Who is the Bigger Idi0t?

Who is the bigger idiot?

  • **** Pound

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
  • Poll closed .
OK, so I thought it was time to rate some of the current players with some of the past. Who is the biggest idiot of this group? You will notice I did not provide an easy option, such as WonderLance :p

(BTW - It is somewhat amusing that Dick is an indecent word on this forum! ;))
 
Mar 18, 2009
14,634
3
0
Hey, we cannot vote for both McQuaid and Verbrugggen. Although since Verbruggen is still pulling the strings, maybe we can just vote for Verbruggen.
 
BroDeal said:
Hey, we cannot vote for both McQuaid and Verbrugggen. Although since Verbruggen is still pulling the strings, maybe we can just vote for Verbruggen.
Yes, I wanted to make people choose one, otherwise I am pretty sure it would have been 2-4 hits per vote!
 
Jul 23, 2009
2,891
0
0
McQuaid. For even thinking that some people believe the crap he dishes out. And for letting himself be strung along like a marionette. Bordry and Pound have their moments good and bad, but this guy's on a roll.
 
Something to ponder ...

Is Verbruggen the bigger idiot for pulling the strings, or McQuack, for getting his strings pulled (and yet again demontrating that, if it doesn't work, keep saying it!)
 
Mar 18, 2009
1,844
1
0
Dekker_Tifosi said:
Lol at Cyclingnews censoring the word D-ick, a perfectly normal name in many countries, even in the US.
Fairly common name in the US actually!!
 
Ripper said:
And you didn't count W-L :eek:
Verbruggen- crook
McQuaid-crook's puppet
Pound-loose cannon plus his first name gets censored on CN forum
Bordry-all this build up about retesting 2008 samples, for what?
Fahey-http://www.bicycle.net/2009/anti-doping-chief-john-fahey-praises-armstrong-comeback

It's so hard to pick just one!
 
Sep 16, 2009
38
0
0
In a group of clowns, Bordry stands out more than the rest, at least this week. God forbid there were no [caught] dopers for him to bust during the '09 Tour, so now 3 months later he starts this farce to get himself some face time, and probably maintain his funding. If by transparency he means feuding with the UCI through French newspapers, he's not doing cycling or the anti-doping crusade any favors. And finally do we really need all this build up for the big reveal that additional testing on '08 samples revealed NOTHING?
 
Sep 30, 2009
306
0
0
V bag for me. The only thing that put him above the others as an idiot for me was all the technology (or lack of) bull**** that he instituted years back
 
Mar 12, 2009
2,521
0
0
ScottinPhilly said:
In a group of clowns, Bordry stands out more than the rest, at least this week. God forbid there were no [caught] dopers for him to bust during the '09 Tour, so now 3 months later he starts this farce to get himself some face time, and probably maintain his funding. If by transparency he means feuding with the UCI through French newspapers, he's not doing cycling or the anti-doping crusade any favors. And finally do we really need all this build up for the big reveal that additional testing on '08 samples revealed NOTHING?
+1

well said
 
Sep 8, 2009
33
0
0
I think the whole someone testing positive in 2008 being named or banned in 2009 is bizarre. If you test positive in 2008 you should be banned in 2008. If you were alleged to be positive in 2008 but banned due to a retest in 2009 wouldnt you argue against the validity of a now one year old sample?? or what may have happened to that sample in that time?
 
Jun 9, 2009
403
0
0
Those guys are just trying to do their jobs and promote a cleaner image for cycling in the face of all scandals over the past years. It seems they are all doing a fairly decent job since sponsors are no longer running scared from the sport.

It is easy to sit back and poke fun or be critical of them, but they are successful in their mission.

The real idiots are the people who think cycling (or any other pro sport) will ever be clean of drugs and devoid of scandal.
 
Jul 2, 2009
1,079
0
0
Mickey75 said:
I think the whole someone testing positive in 2008 being named or banned in 2009 is bizarre. If you test positive in 2008 you should be banned in 2008. If you were alleged to be positive in 2008 but banned due to a retest in 2009 wouldnt you argue against the validity of a now one year old sample?? or what may have happened to that sample in that time?
What company or team would want one of their riders implicated during the season? That would be bad for business. Where is the common sense?

Everyone Involved, so much dirty laundry
 
Update

It's a tight battle for the number one spot between D*ckster, Verbugger and McQuack. The podium is clear, but who will be on the top spot?

(obvious bump to get some more votes before this poll closes ;) )
 
David Suro said:
Those guys are just trying to do their jobs and promote a cleaner image for cycling in the face of all scandals over the past years. It seems they are all doing a fairly decent job since sponsors are no longer running scared from the sport.
David - Frank VDB just died from a blood clot that was very, very likely attributed to his past (or possibly current) doping. All of this happened under HV and PM's watch, while both said repeatedly over and over in the last decade that they were doing all they could to stop doping, and were turning the corner, and the sport was pretty much clean. So, do you still believe in what you wrote above?
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY