The ultimate fanboy - Indurain says Armstrong is Innocent!

[No_Balls]

The more these cyclists open their mouths, the more one wishes that they would just shut-the-F-up and spare us the drivel. Why are so many of them coming from Spain (I ask myself rhetorically)? Although the case of Jalabert reminds us that it is never prudent to over generalize.

If you read the original source (Marca) Indurain admits he hasnt read USADAS report, he believes Armstrong will fight on and questions his former USPS-teammates motifs in all this. He has taken the exact same position as Mr Merckx in this, which is intresting.

 

[rhubroma]

If you read the original source (Marca) Indurain admits he hasnt read USADAS report, he believes Armstrong will fight on and questions his former USPS-teammates motifs in all this. He has taken the exact same position as Mr Merckx in this, which is intresting.

Well, didn't he also say USADA's got no proof?

I'm getting the impression here that in the European court system if you have 24 witnesses that all say the same thing (while incriminating themselves), without a second whiteness to corroborate what they have claimed to have witnessed; then that's not immiscible in a criminal hearing.

Now I ask you, and I ask myself: how f-ing stupid is that?
Now I realize that the Europeans “know” how things work, however this cast system is meant to protect the powerful and defies common sense.

While bloaks like Indurain and Ferrari take advantage of such a feudal logic, as if ingrained culturally.

 

[the asian]

If you read the original source (Marca) Indurain admits he hasnt read USADAS report, .

Then he should stop spitting BS and stay silent like he did for all these years.

 

[rhubroma]

If you read the original source (Marca) Indurain admits he hasnt read USADAS report, he believes Armstrong will fight on and questions his former USPS-teammates motifs in all this. He has taken the exact same position as Mr Merckx in this, which is intresting.

Well, didn't he also say USADA's got no proof?

I'm getting the impression here that in the European court system if you have 24 witnesses that all say the same thing (while incriminating themselves), without a second whiteness to corroborate what they have claimed to have witnessed; then that's not admissable in a criminal hearing.

Now I ask you, and I ask myself: how f-ing stupid is that?

I realize, however, that the Europeans “know” how things work, however this cast system is meant to protect the powerful and defies common sense.

While bloaks like Indurain and Ferrari take advantage of such a feudal logic, as if ingrained culturally.

 

[rhubroma]

If you read the original source (Marca) Indurain admits he hasnt read USADAS report, he believes Armstrong will fight on and questions his former USPS-teammates motifs in all this. He has taken the exact same position as Mr Merckx in this, which is intresting.

Well, didn't he also say USADA's got no proof?

I'm getting the impression here that in the European court system if you have 24 witnesses that all say the same thing (while incriminating themselves), without a second witness to corroborate what they have claimed to have witnessed; then that's not valid in a criminal hearing.

Now I ask you, and I ask myself: how f-ing stupid is that?

I realize that the Europeans “know” how things work, however this cast system is meant to protect the powerful and defies common sense.

While blokes like Indurain and Ferrari take advantage of such a feudal logic, as if ingrained culturally.

 

[mutschi]

What is making him and Boogerd just not letting go of the newspapers and tv all at once? It's hard to miss them anywhere!

They try to safe their own skin. They don't care about Lance at all. But if Lance goes down through witness testimony every doped pro is in danger to be outed soon. So Sanchez and Indurain and all those other pro's who question the process or still support Armstrong hope to do two things:
1. Try to change pubilc opinion
2. Try to support Lance so he can go to CAS to fight the charges and maybe win because of technical or legal loopholes ("still no official failed test").

 

[Doofus]

The problem with this is you need to set a clear definite date to when Indurain began with EPO. I give the headache to you, Ullrich-boy.

1990. Luz Ardiden. Went from being a big boy and a second-group climber to riding Lemond and the rest of the GC off his wheel on a HC climb.

He was clearly the strongest that year, buy tactical mistakes led him to finish off the podium.

Andy Hampsten did so few races for Banesto in '95, and went home instead of the Tour, because he wouldn't get with the Banesto "medical program."

 

[hrotha]

1990. Luz Ardiden. Went from being a big boy and a second-group climber to riding Lemond and the rest of the GC off his wheel on a HC climb.

He was clearly the strongest that year, buy tactical mistakes led him to finish off the podium.

Andy Hampsten did so few races for Banesto in '95, and went home instead of the Tour, because he wouldn't get with the Banesto "medical program."

The problem with the pioneer hypothesis is that Indurain didn't fade as more people got on the EPO bandwagon. On the contrary, by 1994-1996 he was climbing better than ever. Compare him to, say, Bugno or Chiappucci.

I'm more inclined to believe that, if he was using EPO in 1990-1991, he didn't get a proper, scientific EPO program until probably 1992 (when he earned his ET nickname by obliterating everybody in the ITTs). He wouldn't be an Ugrumov and would keep his hematocrit at reasonable levels until the arms race got completely out of hand by 1994. This is just my subjective and mostly baseless interpretation of the facts.

 

[No_Balls]

I heard you the first time.

Well, didn't he also say USADA's got no proof?

He says he believes Armstrong is innocent, in a way he sounds just like Liggett before the old man woke up and smelled the coffee.

Remember this article from September:

“It’s very sad,” Indurian told VeloNews. “Something like this is — it’s not very clear — the image of cycling is being ruined.”
It appears likely that Armstrong, who recently dropped the fight to clear his name of a litany of doping charges, will lose his Tour de France titles once USADA hands over its case file to the UCI. The agency has argued that its lifetime ban and nullification of his results between August 1998 and 2010 take effect regardless of UCI involvement because Armstrong forfeited his right to arbitration.

The business of reassigning Armstrong’s title is messy. Nearly every Tour podium finisher during Armstrong’s seven-year rein have themselves been implicated in doping scandals. On the subject of Armstrong’s titles, Indurain was unsure of the proper action to take.

“I really don’t know what’s going to happen,” he said. “Everything needs to be studied so we know what’s going on.”

Asked what could be done to chart a cleaner future for the sport, Indurain suggested cooperation.

“We work. We set the rules. We work directly with the federation and the other [organizations]. And we work together with cyclists,” he said.

http://velonews.competitor.com/2012...n-the-image-of-cycling-is-being-ruined_239373

Now I ask you, and I ask myself: how f-ing stupid is that?

It is of course shockingly stupid in a un-Indurain kind of way. There is this slightly possibility that he WANT to believe in Armstrongs innocense because of the earlier interview. He has of course right in a way that this affair is both good and bad for cycling depending on the perspective. It is the slightest of hope i have for know.

I realize that the Europeans &#8220]

What do you mean by "europeans" in this matter?

 

[No_Balls]

1990. Luz Ardiden. Went from being a big boy and a second-group climber to riding Lemond and the rest of the GC off his wheel on a HC climb.

He won stages before 1990 too.

He was clearly the strongest that year, buy tactical mistakes led him to finish off the podium.

Tactical mistakes? He was ordered to a halt because the superdoped Perico couldnt followed the other clean riders.

Andy Hampsten did so few races for Banesto in '95, and went home instead of the Tour, because he wouldn't get with the Banesto "medical program."

Good try. But that was because he got sick. Although later mentioned in an interview that he was put under pressure to dope "later on his career". What could it be? The-always-talked-about-crime syndicate Banesto....or.....US Postal?

Indurain? Hampsten never met the guy. But said he would love to.

 

[mountainrman]

1990. Luz Ardiden. Went from being a big boy and a second-group climber to riding Lemond and the rest of the GC off his wheel on a HC climb.

He was clearly the strongest that year, buy tactical mistakes led him to finish off the podium.

Andy Hampsten did so few races for Banesto in '95, and went home instead of the Tour, because he wouldn't get with the Banesto "medical program."

Hampsten was luckier than such as Hamilton to be born in era when you could win a tour panagua , and with a couple of tour titles under his belt, so retiring was at least an option that did not lose a complete career. Much harder for those who came five years later. Dope or quit, either way they got no real career. I do not envy them having that choice.

The one whose decisions I really cant stomach is the way Armstrong made hell for those who dissented as well as taking additives.

 

[Doofus]

He won stages before 1990 too.



Tactical mistakes? He was ordered to a halt because the superdoped Perico couldnt followed the other clean riders.



Good try. But that was because he got sick. Although later mentioned in an interview that he was put under pressure to dope "later on his career". What could it be? The-always-talked-about-crime syndicate Banesto....or.....US Postal?

Indurain? Hampsten never met the guy. But said he would love to.

His 89 win was a tactical attack for Perico that no one chased. he was in the second group for the rest of the tour. 90 was a different Indurain all together.

Tactical mistake. I never said it was by Indurain. It was a manager's misjudgment.

not a good try. banesto wanted him to dope. he wouldn't.

 

[webvan]

These obvious dopers like Indurain and Jalabert are sickening and should just STFU and...not push their luck. As for Sanchez, let's hope he gets popped soon.

 

[enCYCLOpedia]

It's not hopeless for Armstrong, but it's definitely complicated:

For the UCI (and sponsors, i.e. public opinion) the reasoned decision by USADA was enough - but they have no strictly defined burden of proof. The CAS could only rule on procedure, and or USADA, ultimately responsible for establishing whether or not Armstrong doped, the evidence was sufficient.

For the CSA case and other civil cases that rest on the question whether or not L.A. doped, or allegations about him doping being true, the burden of proof is different, but it looks like L.A. could well lose them. He will have to make a calculation on how much it will cost him to pay up. Let's not forget that he's not forced to say anything at all if he's accused, i.e. neither admit nor deny the claims.

For potential criminal cases, either for perjury or drugs related offences, the burden of proof would be much higher, and the criteria on what is admissible evidence much stricter. There is a good chance that what's been revealed so far is not enough for a conviction - which makes admitting to doping (and thereby perjury) that much harder.

Hypocritical as it will surely be, I still wished L.A. would own up now - I am sure there are many who would be more than willing to forgive him (but mostly themselves for their naivety) at the first opportunity. L.A.'s window of opportunity in this respect is larger than most's, but it's not infinite.

I also think L.A. needs to get some lawyers whose interests are more aligned with his own.

 

[mewmewmew13]

Idiotic statement.

He should just clam it and walk away.

Sanchez lost by opening his mouth too.....

 

[orangerider]

Lost respect for Indurain. An obvious doper himself but he should've just STFU and stay hidden for good. Hopefully he gets what's coming to him by having an investigation launched to strip him of at least one tour title so he loses his record setting consecutive streak.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Same feeling. Once classy champion making himself look like either a blind fool, or as guilty as the next doper. He should have just shut up and stayed above or away from it all.

 

[hfer07]

Miguel:

"What the fvck happened to you man? Your a$$ used to be beautiful!"

 

[the asian]

These obvious dopers like Indurain and Jalabert are sickening and should just STFU and...not push their luck. As for Sanchez, let's hope he gets popped soon.

Jalabert should resign from his position as The French NT selector/manager.

He's a black- mark to the French.

 

[Marcuccio]

Here!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/201...ng-miguel-indurain-uci-evidence?newsfeed=true

Is he worried about the investigation going deeper?

Incidentally - Samuel Sanchez seemed to say the same thing a couple of days ago...

I would say half the guys, past and present are only kissing Lancey's @$$ cos they're paranoid he's got something on them...

Ultimate betrayal will be Lance outing those same dbs who are still saying he's a champ...

 

["Jeff"]

Andy Hampsten did so few races for Banesto in '95, and went home instead of the Tour, because he wouldn't get with the Banesto "medical program."

Not a good try. banesto wanted him to dope. he wouldn't.

The problem with the pioneer hypothesis is that Indurain didn't fade as more people got on the EPO bandwagon. On the contrary, by 1994-1996 he was climbing better than ever. Compare him to, say, Bugno or Chiappucci.

I'm more inclined to believe that, if he was using EPO in 1990-1991, he didn't get a proper, scientific EPO program until probably 1992 (when he earned his ET nickname by obliterating everybody in the ITTs). He wouldn't be an Ugrumov and would keep his hematocrit at reasonable levels until the arms race got completely out of hand by 1994. This is just my subjective and mostly baseless interpretation of the facts.

I think this is a very good summary.

 

[D Avoid]

Early onset senility.

Such a shame.

Dave.

It has been very clear to me since Freddy Nolfe died how omertic Eddy is in his behavioural patterns. I watched him after that and he was at Arsethongs snatch constantly!! Then I got sick of looking at him!! Apologist name calling would do disservice to the truth!!

 

[D Avoid]

Not quite.

Eddy is critical of the whistleblowers saying they spoke up too late. He does not vindicate lance see here..

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ot...-whistleblowers-for-speaking-up-too-late.html

He does not vindicate because he sees the winds of change and goes with the money!!

 

[D Avoid]

Not surprising, since finding a clean Spanish rider is harder than finding a virgin in a wh0rehouse.

Perhaps a mirror would help!!

 

[blackcat]

I have a 12 inch priapus