So we’re still waiting on that evidence. Here’s (scroll down) what we’ve got so far, and (in America, at least) it couldn’t convict a sex addict in a cathouse. Thankfully, the entire world hasn’t gone mad; Tyler Hamilton’s lawyer also thinks that having nothing more than patÃ© on pressboard to back up these suspensions is a bad thing – and as far as I’m concerned, that leaves me in piss poor company (sorry, Howard). My dear, dear friends at the Journal of Competitive Cycling (hugs and kisses all around) have gone through the trouble of pointing out in a mailbox column (scroll down) that this is all in line with the ProTour Ethics code, but, exercising possibly the worst journalistic judgement ever, they neglect to add that it still doesn’t make this OK. Way to take a fÂµÂ¢&ing stand for basic human rights.
Maybe it’s a European thing and I just don’t get it. But when I see athletes essentially banned over the names of their dogs, little hairs go up on the back of my neck. I want dopers to get penalized as much as anyone, but this is simply not the way to do it. WADA and the UCI are setting precedents in this case that they simply cannot uphold. At the present time, any jackass with access to medical supplies can say “Yo, I was totally hooking [Rider X] up with mad dope”; that’d be the basis for an investigation, which would suspend Rider X from racing until that investigation was closed. If Rider X happens to be unpopular with WADA or the UCI, then that would essentially be the end of their career. And that’s just moronic. I admire the progressive stance of Europeans when it comes to alternative lifestyles, drug laws and health care, but I’d trade it all, in a doped up heartbeat, never to read a phrase like this one again.
Oh, by the way, there was some racing today. Thor Hushovd won the prologue. Too bad nobody gave a fÂµÂ¢&.
thoughts on “Cycling's Kangaroo Court Rolls On, Tour Prologue 2006”
Glad you’re posting again. Thank you for the explanation you provided a few posts back. Maybe it’s why a comment of mine was not posted several wks ago?
I am all for human rights, respect and dignity. However, I find myself disagreeing with virtually
everything you’re posting this past week. Hmmmmm.
During the Giro the reports may have been able to be deemed spurious because PRESUMABLY there were verbal leaks from the police/investigators/officials.But, there was police video of physical evidence (made during their raids)and the video and stills appeared in the media.
The past week, the info. was coming from the 500 page report and we knew Thurs/Fri that the abstract was made available to cycling officials and organizers.
Certain riders, such as Gutierrez,
the Giro 2nd place finisher can
say “I am tranquil I haven’t done anything wrong,,I have never tested positive..I have done nothing illegal..” and believe they are speaking the truth! Not illegal in Spain or at least not more than a misdemeanor. These riders didn’t know what the record keeping system was, not could they have any input on the details. In denial they choose not
to fathom any notions of linkage plus the involvement of those who don’t actually take the products/treatments. I’m speaking of agents, trainers, managers AND
the ringleaders. The riders can be silent but the veil is not opaque as they believe and it is porous due to the involvement of all the other parties.
Pehaps some riders never took all the products outlined for them or donated the blood but never used it
because the doping climate got worse or their status changed due to lack of funds, change of teams, racing programme, sickness, injury, hospitalization, etc.
Yes, I have thought what if the “official record” is full of
fake info in order to stymy police or take down/blackmail innocents
in order to stave off prosecution.
Manolo Saiz is a total example of what I term “plausible deniability’: espousing anti-doping and ethics and stressing teamwork above all and systematically doping much of his team. It disgusts me that he has evidently psychologically enrolled many grown men into this mess. I
was excited to attend the presention of LSW at Belmont Wheelworks last year. I enjoyed the interviews, however I actually ended up uneasy and distressed that afternoon. (A story for another time).
I was going top leave my remarks to just the 2 paragraphs….but thought I should try to explain…
I totally agree that a decision can be decided on whether a rider is popular with the WADA or UCI. There’s a ton of politics in sports, as elsewhere.
As for the testing, ask anyone with a chronic illness (I have MS) how exact tests are – they’re not. You have to test again and again to make sure they’re accurate, because someone is always screwing something up. I think the WADA/UCI think they’re above that.
It’s too bad riders careers can be destroyed by morons.
The UCI like FIFA and the IOC- are all corrupt. The evidence is compelling. It rots from the top down.