posted Jul 20, 2007

It really is quite fun to watch Matt get his knickers in a twist after being called. The best he can come up with in his defense is Peter Alliss and the head of the R & A. That would be the same R & A that put the phone down on the poster who tried to talk to them about research into doping and golf.

So you've switched from talking about scientific evidence to talking about 'a belief'. You have nothing to support your belief other than your own personal faith in golf.

You were wrong about cycling, you have been shown to be wrong about golf.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 20, 2007

I'd like to begin by commending Matt Slater on his article. I found this to be a fine and interesting article, which has produced some 'lively' debate! (Which, may I remind some other readers who have chosen to comment, is the whole point of these articles). The name calling, personal slurs and quite frankly narrow-minded disregard for other sports is deplorable. I was, as is obvious by now, disappointed in the reaction to this article. The sense of direction was almost immediately lost, as two ‘camps’ have formed. For use of a better phrase there’s 'pro' cycling and well…… Matt!

Instead of addressing the very serious issue of drugs or the POSSABILITY of drugs in golf, the discussion has moved towards readers, understandably defending their beloved sport, cycling. Until testing is introduced into the sport, drugs or doping can never be ruled out, however my personal opinion is that it is unlikely that there are golfers using drugs. Why Gary Player has chosen now to emphasize the point, only he knows. Why he feels the need to identify players that he knows are taking drugs but refuses to name them, only he knows. Undoubtedly Mr.Player commands a huge amount of respect and these claims should not be taken lightly. I would never want to question Mr. Players integrity but I would like to pose a qusetion. If Mr.Player has the best intentions of the game of golf at heart, which I am sure he does given his commendable playing record and status within the game, then surely it is his duty to expose any cheats in the game and try to eradicate his sport of any foul play? Will this turn into a discussion of morals, with Gary Player being urged to tell all? I hope not but it remains to be seen.

That aside, if people want to draw comparisons between golf and cycling then, to be frank there is no point. The are worlds apart just by the nature of the sports and byt the ‘drug issue’. In golfing history, there has never been any suspicion of drugs, nor has there been any players caught with drugs in their system after random testing (as sporadic as it has been, there has been random testing). Compare that with cycling. Regardless of how the sport is viewed at present by those ‘in’ and ‘out’, the sports reputation and public image has been left in tatters and is only recently showing signs of recovering. The fact that sponsors are looking elsewhere and television figures of the major cycling nation such as France and Italy have steadily fallen don’t lie. To disagree with that would be extremely naive. Partly due to more stringent testing and pre-signed agreement between cyclists, teams, event organizers and governing bodies, which is long over due, the sport is looking to recover. There has long been a history of doping in cycling, regrettably with some cyclist paying the ultimate price, notably the late-great Marco Pantani. (Although it was his cocaine addiction that ultimately killed him friends, family and team mates later said the culture of performance-enhancing drugs in professional cycling had drawn him towards recreational drugs).

Basically I believe that there is no smoke without a fire. In cycling there is a visible problem and a drug culture that for years had obviously been recognised as a problem but was brushed under the carpet. In golf however the nature of the sport does not lend itself to doping, it is a technical sport opposed to physically demamding sports like, football, rugby and yes, cycling. Also earlier comments had raised the point of golf being elitist and highbrow. This view is somewhat out dated but not wholly untrue. The game is steeped in integrity, tradition and even family values. Those of you out with the sport may mock the suggestion of this but it is the case. The thought of the likes of Ernie Els, Jim Furyk, Darren Clark, Vijay Singh, Luke Donald, Sergio Garcia etc etc etc taking performance-enhancing supplements is quite honestly unbelievable. As callous as it may be to suggest this many golfers are happy turning up to events finishing 20th 30th 40th and leaving with $50 000 for 4 days work. How many people would argue with a payout like that? Therefore where’s the need to cheat? I understand that the games top players are ruthless in their pursuit of glory, non more so the Woods and it would be naïve to think that there never has been or there never will be ‘foul play’ but due to the nature of the game, the life-style and lack of evidence to date, I would be astonished if there was any evidence of drugs in sport.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 20, 2007

Matt - your lengthy response clearly shows you are irked by Naspa and I. I'm not being personal, I may poke fun at you on cyclists only forums, joke about the golf slacks etc - however I don't hit out with "asylum" type stuff! I admitted I had over-reacted to your eve of TdF article - let's just say that I saw red due to it's rather targeted timing. I initially saw it as another of your spoiler articles, a "yes, but" article. However your response to my response WAS ott - and I thought long and hard about submitting a complaint to the BBC. As I'm sure you know, I just let it pass. Instead I spent the weekend enjoying the Tour de France, along with several million other people with minds of their own. If you do really like Cycling - where were you Matt?
Most of your long response above is again ott -of course I don't believe that there is an actual "conspiracy" at the BBC to keep Cycling down, but I do believe that there has been something amiss for decades. I have been genuinely puzzled and annoyed by this - I've genuinely tried to fathom what the root of this might be. You mention the difference in our ages - well that is crucial I feel. My memory really does go back further than yours, and over the decades I have logged literally hundreds of slights and insults that the BBC has perpetrated towards the sport I love. I feel great progress has been made in the last few years - I’ve applauded the BBC website coverage on several occasions, and it has been excellent for this year’s TdF. A big thanks to contributors like Alex and Paul.
But, and this is a very big but... would any of this have come about if it weren’t for people like me keeping the pressure on? With the growth of the internet, the BBC has had to face the reality that finally the public has a way of making it’s feelings clear. I seem to remember it took quite some time for the BBC to even give Cycling it’s own webpage - and again that was because of badgering. Please correct me if I’m wrong. So slowly but gradually, bit by bit, the BBC has made some progress towards the recognition that Cycling may well be the major sport it really is.
But I haven’t yet reached the stage where my “paranoia” towards the BBC has entirely abated. Why? Because ever so often something happens that forces me to confront the fact that somehow or other, somewhere deep within the BBC, that “problem” as I percieve it, still exists. Your attack on the Cycling community last year was a nasty ill-judged little piece and I was well justified to take you to task for it - however clumsily. Later in the year we had the disgraceful SPOTY episode, which had all the appearance of a calculated insult towards one of the UK’s most successful athletes. Can you truthfully tell me how that came about? I most certainly wasn’t the only person to be angered by this - it created quite some controversy.
When I read your article dismissing Gary Player’s assertions, I can’t say I saw red - but I did see it as more depressing evidence of the way that you and, most likely your employers, see the status quo in sport. I’m not into double standards Matt, but I think you are - I’m just defending the sport I love.
Message boards and forums have a habit of creating bitter disputes between individuals who may well otherwise get on fine. I’m not a journalist, and I’m not necessarily as articulate as I’d always like to be (I wish I could think of a better word than “establishment”!) but I do know that I’m in the right, and no matter how much you twist things, I’m not convinced that you are being fair and balanced in your articles.

And apologies to redrumpus, and I take your point. I am an artist in real life, and like many arty fartys - as you might like to label me - I have absolutely no interest in sport whatsoever, be it golf, football, cricket etc etc. However Cycling is a very different proposition...... now there's something to behold!!!! And I will spring to it's defence wherever and whenever I think it necessary.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 20, 2007

Matt Slater: "Anyway, you would have loved every minute of the exchange Peter Alliss just had with R&A boss Peter Dawson on telly. They agree with me....which, in your angry little world, is tantamount to a confession."

This really does come across as rather foolish, Matt. "Peter and Peter agree with me, so there." The fact that Messrs Alliss and Dawson do not exactly give the impression of being at the cutting edge as far as drug culture is concerned is, of course, irrelevant.

It is complacent and misguided to think that because golf is a technical sport and does not demand great athleticism or endurance, PEDs won't play a part. If muscles don't help, why does Tiger go to the gym? Any young pro will tell you that by improving their physique they have put 15-20 yards on their distance off the tee and on their long irons. So ask yourself, would you rather play a 4 iron or a 6 iron to the green? And isn't that advantage enough to make some people want to reduce the amount of time it takes them to gain, and sustain, that improvement? the difference between the best golfer in the world and the also-rans is less than one stroke per round. PEDs can deliver marginal improvements, and that is enough for there to be a huge incentive to take them. To think otherwise is naive in the extreme.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 21, 2007

What is interesting is that Matt Slater's argument are eerily similar to the arguments coming out about baseball before they introduced testing (and pre-Game of Shadows). Those who denied steroids were rampant in baseball argued that they would be of no benefit, baseball was a sport requring great technical skill and hand-eye co-ordination. 'Steroids don't help you hit the ball' was the common refrain. Indeed steroids don't help you hit the ball BUT they do help you hit the ball further - and has been shown steroids have been and are rife in baseball.

The sense of schadenfreude at Matt Slater is quite amusing.

The inviligator you are quite right. If an old cyclist had come out and made the same accusations against the peleton that Player has made then you can bet your bottom dollar that Slater would not write about how 'he is seeing things that aren't there' or accuse him of being a publicity seeker. Slater would instead pounce on the story as 'proof' that cycling is in the toilet and no fans will watch it. When proved wrong he will start to make excuses to belittle cycling 'oh it was just a freebie - ignoring that over a million cycling fans travelled from across the UK, Europe and the rest of the world to see the event.

Of course one other reason why Slater is so unwilling to criticise the golf is that he doesn't want to bite the hand that feeds him. It would be terrible for him to write something honest about golf and risk ending up losing out on all the free junkets he gets to go on because he's upset the authorities or ruffled a few feathers. Nothing worse than a party hack.

Matt might I suggest you pay a visit to http://justcycling.myfastforum.org/index.php you might learn a bit about cycling, as well as the science behind doping.

Anyway, is been fun as always and much as I enjoy kicking a man when he is down, I'll leave you in peace to lick your wounds and to prepare your next hatchet piece on cycling and your next hagiography for golf. Who knows next time you might actually get something right.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 21, 2007

Matt - firstly, yes of course I’ve been pretty rude about you on justcyling - it’s a pretty no-holds barred sort of forum. But as you rightly say ,I didn’t make any threats of violence towards you on the sportive - though others did, albeit in jest. I seem to remember my quip was that if you felt knackered on the sportive, you could always ring Dr Fuentes!

Also, re your response one back - I didn't intend to give the impression that you hadn't commented on the Daily Mail Wimbledon/Cycling article. Like you I would generally say the Mail was only fit for the bin..... What I had intended to point out was that the phenomenal success of the UK TdF weekend hadn't received any comment from you - to the best of my knowledge you were entirely silent about this.
I had reached the point myself where I was so fed up with reading drugs stories that I also half believed the weekend might be a flop - that the crowds would not gather at the roadside, that the doom merchants might be right. But that clearly wasn't the case - it really was a massive success in every way. Matt, believe me, the crowds were HUGE -and your remark about it being a free spectacle is irrelevant. Please excuse my humour, but I wouldn’t go and watch a golf tournament even if it was free, or even if I were PAID to do so - people came to see the TdF because they wanted to, simple as that.

There's a deeper question to be looked at here - one which concerns both golf and Cycling, all sport in fact. What is sport for? People were having such a great time in London and Kent, just enjoying the spectacle - cheering on their favourites and enjoying a day out. As you know neither Naspa or myself condone doping, we both want to see the back of it - but in many ways, what people require from sport, what they take from it is fairly simple in many ways. And that is what is so painful about doping, because it spoils that simple pleasure. Suddenly your heroes are the bad guys, they get banned, they appear in court, some are forced to retire. Your pleasure is spoilt. And so every sport holds out and holds out on the doping issue, hoping against hope that it can't be happening - I’m not saying that golf or tennis fans are necessarily fools, just that like cycling fans they don't want their pleasure taken away from them! Cycling fans are now a very long way along the road from that kind of denial, we have had to bravely endure all the scandals and disappointments for some years now. But we’re not going to start watching cricket or golf or whatever - we like Cycling!
Can you please understand from that why we get so cross with you? If Gary Player turned out to be correct, would you be happy to see Cycling journalists repeatedly bashing golf as it slowly tried to regain it’s credibility? As Naspa intimated, if a similar figure to Gary Player, say Greg Lemond, were to make accusations about individuals in Cycling (which of course he has....) you wouldn’t dismiss his comments so swiftly would you?

There are still many wonderful and terrific stories to be written about Cycling - even the Tour de France - but you have to admit you do “major” on the doping aspect. And it’s not as if there isn’t plenty of info on the subject out there already! We don’t like having our noses continually rubbed in it - particularly when it so very likely that doping is going on in many other sports.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 21, 2007

LOL Matt runs away. You are licking your wounds - you've been called to back up your claims and you've failed on every occassion.

Your opinion is based upon nothing more than your personal biases and prejudices. This is why you are not very good as a journalist. A journalist with some ability and talent would have gone out and done some research before writing. Again try it some time.

You got it wrong about doping in golf and about cycling and you've tried to lie you way out of it. Been called and now you are reduced to name calling.

Comeon sign up for just cycling and engage in some debate. You might actually learn something.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 23, 2007

Rather than join in the 'Tennis Match' which seems to be going on I would like to comment on the issue of actually introducing testing in golf. I was appalled to hear Peter Dawson say he didn't think testing could be brought in before next years Open - WHY ? It's not rocket science, is already used in amateur golf and there are tried and tested methods of doing it all over the world. Are the R&A afraid of finding one of their top 20 players taking drugs? It would shake their ivory tower to the foundations !

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 23, 2007

notinmydaymike - I think your last sentence sums things up entirely. I sometimes think that Cycling is being used as the whipping-boy of sport. As Cycling is the hardest sport of all it may well have the biggest drugs problem - but that does not mean that the "softer" sports like golf and cricket must be entirely clean. Sign up to WADA, test as thoroughly as Cycling does and THEN hold your heads high if golf is clean.

add comment | complain about this comment