Kav0777 wrote: » I believe he gives the reindeer PED's though, or "magic dust" as he calls it..... Edited to Apologise to Mods for doping speculation..
Beasty wrote: » Rudolph is clean - end of!!
"...Contador had his problems..." "...Whatever mischief was going on then could never happen today...."
wonderfullife wrote: » Seriously, i know it's unlikely but if the UCI take USADA to the Court of Arbitration for Sport they all deserve to be dumped in a black sack and beaten with sticks for stupidity.
mcgratheoin wrote: » Yeah, but he's benefiting from the assistance of an entire team suspected of snorting the magic dust - pulling sleighs is a team effort you know.
buffalo wrote: » http://www.independent.ie/sport/other-sports/cycling-has-cleaned-up-its-act-now-claims-stephen-roche-3265071.html Stand back everyone! Stephen Roche says it's okay!! It's a sign of how far the pro-peloton has sunk when a rider is "suspected of being clean".
buffalo wrote: » This is key. I think any LA fans who were still clinging on to their vision until recently were not at all into cycling. Surviving cancer, and coming back stronger than before (to win some big race in France)... that's a powerful thing. You don't see why that would inspire people?
Harrybelafonte wrote: » Personally, no. I had a grandfather who lost an arm in his thirties, raised four kids on his own and lived an extremely healthy and full life until passing on in his mid-80s. I know of others on a personal level who have recovered from various traumas in their lives and continued on with their lifes, with maybe marginal sucess. People like that inspire me, if I really need it. I don't get in a fuss about a wealthy american with questionable morals who had an intriguing comeback after suffering from an illness lots of ordinary people suffer from. Y'know, it's a belief. I'm not going to change it, you can call me an idiot as I have those who worshipped him, maybe one is as bad as the other, but I'll back it up. When it comes down to it, even Lemond, who I have no great love for either, I'd admire way more by winning the TdF and World Champs two years after being shot in the ass and still carrying some lead in there.
wonderfullife wrote: » even though you get from A to B just as the Ferrari did.
buffalo wrote: » I'm not asking if you would admire it, I asked if you don't see why that would inspire other people? The story of someone who suffered and survived an illness to return to sport and win. If you can't see why some people would find that inspirational, well then I'll hush.
wonderfullife wrote: » The other way in which cycling (and particularly TdF) has suffered as a result of the mass doping era is in terms of the entertainment of the product. Some of the mountain stages in the 1999-2007 period were pure exhiliaration, attack after attack, pure excitement. Except this was on the back of doping and nowadays the tour looks dull, boring and mundane because the reality is nobody can legally sustain the power/watts, recovery etc they were sustaining in that era. So in place of breathtaking duels between Pantani, Ullrich, Armstrong etc we are left with Chris Froome towing Bradley up the mountain in an effective , boring, uninspiring way.
Harrybelafonte wrote: » Admiration comes before inspiration. I can see why they thought it inspirational, but... they were wrong. Plenty of fallacies in my logic, I know,like I said my view is tainted.
mcgratheoin wrote: » Oakley statement :rolleyes:
mcgratheoin wrote: » Oakley statement :rolleyes: "As guilty as the evidence shows, which we completely acknowledge, it is our promise and contractual obligation to stand by our athletes until proven guilty by the highest governing body of sport, or a court of law. "We might be last off, but we are not going to jump on the bandwagon as it breaks our promise to all of our athletes. We will wait for the UCI's conclusion and act at that time."
Harrybelafonte wrote: » Seriously? Comparing an honest LA to Santa Claus is spot on. We're adults, not seven year old children. I'll be telling my brat after this Christmas that the fat man doesn't exist, I'll lose plenty of respect for him if he turns a blind eye to the evidence and he's eight.
petethedrummer wrote: » The Many stages of Santa denial: 1. Santa is real. 2. There is absolutely no evidence to say he doesn't exist. 3. The only evidence is hearsay from bitter people who don't get presents anymore. 4. He has brought too much happiness in to children's lives and that's what is important. His existence is not relevant. 5. Dancer, Prancer and Blitzen musn't exist either. Why not talk about them? 6. Maybe he doesn't exist but I'm going to keep on believing in him. 7. Why do you hate Christmas? 8. Well the Postman musn't exist either. You say you don't believe a man comes round once a year to deliver parcels to children. Yet your guy comes round with parcels everyday. Not Possible.
Harrybelafonte wrote: » I, genuinely ask, apart from surviving cancer and doing something with his life, something which many other people, family members and friends have done, what made him such a special human being? Maybe I oversimplify it.
leftism wrote: » Lance was successful at beating cancer. He was very successful in professional cycling.
Lumen wrote: » Actually it was Lance's doctors that were successful at beating his cancer, and... oh.
leftism wrote: » Lance was successful at beating cancer.
leftism wrote: » Success does not a hero make...
petethedrummer wrote: » I'll give the SKINS man a pass as he doesn't seem to have been a major player in cycling.
Lusk Doyle wrote: » God, I'll bet he's breathing a huge sigh of relief at that news. Some guy who plays drums in Ireland is giving me a pass. Phew! I'll remember this day as the day I dodged a figurative bullet.
