Who is lying? Evans or Landis?

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.

In the quotations in the opening post, who is lying?

  • Both are truthful. There was protection, but not now.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
Libertine Seguros said:
They're both truthful. Some bosses are trying to clean things up, others are tied to the system. Some are trying to clean things up on the surface but underneath are as corrupt as ever. Some are genuinely trying to clean things up but are unable to because they're tied to the sport's past, and there are too many vested interests for the sport to be either wholly corrupt (sponsorship/races collapse) or wholly clean (too much to sacrifice for too many people).
This seems to assume that "bosses" refers to team managers, etc. But if you look at the quotations, well, Landis is explicitly talking about those "responsible at UCI", and Evans is too, though a bit more implicitly, since he's referring to those who are responsible for all the scrutiny and testing. That's not the team managers (for the most part)... that's, again, those "responsible at UCI".

Consider Evan's words again:

We feel a little bit overly scrutinised sometimes. Cycling [bosses] are doing the right thing to try to clean up the sport and they're really doing it with transparency, but just because they catch one person with however many tests they do, it doesn't mean that everyone's a cheat.
So, the people responsible for all the scrutiny and testing are "doing the right thing to try to clean up the sport"? Does anyone really think Evans really believes that?
 
May 20, 2010
718
0
0
I recon Cadel is being very generous to the "bosses". Politically he is best served to provide those in power with the benefit of the doubt, and then add a significant margin of error.

His previous statements imply that he desires a clean peloton.

Being overtly critical of the bosses would be professional suicide.

To refer to police drama "Softly Softly" catchee monkey.
 
Oct 29, 2009
2,578
0
0
Ninety5rpm said:
This seems to assume that "bosses" refers to team managers, etc. But if you look at the quotations, well, Landis is explicitly talking about those "responsible at UCI", and Evans is too, though a bit more implicitly, since he's referring to those who are responsible for all the scrutiny and testing. That's not the team managers (for the most part)... that's, again, those "responsible at UCI".
Consider Evan's words again:
So, the people responsible for all the scrutiny and testing are "doing the right thing to try to clean up the sport"? Do you really think he really believes that?
When Evans used "bosses" I thought he was casting it a bit wider than just the testers and UCI alone. It sounded to me more like a reflection on the direction that the different sport shapers were triggering once you added up all the pluses and minuses. Acknowledging that the combined forces at work are indeed having an active impact, and on the whole are heading in a more transparent and honest direction.

That is not the same as saying all people with an oar are paddling the cycling canoe in the same direction.

Evans always struck me as a "don't rock the boat, I just want to ride however it comes and be left alone" type of rider, so he makes a half-way house statement that makes a point without pushing anything in any real direction.

Obviously dislikes aspects of the constant spyglass hanging over him as a rider. Lack of privacy and increasing scrutiny, sacrificing the normality of life to a great extent. Probably appreciates some of the work that that is done too, without caring too much I think. He's in a reasonable good place, most people go with the flow and take it all the way it comes then.

What sometimes gets lost in translation when people talk about the whole, is that there isn't "one force" at work. Some people are trying to clean it up. Some aren't. Some care, some don't, some obstruct. The UCI isn't "one" thing, but we often talk about it as if it is only capable of doing "one" thing and has just "one internal voice". With so many people involved, organisations tend to walk in different directions, sometimes conflicting directions, all at once.

There are strong anchors out, but bit by bit there appears to be a shift of direction in the deeply rooted culture, and we are indeed seeing a bit more openness, a bit more scrutiny, a bit more effort, in the sport as a whole.

Hardly ever because a genuine shift the attitude of people in place. Unless they only get embarrassed into making changes. But there are more active and powerful outside forces at work these days. And usually that also means that the internal culture adapts, and gets more appropriate people in the right spots. Slowly.

The sport isn't 100% corrupt. Not everyone is a cheat, let alone a cheat at heart. A lot of people are simply adapting to what they find, rather than setting out to cheat as such. Nor is the entire circus around the riders just there to stuff their pockets regardless. Some genuinely care.

So I go with Evans, that compared to what it was like, it is indeed more transparent, or at least some are making genuine efforts to make it so, and overall it is getting a bit more honest. Some genuine efforts are being made (by some).

There is still a lot of water to cross before we reach the promised land, and it will some serious sea-splitting if we want to take a short-cut there fast. There are also a lot of peculiar and powerful winds blowing from across the sea that are creating waves where none managed to create ripples before. I'm curious to see if it does herald some significant water movement in the near future, or if it is gonna be draining the pool by patching one leaky bucket at a time.
 
Jun 16, 2009
19,657
1
0
Ninety5rpm, do you have something against evans? You made some very strong statements about him in another thread and then you make this thread about a single comment. It is like you are almost are out to get him?
 
May 20, 2010
718
0
0
"Your Welcome" Post 31

Agreed. While I see CE as always trying to answer thoughfully I do not think he is mathematically calculating every permutation or possible interpretation of his thoughts/words.

It is interesting the lengths to which we go to tease out all those possibilities.

A worthwhile note.
 
I might have misunderstood, but my take was that Evans was referring to a lot of the DS's rather than the UCI. So, he is saying that the guys like Vaughters etc are trying to clean up the sport.
If he was referring to the UCI, he is either very naive & really hoping that what he is saying is true, or he is spinning the company line.
 
auscyclefan94 said:
Ninety5rpm, do you have something against evans? You made some very strong statements about him in another thread and then you make this thread about a single comment. It is like you are almost are out to get him?
I've got nothing against Evans. Well, other than he's boring, like Leipheimer.

My beef is with those who defend or downplay the significance of his words in terms of revealing him to be a shill for the UCI. It's understandable that he's such a shill. I get why he lies. I get why he wants to emphasize the "improvements", no matter how small and insignificant they are, and how much of a charade they are, over the blatant lack of progress being made as revealed in the ever-strong performances. This is how he makes his living. It's the choice all pros have to make (though I do think he said more than required here). Anyway, I get all that. What I don't get is the dismissal of it. The comments about how, well, he didn't expect his blatant statement to withstand minute scrutiny. Minute scrutiny? We're looking at his plain words, in context, in the only way they can be reasonably interpreted.
 
Nick777 said:
I might have misunderstood, but my take was that Evans was referring to a lot of the DS's rather than the UCI. So, he is saying that the guys like Vaughters etc are trying to clean up the sport.
If he was referring to the UCI, he is either very naive & really hoping that what he is saying is true, or he is spinning the company line.
Lot of people seem to have come away with this interpretation, and I don't understand why. Wishful thinking, perhaps? Here, again, is the full quote:

"We feel a little bit overly scrutinised sometimes. Cycling [bosses] are doing the right thing to try to clean up the sport and they're really doing it with transparency, but just because they catch one person with however many tests they do, it doesn't mean that everyone's a cheat."

Overly scrutinized? By Vaughters and other DS's? No way..

The next sentence starts with "Cycling bosses", and in the latter part refers to "they" who are catching persons with tests. Again, the DS's are not catching anyone, with tests or otherwise. What in his words makes you or anyone else think he's referring to DS's here?

I think it's pretty clear he can only be referring to UCI upper management as "cycling bosses".

Remember that the public at large, the press, and even most of cycling fans believe the UCI is on the side of cleaning up the sport. Naive, but their propaganda machine has been effective, to some extent, and spreading this meme. And Cadel is quite obviously part of it.
 
Jul 6, 2010
2,340
0
0
Ninety5rpm said:
Lot of people seem to have come away with this interpretation, and I don't understand why. Wishful thinking, perhaps? Here, again, is the full quote:

"We feel a little bit overly scrutinised sometimes. Cycling [bosses] are doing the right thing to try to clean up the sport and they're really doing it with transparency, but just because they catch one person with however many tests they do, it doesn't mean that everyone's a cheat."

Overly scrutinized? By Vaughters and other DS's? No way..

The next sentence starts with "Cycling bosses", and in the latter part refers to "they" who are catching persons with tests. Again, the DS's are not catching anyone, with tests or otherwise. What in his words makes you or anyone else think he's referring to DS's here?

I think it's pretty clear he can only be referring to UCI upper management as "cycling bosses".

Remember that the public at large, the press, and even most of cycling fans believe the UCI is on the side of cleaning up the sport. Naive, but their propaganda machine has been effective, to some extent, and spreading this meme. And Cadel is quite obviously part of it.

+1


Nicely done 95.
 
Jul 6, 2010
2,340
0
0
Francois the Postman said:
When Evans used "bosses" I thought he was casting it a bit wider than just the testers and UCI alone. It sounded to me more like a reflection on the direction that the different sport shapers were triggering once you added up all the pluses and minuses. Acknowledging that the combined forces at work are indeed having an active impact, and on the whole are heading in a more transparent and honest direction.

That is not the same as saying all people with an oar are paddling the cycling canoe in the same direction.

Evans always struck me as a "don't rock the boat, I just want to ride however it comes and be left alone" type of rider, so he makes a half-way house statement that makes a point without pushing anything in any real direction.

Obviously dislikes aspects of the constant spyglass hanging over him as a rider. Lack of privacy and increasing scrutiny, sacrificing the normality of life to a great extent. Probably appreciates some of the work that that is done too, without caring too much I think. He's in a reasonable good place, most people go with the flow and take it all the way it comes then.

What sometimes gets lost in translation when people talk about the whole, is that there isn't "one force" at work. Some people are trying to clean it up. Some aren't. Some care, some don't, some obstruct. The UCI isn't "one" thing, but we often talk about it as if it is only capable of doing "one" thing and has just "one internal voice". With so many people involved, organisations tend to walk in different directions, sometimes conflicting directions, all at once.

There are strong anchors out, but bit by bit there appears to be a shift of direction in the deeply rooted culture, and we are indeed seeing a bit more openness, a bit more scrutiny, a bit more effort, in the sport as a whole.

Hardly ever because a genuine shift the attitude of people in place. Unless they only get embarrassed into making changes. But there are more active and powerful outside forces at work these days. And usually that also means that the internal culture adapts, and gets more appropriate people in the right spots. Slowly.

The sport isn't 100% corrupt. Not everyone is a cheat, let alone a cheat at heart. A lot of people are simply adapting to what they find, rather than setting out to cheat as such. Nor is the entire circus around the riders just there to stuff their pockets regardless. Some genuinely care.

So I go with Evans, that compared to what it was like, it is indeed more transparent, or at least some are making genuine efforts to make it so, and overall it is getting a bit more honest. Some genuine efforts are being made (by some).

There is still a lot of water to cross before we reach the promised land, and it will some serious sea-splitting if we want to take a short-cut there fast. There are also a lot of peculiar and powerful winds blowing from across the sea that are creating waves where none managed to create ripples before. I'm curious to see if it does herald some significant water movement in the near future, or if it is gonna be draining the pool by patching one leaky bucket at a time.
I absolutely love your use of an over-arching, and yet consistent, nautical theme. Lovely.

My issue is that canoes are paddled with, get this... PADDLES.

Your post makes me have to take a leak, and I'm not saying that metaphorically.

Keep up the good work. Just give me fair warning about your future aqueous posts, Gravol takes a while to kick in...
 
More pointless Evan's bashing. Landis has no credibility at all. He is just another manipulator who thinks the world owes him something. Sure Evan's comments sound like PR but that's not uncommon for someone in his position. I think most people know what he is on about.
 
movingtarget said:
More pointless Evan's bashing. Landis has no credibility at all. He is just another manipulator who thinks the world owes him something. Sure Evan's comments sound like PR but that's not uncommon for someone in his position. I think most people know what he is on about.
So you believe Landis is lying when he says that all riders are not treated equally by the UCI?

That's a big statement given what we know about donations etc.
 
Jun 16, 2009
19,657
1
0
Ferminal said:
So you believe Landis is lying when he says that all riders are not treated equally by the UCI?

That's a big statement given what we know about donations etc.
No matter how truthful landis is, he has lied under oath and has little credibility. I believe him but many others won't until he can start providing some substance to his arguements. Like that picture of the epo coming in the panniers that he has.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
movingtarget said:
More pointless Evan's bashing. Landis has no credibility at all. He is just another manipulator who thinks the world owes him something. Sure Evan's comments sound like PR but that's not uncommon for someone in his position. I think most people know what he is on about.
i dont see someone swanning aorund the world granting interviews to every rag that asks for a fee with an agent in tow. In fact he has been quite low profile considering the allegations and the flack he as taken for it.

It makes no sense to do what he has done in the manner he has done if he felt the world owed him. He would be more likely to behave like a certain sociopath from Texas.

As for doubting his credibility, who has he talked about, a doper and a corrupt federation, hardly revelations and people who hardly have huge credibility. Landis has more credibility that Pharmastrong and McQuaid will ever have in a lifetime.
 
auscyclefan94 said:
No matter how truthful landis is, he has lied under oath and has little credibility. I believe him but many others won't until he can start providing some substance to his arguements. Like that picture of the epo coming in the panniers that he has.
I'm not sure what that has to do with it. Does lying "under oath" make you a worse liar than people like McQuaid, Armstrong, Contador etc who lie to global media outlets? Is it not a lie if you use twitter? If you twitter it twice does it make it credible? (to borrow a line from nyvelocity). Which statements from Flandis in the last 6month do you determine to be false?

The whole no credibility suggestion is nothing but a beat up by those who have a stake in outcome of the current investigation. Of course Flandis may be overstating things like we all do, but it's fairly obvious that the general idea "not all riders are treated equally" is a plausible one.
 
JMBeaushrimp said:
Well, that's just being entirely ignorant or plainly brilliant.

Not in your backyard? Is that the issue?
do you really consider Evans to be "in the loop" with the peleton??
it's not like he's the most loved fella there, or a rider you'd consider as "one of the boys"...
 
Aug 9, 2010
448
0
0
JA.Tri said:
"Your Welcome" Post 31

Agreed. While I see CE as always trying to answer thoughfully I do not think he is mathematically calculating every permutation or possible interpretation of his thoughts/words.

It is interesting the lengths to which we go to tease out all those possibilities.

A worthwhile note.
Interesting. Also utterly predictable and deeply depressing.

Libertine and Francois have it right on this.
 
Ferminal said:
I'm not sure what that has to do with it. Does lying "under oath" make you a worse liar than people like McQuaid, Armstrong, Contador etc who lie to global media outlets? Is it not a lie if you use twitter? If you twitter it twice does it make it credible? (to borrow a line from nyvelocity). Which statements from Flandis in the last 6month do you determine to be false?

The whole no credibility suggestion is nothing but a beat up by those who have a stake in outcome of the current investigation. Of course Flandis may be overstating things like we all do, but it's fairly obvious that the general idea "not all riders are treated equally" is a plausible one.
Yes, the whole "no credibility" argument is quintessential ad hominem attack, a classic logical fallacy:

"An ad hominem (Latin: "to the man"), also known as argumentum ad hominem, is an attempt to link the validity of a premise to a characteristic or belief of the person advocating the premise."

What does Landis' credibility have to do with whether his statement that the entire peloton knows that "the stars" are treated by the UCI more favorably than others with respect to avoiding doping detection? Nothing.

Has even one member of the peloton stepped up to disagree with Landis on this point? No.
 
Jul 27, 2009
749
0
0
Ninety5rpm said:
If it is "known in the peloton" then Evans must know as he is "in the peloton".

So which is it, cycling bosses are "doing the right thing to try to clean up the sport", or they "protect some people [to] manipulate results and create stars"?

Who speaks the truth? Who is lying?
I think you're reading too much into Evans quote and quite frankly it isn't really comparable to Floyd's quote. Floyd is mostly talking in historical context and Evans is clearly talking about the current situation.

So I'm willing to conclude both are telling the truth.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS