Flip flops, and about faces
26 May 2010
Lance Armstrong donation to International Cycling Union a mistake, says Pat McQuaid
"To the best of my knowledge," continued McQuaid, "the UCI has not accepted other donations and I'd just like to clarify that there was
only one donation from Lance Armstrong not two or three.
...
"I think based on experience, based on hindsight and 20/20 vision, and based on the claims of a conflict of interest, the UCI would be very careful before accepting a donation from a rider in the future
10 July 2010
McQuaid reveals Armstrong made two donations to the UCI
"Armstrong said he paid $25,000 but I also knew he paid $100,000,”
And here is a real doozie:
"McQuaid has often defended Armstrong, yet has been openly critical of Floyd Landis even if the World Anti-Doping Agency is doing everything it can to assist the investigation to his allegations. McQuaid justifies his support for Armstrong because of the huge public and media attention he brings to cycling.
"I defend Lance because he's one of the greatest athletes in our sport but I
would vehemently deny that he has ever received any favourable treatment from us," McQuaid said...""
Uh, Pat, that is the definition of favourable treatment. Defending Lance, especially while villifying, others, all the while denying that you are providing favourable treatment. And, in case anyone was confused about the special treatment:
"I believe that it's up to the authorities and the scientific community to catch these guys while they're doing it,” he added. “
Re-opening things from the past and spending a lot of time and a lot of money isn't the answer."
"Doping has been going on in sport for centuries. Do we really want to go backwards all the time and keep opening investigations for accusation that someone makes?
Does that explain the Vrijman report? That the UCI doesn't want anyone to look at what happened in the past?
I have never denied that there has been a culture of doping in this sport
Um, what about:
"What I am sure of is that cycling is cleaner than it’s ever been. It’s the cleanest of any sport.”
Or:
Doping scandals mar cycling year _ again
"UCI president Pat McQuaid continued to claim that cycling is the "cleanest of all sports," while
Italy's anti-doping prosecutor Ettore Torri said in October he is convinced that all cyclists are doping
...
"I'll just say that the leaders of this team were naive," McQuaid said. "If I am the sports director, Ricco never joins my team.""
Pat, you don't need to be the sports director. You need to pull your head out of your @ss and realize that you are the head of the UCI for crying out loud.
And, to put an exclamation point on the favoritism:
Confusion trails Armstrong’s Sysmex machine donation
"McQuaid told CW: "
The UCI will follow the rules, regardless of whom the rider is. The rider must be in the anti-doping system for six months, that's the rule he must follow."
On October 8, it was announced that the UCI was to waive rule 77 allowing Armstrong to take part in the Tour Down Under. "
Dave.