Thoughts on Astana so far?

[Publicus]

I see this thread is infested.

 

[python]

i see this thread is infested.

correct......
AND THE VERMIN EXPOSED

 

[Oncearunner8]

Very funny to see anyone support a team that has a leader who crashed his bike into a bloodbank bus back in the TDF.
Astana and drugs go hand and hand. To think anyone would start a thread about …..what someone thinks of them so far in the season. Well duhhh they are doing well considering they have all the good "equipment".

 

[dickwrench]

you heard me before, i don't give a texas or houston's arse where you are from. i give just about as much rat's behind about what you think about me or others on this forum. you have no clue.

Hey man why don't you debate the thread? Let me break it down for you in a simple multiple choice test that you are used to taking. You are probably like Spicolil on Fast Time making figures with the multimple choice test. fyi don't use a pencil on your screen.

a) You are a fan of teams not paying riders
b) You are a fan of teams not paying riders unless Johan and Lance are on that team then it is ok.
c) You are a fan of not taking dopers on a team.
d) you are a fan of not taking dopers on a team unless Lance and Johan are involved then it is ok and Lance sux.
e) none of the above. you are stupid.
f) false.

Is that simple enough for you not to hijack the therd with your ad hominum attacks?

 

[danjo007]

i dont see astana being strong enough to protect the jersey. it will be all up to vino on his own.
so far they've hidden amongst other teams, so it will be interesting to see if they can inject some control over the last week.

 

[python]

none of the above dickwench. ad hominiems are chrisE's specialty. many of us know that. don't know.


chap.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Hey man why don't you debate the thread? Let me break it down for you in a simple multiple choice test that you are used to taking. You are probably like Spicolil on Fast Time making figures with the multimple choice test. fyi don't use a pencil on your screen.

a) You are a fan of teams not paying riders
b) You are a fan of teams not paying riders unless Johan and Lance are on that team then it is ok.
c) You are a fan of not taking dopers on a team.
d) you are a fan of not taking dopers on a team unless Lance and Johan are involved then it is ok and Lance sux.
e) none of the above. you are stupid.
f) false.

Is that simple enough for you not to hijack the therd with your ad hominum attacks?

If 'hijacking a thread' upsets you so much then why did your first post on this thread bring up the former General Manager and doping?

If you want to continue your doping talk bring it to the Clinic.

 

[dickwrench]

none of the above dickwench. ad hominiems are chrisE's specialty. many of us know that. don't know.


chap.

I am proud to think I am ChrisE. I have seen him bust people up all over this forum including your simple a$s. I bet you have to hold your breath when you type so not to get confused doing to many things at once. It is much better than to be thought of as sprocket or the volcano. I could be bikecenter to because he seems smart and stupid at the same time. Word.

 

[python]

i was offering you some love dickwench and you spoiled it.

why do you have to do that ? disappointed.


chap.

 

[dickwrench]

If 'hijacking a thread' upsets you so much then why did your first post on this thread bring up the former General Manager and doping?

If you want to continue your doping talk bring it to the Clinic.

Why do you slam a article on cyclingnews that says Johan is sewing Astana for backpay and saying they tried to make him take Vino on the team? You said this should be in the clinic? By coincidence maybe you should take a drug test just saying.

You are the one bringing up doping because what I say has nothing to do with doping other than them trying to make Johan bend his morals when it comes to dopiing. If you can't debate the lyrical dancer then don't get off the porch.

Python said you were the smartest so lets go engage and debate the thread with me so we can redo the pecking order here. Word.

 

[Publicus]

I seem to recall that the UCI made sure all the riders were paid (for 2009) and refused to clear Astana's license for 2010 until they paid the full amount of team salaries in cash to an account. So I don't think it's the same issue. It seems more likely Bruyneel is arguing that riders who terminated their contracts early are entitled to the balance of their contracts, which seems novel. Which goes doubly for Bruyneel attempting to get anything other previously earned but unpaid salary. He's not entitled to
anything for the unperformed portion of his contract--and he is very likely to be hit with a countersuit.

As for accepting the return of Vino, it wasn't about some stance against unrepentent doping. It was about control. Bruyneel simply wouldn't be able to run roughshod over the KCF and the wants of the sponsors. If it was predicated on an opposition to doping, he wouldn't be manager of Radio Shack.

 

[python]

wench, you are lying (well, i mean misrepresenting). I said the doc is always right. the smartest reference is your typical flame-on to hijack the threads into flame wars about armstrong the landsman being treated unfairly.

love ?

 

[dickwrench]

I seem to recall that the UCI made sure all the riders were paid (for 2009) and refused to clear Astana's license for 2010 until they paid the full amount of team salaries in cash to an account. So I don't think it's the same issue. It seems more likely Bruyneel is arguing that riders who terminated their contracts early are entitled to the balance of their contracts, which seems novel. Which goes doubly for Bruyneel attempting to get anything other previously earned but unpaid salary. He's not entitled to
anything for the unperformed portion of his contract--and he is very likely to be hit with a countersuit.

As for accepting the return of Vino, it wasn't about some stance against unrepentent doping. It was about control. Bruyneel simply wouldn't be able to run roughshod over the KCF and the wants of the sponsors. If it was predicated on an opposition to doping, he wouldn't be manager of Radio Shack.

Where does it say in the article to support your fantasyland pay issue? Everybody on here says UCI is corrupt except when it comes to putting this issue in bad light for Johan. You guys pick and choose and have thus no credibility in the end because you look like a pretzel.

Now when dopers try to come back it is about control and not about morals? If Riis would take him last year then it would be about dope morals. He tries to come back on Astana it is about control if Vino had so much power then why didn't he just tell Johan "hey I'm back suck it"? Why shoudl Johan be scared of Vinos control when he had control to dictate whether he was on the team or not. Duh.

You need to get some sleep and debate me tomorrow with more energy and smarts. Later.

 

[dickwrench]

wench, you are lying (well, i mean misrepresenting). I said the doc is always right. the smartest reference is your typical flame-on to hijack the threads into flame wars about armstrong the landsman being treated unfairly.

love ?

Love, ok we're cool. Peace.

 

[python]

Love, ok we're cool. Peace.

could you please provide a link to the model behavior. thank you.

 

[Oncearunner8]

wench, you are lying (well, i mean misrepresenting). I said the doc is always right. the smartest reference is your typical flame-on to hijack the threads into flame wars about armstrong the landsman being treated unfairly.

love ?

I love you rattlesnake! I mean RHitaliano

 

[python]

what texas loves or dislikes is of no concern to me. as i said you have no clue. no finesse. none of the things to engage a person. a lot to ignore and feel for.

 

[Oncearunner8]

I seem to recall that the UCI made sure all the riders were paid (for 2009) and refused to clear Astana's license for 2010 until they paid the full amount of team salaries in cash to an account. So I don't think it's the same issue. It seems more likely Bruyneel is arguing that riders who terminated their contracts early are entitled to the balance of their contracts, which seems novel. Which goes doubly for Bruyneel attempting to get anything other previously earned but unpaid salary. He's not entitled to
anything for the unperformed portion of his contract--and he is very likely to be hit with a countersuit.

As for accepting the return of Vino, it wasn't about some stance against unrepentent doping. It was about control. Bruyneel simply wouldn't be able to run roughshod over the KCF and the wants of the sponsors. If it was predicated on an opposition to doping, he wouldn't be manager of Radio Shack.

Yeah sure right. Good luck with that countersuit. I give you the control bit. I would not want to be anywhere near a dumb **** like vino when he was a BD fool. Not saying that the folks at the shack are not BD fools but at the least they have not been hit with that bus yet.

good luck and have fun with the astana love shack.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Why do you slam a article on cyclingnews that says Johan is sewing Astana for backpay and saying they tried to make him take Vino on the team? You said this should be in the clinic? By coincidence maybe you should take a drug test just saying.

You are the one bringing up doping because what I say has nothing to do with doping other than them trying to make Johan bend his morals when it comes to dopiing. If you can't debate the lyrical dancer then don't get off the porch.

Python said you were the smartest so lets go engage and debate the thread with me so we can redo the pecking order here. Word.

Python never said I was "the smartest" - nor did I "slam" an article by Cyclingnews.

Hard to debate someone when they misrepresent what has been said.

 

[Oncearunner8]

what texas loves or dislikes is of no concern to me. as i said you have no clue. no finesse. none of the things to engage a person. a lot to ignore and feel for.

The type of psychological behavior your demonstrating on this thread is troubling. Maybe you should seek medical attention.

If you have a bone for the Astana team then that is fair enough. But you do not have to go out of your way to suck on the kit you rattlesnake.

 

[Publicus]

Where does it say in the article to support your fantasyland pay issue? Everybody on here says UCI is corrupt except when it comes to putting this issue in bad light for Johan. You guys pick and choose and have thus no credibility in the end because you look like a pretzel.

Now when dopers try to come back it is about control and not about morals? If Riis would take him last year then it would be about dope morals. He tries to come back on Astana it is about control if Vino had so much power then why didn't he just tell Johan "hey I'm back suck it"? Why shoudl Johan be scared of Vinos control when he had control to dictate whether he was on the team or not. Duh.

You need to get some sleep and debate me tomorrow with more energy and smarts. Later.

It was from the fantasyland called reality. I never said it was in the article you are referencing, but I did a quick search and you can find that the pay issue was resolved to the UCI's satisfaction in this article from last September:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/protour-2010-astana-reassures-uci

Astana had looked to be hanging by a thread in May and June after salary payments to riders were delayed and a bank guarantee required for ProTour membership was withdrawn. However, an eleventh-hour reprieve came after the Kazakh government – owners of the Astana ProTour licence – were able to provide $9 million to ensure the future of the team through 2009.

Astana still holds its four-year ProTour licence, which will be up for renewal at the end of 2010. Although the team is not one of eight whose applications are currently being considered by the ProTour licence commission, McQuaid said Astana had been closely scrutinised by the commission this year.

"The licence commission had quite a lot of things to deal with last year with Astana because of all the problems," said McQuaid. "There were times when their [ProTour] licence was close to being withdrawn, but each time they came up with money at the last minute and sorted it out. The UCI and I have been assured that this won't be the case again in 2010."

As for the doping vs control issue, I was only speaking as it relates to the situation with Vino's return to Astana in 2009. I was neither making, nor was I intending to suggest, that each time a manager balks at the signing of a rider coming off of suspension it is because of control issues.

And for the record, Vino did tell Johan just that:

I will return to professional cycling on July 24," Vinokourov told the press conference.
"Astana was created in 2006, it is our baby, I would not want to join another team.

"I am negotiating with Johan Bruyneel, but the Kazakhstan cycling federation wants me to ride in this team.

"This team was created for me and it is down to me and I don't see why I should not return.

"If he doesn't want me then he should leave the team."

 

[python]

oh my.

why so much anger ?

why so much assuming about another person's behavior?

why so much defending texas ?


hey, runner someone who's a member of this and another board send me links about you


admitting

being

a member who

started baiting threads about armstrong seven tour wins

he also said you admitted to having suck puppets here

is that true

would you like me to ask him about the links ?

rattlesnake ?

 

[Oncearunner8]

oh my.

why so much anger ?

why so much assuming about another person's behavior?

why so much defending texas ?


hey, runner someone who's a member of this and another board send me links about you


admitting

being

a member who

started baiting threads about armstrong seven tour wins

he also said you admitted to having suck puppets here

is that true

would you like me to ask him about the links ?

rattlesnake ?

Hey link it. It is just a internet Message board. Maybe to try and get the snake from under his log. Sockpuppet here?

 

[dickwrench]

So Publicus tell me how you figure out which article about the UCI is true and which artilcle is false and when the UCI lies and when they do not? If I paste report from vriman from UCI it is false but this is true. I get it when UCI says something that is against Johan it is true and just and when it is anythign else it is false. I get it now.

Thank you for the bolded part of yoru reply becuse it supports my point. vino is full of ****t because Johan left on his terms. What you bolded has nothing to do with what Johan thinks about vino doper so now you say Vino has power over Johan. So it must be Johan didn't want more power to Vino or was it he didn't want a doper on his team? How can you conclude what the truth is from that statement oh yeah it supports your pretzel logic.

 

[Oncearunner8]

oh my.

why so much anger ?

why so much assuming about another person's behavior?

why so much defending texas ?


hey, runner someone who's a member of this and another board send me links about you


admitting

being

a member who

started baiting threads about armstrong seven tour wins

he also said you admitted to having suck puppets here

is that true

would you like me to ask him about the links ?

rattlesnake ?

You think Astana is the Bizzomb? Why not break down some power number on VinoK for us?