morana wrote: » No to divert the thread but dont you find it worrying that in rugby where bulk and strength seem to be fundamentals for success that only a handful have been caught. A lad in england, a kenyan in one of the world cups, our lad for salbutamol. Maybe there is stacks of others but we just havent heard of them.
on_the_nickel wrote: » Just watched this doc, from Aussie tv this past weekend, suggest you all do too.http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2012/10/11/3608613.htm
So, the great Lance Armstrong has been cited as a 'doper'. Not only that, but his colleagues and managers at Team US Postal were drawn into this scandal. Bearing in mind that US Postal began life as The Pony Express, I am reminded of a line by John Wayne in a western, "only dopes ride for the pony express". After all these years, he has been proven correct. Sean Kelly Tramore, Co Waterford
morana wrote: » hardCopy wrote: » There's been a few bits about the UCI's dope testing that have been really shocking, firstly the fact that riders were allowed one hour unsupervised after an event, add in the fact that when testers visited the team hotel they arrived in branded cars wearing official jackets. It's madness. I know a former IRB (rugby) dope tester. The testers used to pick a player from each team at random and meet those players at the sideline at fulltime, the players were then kept separate from their team and staff and supervised in a designated room until they peed. That was back in 1998. The idea that testing protocols were stricter in rugby at that time than cycling, a sport with such a history of drug abuse is bizarre. It looks more like willful negligence than incompetence. No to divert the thread but dont you find it worrying that in rugby where bulk and strength seem to be fundamentals for success that only a handful have been caught. A lad in england, a kenyan in one of the world cups, our lad for salbutamol. Maybe there is stacks of others but we just havent heard of them.
hardCopy wrote: » There's been a few bits about the UCI's dope testing that have been really shocking, firstly the fact that riders were allowed one hour unsupervised after an event, add in the fact that when testers visited the team hotel they arrived in branded cars wearing official jackets. It's madness. I know a former IRB (rugby) dope tester. The testers used to pick a player from each team at random and meet those players at the sideline at fulltime, the players were then kept separate from their team and staff and supervised in a designated room until they peed. That was back in 1998. The idea that testing protocols were stricter in rugby at that time than cycling, a sport with such a history of drug abuse is bizarre. It looks more like willful negligence than incompetence.
The 27-year-old added that he thought stirring up cycling's past was not a useful way to clean the slate. "What's the use, really, that someone like Frankie Andreu - whom I refer to at random - tells the truth today about something he did 12 years ago, or more? So, should we go even further, find witnesses to talk about Charly Gaul's era, to hold them accountable?," he asked.
Zascar wrote: » The video won't play for me - giving an error - anyone got another link?
PHIL LIGGETT: I, look, I admit I've, I've been very proud to commentate on Armstrong over these, over these years because I've seen a man and I've seen how he's battled the elements and I've seen how he's come forward, and I'm very sad. What do I think? Everybody else did it, so I find it very difficult not to think that Lance did it
mcgratheoin wrote: » http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/despite-usadas-evidence-liggett-remains-armstrongs-supporter Depressing...
had an email from an eminent scientist from the US yesterday. An SMS actually. It said if Lance Armstrong had taken the drugs outlined by USADA he’d have been dead ten years ago. He’s an eminent scientist and a very intelligent man. I don’t know his name, the SMS came from a secondary person.”
ThisRegard wrote: » I got an email, no wait, and SMS, from a very intelligent and eminent scientist. Who is he, I don't know, never heard of him, but he's eminently intelligent.
morana wrote: » Its always the same with procyclists "lets get on with it, this was in the past and focus on the future" The problem is the future soon becomes the past and its usually riddled with drugs.
ThisRegard wrote: » I got an email, no wait, an SMS, from a very intelligent and eminent scientist. Who is he, I don't know, never heard of him, but he's eminently intelligent.
wonderfullife wrote: » I actually feel sorry for Ligget after watching it. You could tell he's hurt by the whole thing and feels betrayed. Everyone is entitled to their opinions on his cycling knowledge/nouse, but at the end of the day he's almost 70 years old and he was looked in the eye by Armstrong and conned like he conned the rest of the world.
petethedrummer wrote: » He's a cheerleading gravy train riding idiot*. This doping has been obvious for years and he is immersed in the cycling world. He bloody commentates on it for hours every day of his working life!!! *Actually idiot is wrong. He knows the score. He's not stupid. He is being deceitful.
Guybrush T wrote: » 1. He fell for LA hook, line and sinker, believed the legend and is still unable to face the truth. To me this is the most likely, but still means he's a bit of an idiot.
Mark Chapman presents a special programme focusing on drugs in cycling through the Lance Armstrong era. Hear from one of Armstrong's former team mates, Tyler Hamilton, as well as interviews with Dick Pound, the former head of WADA and Emma O'Reilly, Armstrong's former masseuse. Plus British cyclist David Millar who was banned for two years after admitting taking performance enhancing drugs and Christophe Basson, a French cyclist who was driven out of the sport by Armstrong and other riders after he spoke out against drugs.
Cienciano wrote: » Phil Liggett finally speaks! It'll take a while before it sinks in fully for Phil.
Guybrush T wrote: » 1. He fell for LA hook, line and sinker, believed the legend and is still unable to face the truth. To me this is the most likely, but still means he's a bit of an idiot. 2. He knew (or at least strongly suspected) Lance was doping, but kept the faith for purely mercenary reasons. If this is the case then he is definitely an idiot for not switching horses earlier this year when it was clear Lance was toast.
