Tone deaf award of the month for Cadel

Page 5 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
0
0
Tyler's testimony yesterday detailed how 4 of the 9 Phonak riders at the Tour used Fuentes, team doctors helped him transfuse, and doctors with bloodbags were shuttling between rooms at the team hotel

Wonder what the Phonak team manager thought of that? What is he up to these days?
 
Jul 9, 2010
127
0
0
86TDFWinner said:
Then how come Indurain and Delgado get a "pass", BOTH won in the 80's and 90's timeframe you mentioned? not out of the question to strip Indurain of his 5 considering what we now know(& he's basically admitted to). IMO, neither Delgado, nor especially Indurain should be allowed to keep their titles, again my opinion.
Both Spaniards, nuff said.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Race Radio said:
Tyler's testimony yesterday detailed how 4 of the 9 Phonak riders at the Tour used Fuentes, team doctors helped him transfuse, and doctors with bloodbags were shuttling between rooms at the team hotel

Wonder what the Phonak team manager thought of that? What is he up to these days?
luckily, a truce was called for in 2008, and I bet Riis, Rihs, Ochowicz, Bruyneel, and all those guys were part of the truce. They may have been up to no good in the past, but 2008 was a turning point.

And even if said truce would turn out to be utter BS, as long as we have the biopassport up and running, and pressure from the media, cycling can keep these guys from doing any real harm to clean cycling.

:rolleyes:
 
Race Radio said:
Tyler's testimony yesterday detailed how 4 of the 9 Phonak riders at the Tour used Fuentes, team doctors helped him transfuse, and doctors with bloodbags were shuttling between rooms at the team hotel

Wonder what the Phonak team manager thought of that? What is he up to these days?
Weren't you saying a while ago that BMC isn't run the same? Of course their top guys would sort themselves out but think you had a point in it not being team-wide this time.
 
arjanh said:
Both Spaniards, nuff said.
No disrespect, but who f½}{¾¥ cares if they're "both Spaniards"? Both "Spaniards" cheated to win. As I said, you cant pick and choose who you want to win, and who you dont, has to be equal across the board. The sport has become a joke because of things like this. Lame excuse. Also, I have ZERO respect for Indurain and feel he's skirted the banning process. He's not only a cheater and doper, but a hypocrite as well. I don't know for sure if Cadel's clean, most here think he isn't, so I should refrain from using his name until/unless he gets popped. But Indurain, and Delgado should get their titles stripped from them, all their wins taken away, and suffer embarrassment too. We all know it probably won't happen, but if the cycling bodies really want fo "clean up the sport" and "bust cheaters", what better way to send a SERIOUS message to the masses that they're not above punishment, then to strip the guys I mentioned too? You strip those guys, it sends a serious message to folks you're through playing favorites or games with folks. Can you imagine how butthurt Indurain would be if he were to be stripped of those 5 titles?
 
sniper said:
luckily, a truce was called for in 2008, and I bet Riis, Rihs, Ochowicz, Bruyneel, and all those guys were part of the truce. They may have been up to no good in the past, but 2008 was a turning point.

And even if said truce would turn out to be utter BS, as long as we have the biopassport up and running, and pressure from the media, cycling can keep these guys from doing any real harm to clean cycling.

:rolleyes:
I was wondering how you would manage to get JV introduced in this discussion.
 
Jun 1, 2011
2,500
0
0
martinvickers said:
Cadel recently did an interview after the tour of oman, it's on the front of this site, and in it he came out with this gem.



Seriously, Cadel? Seriously?

I know some of the Wiggins and Froome interviews send people bananas around here, and sometimes rightfully so, lets be honest, but this, this takes some beating for sheer tone deafness, surely?
"Paging Dr. Funtes, paging Dr. Funtes, emergency in room 909."

Refocusing the thread to its origin.
 
hrotha said:
If you start doing that without any regard to the rules about SOL and proven offenses, it does become the witchhunt Armstrong was complaining about.

Only when stripping others for the same offense doesnt fit ones agenda. Not saying this towards you, but the system is flawed. I'm all for Wonderboy going down and getting what he deserves, but why do others get a pass for the same thing?

You're proving my point, no one wants to talk about Indurain, or Delgado, Evans, etc getting stripped and banned, thats ok....but lets use a double standard to crucify a couple of other riders for essentially doing what the other guys did, yeah makes sense:rolleyes:.

Imo, that's why the sport is seen as a complete joke in many peoples eyes. Favoritism and hypocrisy are the standards of the sport. I can't wrap my head around how some can "overlook" what some guys have done, yet are ready to send guys to the firing squad for the same thing the guys they're protecting, have done.


Just my opinion.
 
86TDFWinner said:
Only when stripping others for the same offense doesnt fit ones agenda. Not saying this towards you, but the system is flawed. I'm all for Wonderboy going down and getting what he deserves, but why do others get a pass for the same thing?
Because they didn't do the same thing. There's some specific reasons why the SOL was waived by the USADA, and in principle it doesn't apply to Indurain, Delgado or Evans. Did any of them obstruct an investigation or say under oath they hadn't doped? Were they involved in a conspiracy to cover up a crime?

There's no reluctance to talk about Indurain, Delgado or Evans in relation to doping, as this forum proves (and if you dig up any threads on them, particularly on Indurain, you'll see me talking lots about his doping). And there's no hypocrisy or double standards, inasmuch as Armstrong's case is not normal, as explained in the USADA Reasoned Decision. SOL exists, there are reasons for it to exist, and there are legal reasons to waive it. So, stick to the legal framework, I says.

If in the cases of Indurain, Delgado, Evans or Coppi there's reason to waive the SOL, then by all means, strip them of all their victories. I wouldn't mind in the slightest. But you can't go around screaming "Double standards! Hypocrisy!", because their cases are completely different to Armstrong's.

edit: of course, if Evans is doping it most definitely falls within the SOL anyway, but then you have to actually prove he doped.
 
hrotha said:
Because they didn't do the same thing. There's some specific reasons why the SOL was waived by the USADA, and in principle it doesn't apply to Indurain, Delgado or Evans. Did any of them obstruct an investigation or say under oath they hadn't doped? Were they involved in a conspiracy to cover up a crime?

There's no reluctance to talk about Indurain, Delgado or Evans in relation to doping, as this forum proves (and if you dig up any threads on them, particularly on Indurain, you'll see me talking lots about his doping). And there's no hypocrisy or double standards, inasmuch as Armstrong's case is not normal, as explained in the USADA Reasoned Decision. SOL exists, there are reasons for it to exist, and there are legal reasons to waive it. So, stick to the legal framework, I says.

If in the cases of Indurain, Delgado, Evans or Coppi there's reason to waive the SOL, then by all means, strip them of all their victories. I wouldn't mind in the slightest. But you can't go around screaming "Double standards! Hypocrisy!", because their cases are completely different to Armstrong's.

edit: of course, if Evans is doping it most definitely falls within the SOL anyway, but then you have to actually prove he doped.
It's obvious I'm not a Wonderboy fan, I think he's a huge POS, but I do think doping is doping. Yeah, maybe the others mentioned didn't do much/any of the same stuff Armstrong did, but they still doped, or atleast hinted/admitted to it, so yeah, they should suffer the same fate as our good friend Wonderboy has.

As a whole(not on this board), it isn't talked about very much about other guys who should be stripped and so forth, that's mostly left for the forums, and message boards. But in the cycling community, not so much, again my opinion. I brought it up once about suggesting Indurain be stripped of his titles, bc he's admitted to doping, and others protected him. Whenever someone brings it up to Miggy in an interview, he "suddenly" seems to change subjects, or uses the "it's not about me" BS. Then how can you(Miggy) talk about something you yourself did, and play it off as if you're concerned for the sport? He wonders why people don't respect him, or care about him anymore.



If you stab someone, and they don't die, do you get a pass on jail time if you didn't kill them, but someone else who did the same thing, and the person died does? No.

I'm with you with your explanation to an extent. However, Miggy needs to be stripped of his titles, that's my opinion.
 
Jul 11, 2009
283
0
0
86TDFWinner said:
cycling is a sport of honor based on its foundation. Merckx/Indurain/Delgado/Evans etc., KNOWINGLY broke that honor, or merit system for their own sucesses, then come out and talk about wanting the sport to be "clean", yet somehow seem to conveniently forget they did the same thing, that's hypocrisy
When did Evans KNOWINGLY [caps are yours] break that honor/merit system for his own success?

When you say that Evans "seem to conveniently forget they did the same thing" , what is the "same thing" that he is forgetting about?

86TDFWinner said:
no one wants to talk about Indurain, or Delgado, Evans, etc getting stripped and banned, thats ok....but lets use a double standard to crucify a couple of other riders for essentially doing what the other guys did, yeah makes sense
Which race results should Evans be stripped of?

What exactly should his ban be for, when should the ban start and how long should the ban be?

You don't have to list all of his offenses, but a couple of key dates/races and a summary of which illegal substances he was using in those races would be a start.

You're so sure in your accusations, this should be easy for you.
 
autologous said:
When did Evans KNOWINGLY [caps are yours] break that honor/merit system for his own success?

When you say that Evans "seem to conveniently forget they did the same thing" , what is the "same thing" that he is forgetting about?



Which race results should Evans be stripped of?

What exactly should his ban be for, when should the ban start and how long should the ban be?

You don't have to list all of his offenses, but a couple of key dates/races and a summary of which illegal substances he was using in those races would be a start.

You're so sure in your accusations, this should be easy for you.
Well, I said a few posts back, that I shouldnt include Cadel in any of this, because theres no proof either way whether he did or didnt dope(if you bothered to read my last few posts, I said as much). Im also going by what others here are assuming, that he did & I'm not alone in thinking that way(the first few pages of this thread are chock full of "Cadel's a doper" posts). Thats just it, no one knows right? BUT 5/10 yrs from now, if he's found to have doped, then yeah he should be stripped. Ask them for your answers you seek, if it means that much to you.

Pardon me for getting ahead of myself. But yeah, I did say I shouldnt include Cadel in the discussion, bc I dont know either way.

But thank you for asking.

Of course this is all just my opinion.
 
May 24, 2011
41
0
0
Wouldn't buy too much into the 'ironic' theory here, since when has Cadel ever said much about doping, and then to break from cover he suddenly chooses to hit us with some inscrutable Aussie sarcasm about LA and Jaja? Somehow I think not, unless he's especially got it in for Jalabert (and who cares about him anymore?).
No, they were surely words from a resident of the naive/guilty bizarro-world of the pro-peloton.

Still, dumb as the remark was, you've got to respect how the weirdo has managed to never get caught. That's rarefied company he's in amongst.
 
Mar 17, 2009
1,863
0
0
86TDFWinner said:
Doesnt matter when they did it. Wonderboy did so for over a decade, and it took equally as long(or longef) to bust him. My point has been why should Wonderboy, and Landis be "stripped" and yet we somehow accept or "overlook" the others past indiscretions of the same thing? Is it because they're cycling "legends"? cycling is a sport of honor based on its foundation. Merckx/Indurain/Delgado/Evans etc., KNOWINGLY broke that honor, or merit system for their own sucesses, then come out and talk about wanting the sport to be "clean", yet somehow seem to conveniently forget they did the same thing, that's hypocrisy. You cant pick and choose who gets banned and who doesnt, it makes you, the system, and the sport less credible. Others will bring it up, how do you justify it for a few and not all? you cant.
Clean & legal are the two things you have mixed up. I'm not going to argue any of the riders you cite are clean.

However, you cannot compare Coppi's actions to those of Armstrong in any way shape or form. Why? Because in Coppi's career it was not against the rules of sport at all. Coppi was dead before doping was outlawed. He could have been transfusing, injecting & popping all the substances under the sun and he would still be totally legal.

With the pre-EPO generation of riders & their successors it is different. The rules had been put in place that certain substances & practices were illegal. But for the same reason Coppi is in the clear, Moser's hour can never be rescinded blood-doping or not. The US Olympic medals are for keeps for the same reason. Delgado's 88 Tour is a sticky one. Poor admin by the UCI allowed a loophole for his escape.

As soon as you start casting the net back to the past using more recent legislation or morals you're on a slippery slope. How fair is it to turn up and nick someone for committing a crime in 1990 that didn't become illegal until 1999?
 
ultimobici said:
Clean & legal are the two things you have mixed up. I'm not going to argue any of the riders you cite are clean.

However, you cannot compare Coppi's actions to those of Armstrong in any way shape or form. Why? Because in Coppi's career it was not against the rules of sport at all. Coppi was dead before doping was outlawed. He could have been transfusing, injecting & popping all the substances under the sun and he would still be totally legal.

With the pre-EPO generation of riders & their successors it is different. The rules had been put in place that certain substances & practices were illegal. But for the same reason Coppi is in the clear, Moser's hour can never be rescinded blood-doping or not. The US Olympic medals are for keeps for the same reason. Delgado's 88 Tour is a sticky one. Collaboration with the UCI allowed a loophole for his escape.

As soon as you start casting the net back to the past using more recent legislation or morals you're on a slippery slope. How fair is it to turn up and nick someone for committing a crime in 1990 that didn't become illegal until 1999?
Agree with everything, except one. Trust the modification is acceptable.

Dave.
 
Clean & legal are the two things you have mixed up. I'm not going to argue any of the riders you cite are clean.

However, you cannot compare Coppi's actions to those of Armstrong in any way shape or form. Why? Because in Coppi's career it was not against the rules of sport at all. Coppi was dead before doping was outlawed. He could have been transfusing, injecting & popping all the substances under the sun and he would still be totally legal.

With the pre-EPO generation of riders & their successors it is different. The rules had been put in place that certain substances & practices were illegal. But for the same reason Coppi is in the clear, Moser's hour can never be rescinded blood-doping or not.
Maybe you're right about Coppi, he gets off on a technicality;). I still say Merckx should be held atleast somewhat accountable though. At the very least, he should've just kept quiet all these years, and not said anything, nore supported Wonderboy, just stay out of the limelight IMO.

Miggy DEFINITELY should be stripped IMO.


The US Olympic medals are for keeps for the same reason.

Slippery slope here too though...if they take them from Wonderboy, Tyler, shouldn't they take them from them all, or am I wrong to think that way? I get some might've been won back when certain doping wasn't illegal, but IMO it sets a bad view of it overall with some guys allowed to keep them, and some guys not allowed to. If you doped, you're not clean, therefore you won whatever NOT clean. Why is that fair?

Delgado's 88 Tour is a sticky one. Poor admin by the UCI allowed a loophole for his escape
. Yeah, I don't "get" that one......he's said(Im assuming here) that he did infact dope, so that should make him a cheater, or no? And, if yes(and I'm leaning towards that way), then I ask again, why doesn't someone point that out, and why isn't his title in question(same with Roche)?

As soon as you start casting the net back to the past using more recent legislation or morals you're on a slippery slope. How fair is it to turn up and nick someone for committing a crime in 1990 that didn't become illegal until 1999?
It's all so confusing, and beyond explanation, how can we do anything and not punish them all? I have no answers, don't think anyone here does, but this notion that just because POS Wonderboy did all of this, and ONLY he and Floyd get stripped, is a bit of an hypocrisy, and makes the whole thing a joke IMO. You have dopers getting off and skirting being banned because of the timeframe they took or did it. I mean, now, whenever someone races, there's always going to be doubt cast as to if he's clean, is he dirty, it's just a big mess.
 
86TDFWinner said:
Maybe you're right about Coppi, he gets off on a technicality;). I still say Merckx should be held atleast somewhat accountable though. At the very least, he should've just kept quiet all these years, and not said anything, nore supported Wonderboy, just stay out of the limelight IMO.

Miggy DEFINITELY should be stripped IMO.





Slippery slope here too though...if they take them from Wonderboy, Tyler, shouldn't they take them from them all, or am I wrong to think that way? I get some might've been won back when certain doping wasn't illegal, but IMO it sets a bad view of it overall with some guys allowed to keep them, and some guys not allowed to. If you doped, you're not clean, therefore you won whatever NOT clean. Why is that fair?

. Yeah, I don't "get" that one......he's said(Im assuming here) that he did infact dope, so that should make him a cheater, or no? And, if yes(and I'm leaning towards that way), then I ask again, why doesn't someone point that out, and why isn't his title in question(same with Roche)?



It's all so confusing, and beyond explanation, how can we do anything and not punish them all? I have no answers, don't think anyone here does, but this notion that just because POS Wonderboy did all of this, and ONLY he and Floyd get stripped, is a bit of an hypocrisy, and makes the whole thing a joke IMO. You have dopers getting off and skirting being banned because of the timeframe they took or did it. I mean, now, whenever someone races, there's always going to be doubt cast as to if he's clean, is he dirty, it's just a big mess.
Contador was also stripped like Landis.

Weren't punishments for doping in the 70s / 80s also much lower than today, should we impose todays sentences on them?
 
Jul 17, 2012
5,303
0
0
Isn't there a statute of limitations? Talking about going back decades and stripping titles is futile: it isn't going to happen and any evidence is mainly anecdotal and speculative. With Lance there is an avalanche of evidence, with Indurain just whispers, with Merkx even less. Anquetil freely admitted using amphetamine, saw drug testing as a transgression of his civil liberty and skipped out of at least one test at the end of a race, and his career overlapped the first outlawing of drugs like amphetamine. The drug was a factor in all five of his Tour victories, as it was in Tom Simpson's World Championship win.

You'd pretty much have to go back to about 1965 and wipe out every result since, apart from LeMond, who no-one seems to doubt.

Is/was Cadel dirty? Probably: he rode in a dirty era against dirty riders and won. Why did he make reference to LA and Jalabert? Stupidity I'd guess
 
del1962 said:
Contador was also stripped like Landis.

Weren't punishments for doping in the 70s / 80s also much lower than today, should we impose todays sentences on them?
You are quite correct. Even in the 80's (at least for Zoetemelk and Theunisse) this resulted in a time penalty but they were not DQ'ed form the TdF nor suspended afterwards. I would say that we ate least apply the common "nulla poena"-principles that you cannot be punished based on law(/rule)-changes that came into effect after your transgression. Let people have their own asterix for those victories that in hindsight seem tainted.
 
Dec 13, 2012
1,859
0
0
GJB123 said:
You are quite correct. Even in the 80's (at least for Zoetemelk and Theunisse) this resulted in a time penalty but they were not DQ'ed form the TdF nor suspended afterwards. I would say that we ate least apply the common "nulla poena"-principles that you cannot be punished based on law(/rule)-changes that came into effect after your transgression. Let people have their own asterix for those victories that in hindsight seem tainted.
Riis should be stripped too.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY