...

[cadence90]

.... ..
.

[gone]

Professional cycling is so screwed up.

[Avispa]

Professional cycling is so screwed up.

Nah.... The UCI is the screwed up thing.

A!

[Steelhead]

Professional cycling is so screwed up.

Post of the day. Sums it up nicely.

[GoJavs]

Amazing that they couldn't figure this out before they allowed him to ride the Tour and finish 6th? I wonder how 7th place finisher Kim Kirchen feels about that. :rolleyes:

[saab2000]

Amazing that they couldn't figure this out before they allowed him to ride the Tour and finish 6th? I wonder how 7th place finisher Kim Kirchen feels about that. :rolleyes:

He feels pretty happy that it is Dr. Fuentes under the microscope instead of his doctor! Kim Kirchen sleeps well at the moment. Valverde doesn't.

[Elefantino]

Nah.... The UCI is the screwed up thing.
I think I'm beginning to come around to LeMond's way of thinking.

[Walter]

It is interesting that at the center of every recent hassle or controversy one finds Pat McQuaid and the UCI. He cannot get along with the ASO (he wants their hard-earned TV money while doing nothing to earn it), he takes big $$$ from ProTour teams and then cannot deliver on what he has promised them, he is now in a beef with WADA (did not ask for testing support at the World's), does everything to avoid a joint anti-doping effort because he wants to be in charge, does nothing when Rasmussen misses test after test (does not even advise the team) until during the Tour ...perhaps to embarrass the ASO...and on the eve of the World's raises the issue with Valverde well over a year after Puerto starts and after he raced in the Tour.

Could all of this be to keep him in the spotlight and to build his perceived fiefdom?

The real tragedy is that it all is so negative for cycling. Under his stewardship we have lost events, sponsors, teams and gotten tremendous negative publicity. Perhaps it is time for a leader with the sport in mind, not his personal aggrandizement.

[Fixed]

bro i think everyone of the pros does or has done dope
and if they suck compaired to a stronger rider then they say well i don't dope . I never did dope (how do you define dope?)
cheers somebody is killing the only sport i like and it is pissing me off
cheers

[sspielman]

..... somebody is killing the only sport i like and it is pissing me off
cheers

Organized Crime.

[Avispa]

I think I'm beginning to come around to LeMond's way of thinking.

Welcome to the club, bro!

Did you read his interview with the Daily Camera Newspaper of Boulder, CO?, good as usual:

http://dailycamera.com/news/2007/aug/25/lemond-upbeat-about-cyclings-future/

A!

[Walter]

PS:

Anyone see the inconsistency of the UCI allowing Zabel in, who admits to doping in the past, while excluding Valverde because "...several documents may show...(his) involvement (whatever that means)....in the affair" ?

[gt6267a]

PS:

Anyone see the inconsistency of the UCI allowing Zabel in, who admits to doping in the past, while excluding Valverde because "...several documents may show...(his) involvement (whatever that means)....in the affair" ?

Is there any proof against zabel? Wasn’t the doping so long ago that its beyond prosecution? Statute of limitations type situation?

Irrespective of what should happen with Valverde, it does not seem relevant to bring up Zabel.

[Big Dan]

believe..

:bike:

[regularguy412]

Is there any proof against zabel? Wasn’t the doping so long ago that its beyond prosecution? Statute of limitations type situation?

Irrespective of what should happen with Valverde, it does not seem relevant to bring up Zabel.

Agreed.

However, suspicion does not equal guilt ( or in this analogy: confession of guilt). The UCI certainly appears to be playing favorites. Is it any coincidence that Germany is one of the countries taking the hardest stand against doping and Valverde is from the Iberian Peninsula?

Mike in AR

[Walter]

Is there any proof against zabel? Wasn’t the doping so long ago that its beyond prosecution? Statute of limitations type situation?

Irrespective of what should happen with Valverde, it does not seem relevant to bring up Zabel.

The "proof" against Zabel is his admission of wrongdoing...there is no better proof. You are correct in that the SL bars a "prosecution." The relevance of it all is that the UCI says nothing about the local federation allowing an admitted doper in (they can univite him), yet bars someone about whom there is but suspicion he may have been involved and does so more than a year after the matter breaks.

It just seems that McQuaid/UCI drops make-weight bombs at times to put the spotlight on themselves and to paint a perceived opponent in a bad light. Why now with Valverde? Why not before the Tour? Why the Rasmussen mess in the middle of the Tour when McQuaid is fueding with the ASO? The claim that the UCI did not know of the missed tests is merely an admission that it does not supervise its own federations very well or coordinate test results and missed tests. Why not have WADA help with testing at the World's?

It just gets old, is incredibly devisive, and drives sponsors away....all over a turf war and overinflated egos.

[cadence90]

.... ..
.