part of the culture of the sport and therefore the norm.

I have known quite a few football (soccer) players that have made it into the lower professional leagues and as far as I know they did not dope. Of course that is not to say as you get to a higher level it will be encouraged or the norm. My point being that you can almost always make it to a decent level in football on skill alone. In other sports this is not always going to be the case or at least the level most can get to will be much lower without PEDs.

 

[Netserk]

Not sure if those are rhetorical or literal questions? Either way I don't know the answers?


I think age is an issue. The more prevalent doping is at the younger age then the more it will be part of the culture of the sport and therefore the norm.

I have known quite a few football (soccer) players that have made it into the lower professional leagues and as far as I know they did not dope. Of course that is not to say as you get to a higher level it will be encouraged or the norm. My point being that you can almost always make it to a decent level in football on skill alone. In other sports this is not always going to be the case or at least the level most can get to will be much lower without PEDs.

Tbh if they were doping, I'd doubt that they'd tell you.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

Tbh if they were doping, I'd doubt that they'd tell you.

Maybe but then again they used to do recreational drugs around me and that never seemed to worry them.