Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Professional Cycling' started by kneedrachen, Dec 13, 2017.
I like the way CNN framed that article.
This is going to be fun to watch. The UCI has to get this one right, the first time!
Summary - UCI sucks
Punishments for cheaters are not consistent. Never will be.
Does anybody on Sky not have asthma?
This will be interesting.
CNN article read as non accusatory, surprisingly. At this stage, it's appropriate and I'm happy to see this type of reporting.
Everybody Must Be presumed innocent until they appear on Oprah.
Behind every great Fortune lies a great crime.
Dope is dope.....strip achievements & ban for life.......oh wait, forgot, UCI has no standards or floating standards to suit each situation. Guessing Froome hasn't embarrassed them enough like Armstrong did so no need to set any more examples or be consistent. About par for the course................
UCI had nothing to do with LA lifetime ban. That was imposed by USADA.
I will hold judgment till the investigation comes to a close & the full story is available.
Will be servilely disappointed if my favourite rider & team are found to of knowingly done this without a medical cause & just for performance gains ☹️
Far out, you can throw out however many acronyms for however many inept agencies involved you want and it still won't be the point. Here, I'll try to be clearer...........doing same stupid crap that is screwing up the whole show for everyone doping or not should = same consequences for anyone and everyone participating in the stupid crap. Persons ratting out the ones trying to cover up what's going on after doing the same thing are just as guilty as the ones being made examples of and are due the same banning, public shaming and media lynching.
Without consistency in governing, there is no legitimacy and the whole thing is just a big joke. Just the nonsense that will only attract hypocritical poser non-role models, fit to represent nothing anyone except the same corrupt individuals will continue to give 2 shits about. I already haven't cared for quite awhile and will not participate in or support any sanctioned anything related to such lameness.......
lol, you mean the UCI can't make credible, consistent decisions? I have to agree, in the end it really doesn't matter who made what decision.
I agree about consistency, but the idea of offering leniency in order to encourage people to come forward and assist in investigations is a time-honored investigative tool.
On the other hand .... every time another one of these incidents comes up ... it doesn't matter how it is resolved.
To me, Chris Froome was clean and above-board. And yes, I am big enough to understand that every player on every team in every sport plays with the doping rules, and yes it is disgusting .... but to see Froome busted really hurts, because I had thought Team Sky and Chris Froome were a little better.
Cycling can't afford to keep losing in publicity court. Every time a "hero" turns up dirty it makes it harder to care .... and in the U.S. at least, not a lot of people care that much to begin with. Maybe Europeans are blase about doping .... but the "UCI World Pharmacists' Competition" isn't getting much traction, and this won't help.
Even worse is all the tech about blood passports and improved testing and all that. If all that stuff really worked, people wouldn't dare pushing the limits. If someone like Froome gets caught, we have to assume he was doing this a lot and got caught once---or, his team decided that since he wasn't keeping up in the mountains, they should try a mega-dose and try to weasel out of it later.
Either way, it shows the teams don't respect the rules or the mechanisms used to enforce them.
Why would or should anyone have respect rules when they aren't uniform for everyone? I have no respect selectively applied rules nor do I acknowledge such BS. I apply that rule to all selectively applied attempts.
..........personal integrity is the most important ingredient to have when you are the ones making rules that ALL others are expected to follow. Making rules that are not equally applied is an absence of personal integrity.
I agree with the consistency across the board, but also it’s not like the substance in question has any performance enhancing effects, if anything it has the opposite effect, so why they have it on their list of controlled substances Im not entirely sure