posted May 29, 2008

Looking back over this debate, I'm wondering if I haven't encouraged members of the Kennedy Assassination Society to muscle in.

To take some of the comments to their logical conclusion would have Armstrong, Contador and every other awesome athlete as the 5th, 6th, 7th etc. Man on the Grassy Knoll.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted May 29, 2008

you bought the grassy knoll story!?! LOL

it was the 3 tramps - surely!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted May 29, 2008

As a matter of interest SOBorSOG. What are your views on the likes of Heras, Hamilton, Landis, Vino, etc?

Do you defend these guys so vehemently? Or is it just that as long a rider doesn't actually 'fail' a drug test, then they are clean, no matter how much evidence is there to the contrary. Rasmussen? Come on, why did he have to lie?

Did Valverde ever dope? Petacchi?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted May 30, 2008

djlovesyou:

Er...the riders you mention have all been caught, so no problem.

I just happen to believe in Law, Justice, actually substantiating rumours. Or do we shed 2,000 years of civilisation to satisfy your craving for a nice story?

Maybe Rasmussen was up to something in training, maybe not. Ever thought that it may have been a bit of romancing on the side? Or just old fashioned incompetence in struggling with the incredibly complicated bureaucracy?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 2, 2008

You can't compare Contador to the Rasmussen incident.

Having your name on a document within a pile of documents, then showing that on the news with an appropriate headline is enough to convinct you it seems. Media victims.

Lying about whereabouts, resulting in the avoidance (whether deliberate or not) of a possible doping control is a situation in a completely different league.

However why have doping controls if you can be guilty without testing positive. And why did it take a year to strip the TDF title off a guy who did test positive?

Why have tests when all you need is speculation and accusation before you are suspended? Why not go the whole hog and burn anyone accused at the stake in the village square?

It's not complicated - the doping test needs to be the ultimate proof of guilt and the clean test the proof of innocence. Why is this not the case? Has everyone gone mad?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 2, 2008

druss

what is your take on why basso won't be riding then?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 2, 2008

BTW, I read in an interview in a german bike mag "Tour") with the CONI boss that they expect <very soon> to get the complete Dr Fuentes list .. let's hope they publish it !
I still think Contador may indeed be "kosher", but why not simply tell us what his treatment was ? The Fuentes file should throw some light on this!
Rasmussen paid the price for some extra-marital fun with his career
Wonder if Contador will enter the Dauphine Libere / Tour de Suisse ?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 2, 2008

so, june is set to be a very interesting month;

rasmussen (rabobank) hearing

landis final appeal published?

CONI to publish puerto list?

Perhaps they could also "reduce" basso's term in order to allow him to start the TdF - after all, else his punishment could be deemed as being 3 years, and not 2.

ASO to name wildcards/amended entry for TdF

and some racing - Dauphine/TdeSuisse/national championships

the irony for me is that all of the riders named above could be "cleared" in the eyes of the regulators/law, whilst the opening up of puerto will put others still riding (and indeed winning) in the frame. depending on the timing of information releases you could even see some absurdities - not starting, starting, not starting etc.....

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 3, 2008

Didn't Basso confess?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jun 3, 2008

yes he did - he confessed to "conspiracy to dope". but seemingly it is a confession to a conspiracy that isn't applicable to (almost) all the other athletes implicated - kind of odd don't you think?

not sure i follow why you ask though? my point about the 2 or 3 years is based on the fact this will now be the third tour he has to miss (because he was not deemed inactive professionally until october '06, even though he was stopped from riding the Tour in July '06)

add comment | complain about this comment