Re: Re:
At the end Kirsty says Sir Brad will be on the Andrew Marr Show (BBC) - on Sunday morning.gillan1969 said:
-
The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
Re:
I don't see the merit here, there are more balanced experts than our Danish friend. But it will be entertaining, so there's that.
Michael is in his own diabolical way an authority on drugs, but on Wiggins? Meh. Also Michael is like many other ex-dopers an agenda pusher.Benotti69 said:
I don't see the merit here, there are more balanced experts than our Danish friend. But it will be entertaining, so there's that.
Re: Re:
Agree.
On the other hand, Prentice Steffen is worth listening to.
I'm sure you were as outraged when you saw Armstrong lying in front of his yellow jerseys as you were in that report when Rasmussen had all those jerseys framed from his doped to the gills victories.
Franklin said:
Agree.
On the other hand, Prentice Steffen is worth listening to.
Benotti69 said:
I'm sure you were as outraged when you saw Armstrong lying in front of his yellow jerseys as you were in that report when Rasmussen had all those jerseys framed from his doped to the gills victories.
Re: Re:
So how does Benotti69 outrage about Lance have anything to do with a Rasmussen agenda with Wiggo? Huh? Your statement looks like a deflection .gooner said:Franklin said:
Agree.
On the other hand, Prentice Steffen is worth listening to.
Benotti69 said:
I'm sure you were as outraged when you saw Armstrong lying in front of his yellow jerseys as you were in that report when Rasmussen had all those jerseys framed from his doped to the gills victories.
Because it shows the height of inconsistency around here once again.
Plus, a deflection from what? When I said Prentice Steffen made a good contribution to the report. Did you miss that?
Rasmussen plays to the gallery. He doesn't care about any good from this. I prefer listening to people in the know who are genuinely interested in solutions, have good contributions to make and come from a position of strength. Not someone who is self-serving and sees himself as some sort of victim from his era while he then pontificates on the riders of today and judges them to a different criteria from himself.
I also find it pathetic seeing the guy who recommended Leinders to Sky getting RTs and praise today. As if he thinks he is on a pedestal to comment.
When I see people doing that, I don't think they are interested in anything to do with anti-doping on this issue. They couldn't be further from it.
Plus, a deflection from what? When I said Prentice Steffen made a good contribution to the report. Did you miss that?
Rasmussen plays to the gallery. He doesn't care about any good from this. I prefer listening to people in the know who are genuinely interested in solutions, have good contributions to make and come from a position of strength. Not someone who is self-serving and sees himself as some sort of victim from his era while he then pontificates on the riders of today and judges them to a different criteria from himself.
I also find it pathetic seeing the guy who recommended Leinders to Sky getting RTs and praise today. As if he thinks he is on a pedestal to comment.
When I see people doing that, I don't think they are interested in anything to do with anti-doping on this issue. They couldn't be further from it.
deValtos said:Wiggins is going on a TV show to explain himself ? :lol:
Awful PR decision surely ? Just shut up and it will go away.
explain himself OR what SKY should explain to the UK fans about winning Tours while being shielded by a massive PR BS thus doing what is necessary to obtain the desired results......
Wiggins did that he had to do to get there .... the TUE reveal is just an undeniable prove that NOBODY can ever win the TDF without any doping aid at all - like it or not!!!
Re: Re:
I am quite certain he's right, but combined with his lack of knowledge of Wiggins makes for a foregone conclusion. Also Michael has not a reputation of being a stable honest guy.
As for better experts? Philippe Gaumont? At least he had some ties with Cofidis. Also, he couldn't care less if Wiggo was a doper or not.
Michael will always say everyone dopes as that makes his own transgressions less severe. Michael still wants recognition as GT winner.Benotti69 said:
I am quite certain he's right, but combined with his lack of knowledge of Wiggins makes for a foregone conclusion. Also Michael has not a reputation of being a stable honest guy.
As for better experts? Philippe Gaumont? At least he had some ties with Cofidis. Also, he couldn't care less if Wiggo was a doper or not.
Re: Re:
Err, you do recognise that will be a little tricky now?!
Agree on Rasmussen by the way. Certainly a hint of attempts to "normalise" in the way he conducts himself. I don't regard him as a credible source.
Franklin said:
Err, you do recognise that will be a little tricky now?!
Agree on Rasmussen by the way. Certainly a hint of attempts to "normalise" in the way he conducts himself. I don't regard him as a credible source.
Well there's a problem *facepalm*
There are other ex-dopers that are not as controversial as Michael Rasmussen. That said, he was more circumspect and even in his comments than I expect of him, so my reservations were premature.
There are other ex-dopers that are not as controversial as Michael Rasmussen. That said, he was more circumspect and even in his comments than I expect of him, so my reservations were premature.
Re: Re:
Rasmussen was invited om to talk about his experience with doping. The relevant part to Wiggins was they had the same Doctor, Leinders, and used the same injections to achieve the same results.
As for Rasmussen's agenda, i dont see one worse than many others and if he sees that every GT winner needed dope to win, well he would not be far wrong, imo.
Armstrong still has an agenda, that of promoting Armstrong, but if he came on and threw more dopers and doping enablers under the bus, great!
Franklin said:
Rasmussen was invited om to talk about his experience with doping. The relevant part to Wiggins was they had the same Doctor, Leinders, and used the same injections to achieve the same results.
As for Rasmussen's agenda, i dont see one worse than many others and if he sees that every GT winner needed dope to win, well he would not be far wrong, imo.
Armstrong still has an agenda, that of promoting Armstrong, but if he came on and threw more dopers and doping enablers under the bus, great!
It looks like Wiggins is being scapegoated. He wont like that. It wont sit well and wont end well.
Wiggins claimed to Andrew Marr that the injections made it a level playing field! Another one from Armstrong's playbook.
This is all playing out a bit Deja-Vu'ish.
This is all playing out a bit Deja-Vu'ish.
Re:
Walsh's article in the Times today seems to infer that Wiggins and the dr were acting alone to a large extent.
Benotti69 said:
Walsh's article in the Times today seems to infer that Wiggins and the dr were acting alone to a large extent.
Re: Re:
Wiggins will not like that.
It depends on Wiggins having allies in upper echelons and one imagines he has not treated people well on his rise and he will meet these people on the way down and when he stretches out a hand it will not be met.
bigcog said:
Wiggins will not like that.
It depends on Wiggins having allies in upper echelons and one imagines he has not treated people well on his rise and he will meet these people on the way down and when he stretches out a hand it will not be met.
Re:
Wiggins claims the 'level playing field' and yet Sky via Walsh claim they knew nothing of Wiggins injections.
How can Wiggins claim to know what others were doing to make it a level playing field as half the teams are MPCC teams.
It all stinks, as per usual.
Benotti69 said:
Wiggins claims the 'level playing field' and yet Sky via Walsh claim they knew nothing of Wiggins injections.
How can Wiggins claim to know what others were doing to make it a level playing field as half the teams are MPCC teams.
It all stinks, as per usual.
Re: Re:
Yup, Rasmussen is probably the least credible source you could find. It's ludicrous how people here and elsewhere hold the likes of Rasmussen up as bastions of credibility.
As for the issue of Wiggins' TUE, I don't believe anybody here who believes that Wiggins doped to win the Tour thinks that this injection was in the slightest bit significant. For one thing he had already won Paris-Nice, Romandie and Dauphine in 2012 prior to this injection, not to mention the fact there are many people who claim such a dosage would provide little to no performance benefit anyway.
simoni said:
Yup, Rasmussen is probably the least credible source you could find. It's ludicrous how people here and elsewhere hold the likes of Rasmussen up as bastions of credibility.
As for the issue of Wiggins' TUE, I don't believe anybody here who believes that Wiggins doped to win the Tour thinks that this injection was in the slightest bit significant. For one thing he had already won Paris-Nice, Romandie and Dauphine in 2012 prior to this injection, not to mention the fact there are many people who claim such a dosage would provide little to no performance benefit anyway.
Re: Re:
Dont see anyone pointing to Rasmussen as a bastion of credibility. He is an admitted doper who was asked to talk about cortisone injections.
As for Wiggins TUE, well that they lied about it, that Brailsford has gone into hiding, that Wiggins only talked to a politico journo not a sports journo, that he never mentioned asthma is 4 autobiographies and other books and that he had a season in 2012 comparable to Merckx when no one ever thought of Wiggins with that ability all means the cortisone is small part of the doping cocktail.
Obfuscating that Wggins "never broke any rules" is not going to work.
JRanton said:
Dont see anyone pointing to Rasmussen as a bastion of credibility. He is an admitted doper who was asked to talk about cortisone injections.
As for Wiggins TUE, well that they lied about it, that Brailsford has gone into hiding, that Wiggins only talked to a politico journo not a sports journo, that he never mentioned asthma is 4 autobiographies and other books and that he had a season in 2012 comparable to Merckx when no one ever thought of Wiggins with that ability all means the cortisone is small part of the doping cocktail.
Obfuscating that Wggins "never broke any rules" is not going to work.
Re: Re:
Who lied about the TUE?
The ''never broke any rules'' is going to work because the governing bodies don't have any issue with it and the vast majority of the general public don't care.
You're treating this as if it's a smoking gun. It's nothing of the sort and will blow over precisely because ''no rules were broken''. Which is fair enough really.
Benotti69 said:
Who lied about the TUE?
The ''never broke any rules'' is going to work because the governing bodies don't have any issue with it and the vast majority of the general public don't care.
You're treating this as if it's a smoking gun. It's nothing of the sort and will blow over precisely because ''no rules were broken''. Which is fair enough really.
yet another f***ing w***ker
Dumrain: Wiggo stinks
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/tom-dumoulin-says-wiggins-tue-case-stinks/
Dumrain: Wiggo stinks
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/tom-dumoulin-says-wiggins-tue-case-stinks/
Re: Re:
jranton - Wrong. The TUE was for a condition that either did not exist, or did not need the nuclear bomb medicine that was prescribed, and therefore the rules for having a TUE were broken.
You are conveniently confusing the the administrative TUE steps (which were likely followed) with the actual merits for the TUE. Which are caca de Vachon. Kind of like submitting the income tax return on time with 100k of income, but not disclosing that the income was from dealing drugs.
jranton - Wrong. The TUE was for a condition that either did not exist, or did not need the nuclear bomb medicine that was prescribed, and therefore the rules for having a TUE were broken.
You are conveniently confusing the the administrative TUE steps (which were likely followed) with the actual merits for the TUE. Which are caca de Vachon. Kind of like submitting the income tax return on time with 100k of income, but not disclosing that the income was from dealing drugs.
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Liege Bastogne Liege-7 hour monument, Sunday, April 21, 2024- Started by topcat
- Replies: 985
-
Paris - Roubaix 2024, one day monument, April 7- Started by Dreginald
- Replies: 2K
-
-
-
De Ronde van Vlaanderen (270.8 km), 2024 March 31 (Sunday)- Started by Netserk
- Replies: 1K
-
Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread- Started by DNP-Old
- Replies: 24K
Latest posts
-
77th Tour de Romandie (2.UWT) // 23rd - 28th of April 2024- Latest: ChewbaccaDefense
-
-
-
Vuelta a España La Vuelta Femenina 2024 (April 28th-May 5th)- Latest: Libertine Seguros
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram