Riis 'didn't' win in '96

Unknown · June 2007

Well who did then?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_s ... 730351.stm

Am i alone in thinking this is a bit daft by the 'Tour de France organisers'. They can't change history.
Riis will always have won the '96 tour, but he cheated.

A fair few riders have recently come out and 'could' feasibly have their victories stripped from them, but it won't change the fact that they did 'win' those races/Jerseys.

Mleh Mleh Mleh

Unknown · June 2007

No you are not alone.
Yes, it is daft.

alecstilleyedye · June 2007

http://www.cyclingplus.co.uk/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=132325

if i had a better signature, i'd use that instead

Salsiccia · June 2007

Are they going to stop considering Jacques Anquetil as having won his 5? He was up to his eyeballs on all sorts.

When is this ridiculous charade going to end? Riis won the tour and wasn't caught breaking the rules in place at the time. Can we expect the World Cup organisers to proclaim West Germany winners of the 1986 world cup because Maradona cheated in the quarter-final but wasn't caught at the time?

Get over it, and let's move on catching those who are cheating now.

Unknown · June 2007

Didn't realise anyone discussed anything bike-related in cakestop [:o)]

I'm not suggesting the race is awarded to anyone else though, Because Riis will have always have won in '96.

Its a fact that can't be changed. They can strip him of the title of winning it, but he still won it.

Mleh Mleh Mleh

top_bhoy · June 2007

It can't be right to allow the result to stand without comment after the admission. There is no need to declare a winner - simply put a note in the space to the effect that the B.Riis was no longer recognised because in 2007, the 'winner' admitted to doping offences. I doubt whatever they do now will materially affect Riis.

This is my bike:
http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p66/ ... ure001.jpg
http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p66/ ... ure002.jpg
http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p66/ ... ure003.jpg

ricadus · June 2007

They should leave it blank as a warning - plus there's no certainty that anyone further down wouldn't subsequently have to be removed from the list too, so passing down the winner's title could become a tediously repetitive task.

Hmmm, perhaps in a few years there won't be any Tour winners listed after about 1990 due to such revisionist purging of the list.

Of course, for them, catching the Texan would be akin to finding the Holy Grail.

londonphoenix.co.uk

flattythehurdler · June 2007

Drives me mad. he is the only person to fully admit his guilt and apologise and they publicly humiliate him for it. All the other cheats are happily sitting there with their multiple wins still on the record. It is a stupid decision which will stifle future admissions.

Dan

Salsiccia · June 2007

I watched the Tour 1992 DVD last night, and all through it Phil Liggett was talking about the incredible speeds; Chiapucci was flying, and riders who had done nothing previously were coming out of the woodwork. Lemond said it was the hardest Tour he had ever ridden and ended up packing half way through.

The point I'm making is that we now know this was the start of widespread EPO use and by the time it got to '96 it seems just about everyone was on it. We can't start going back and removing names of people who have said they did stuff or are suspected, where will it stop? We can only let things be and move forward. Crucifying riders who admit to doing stuff in the past is not going to help Cycling face up to the problem and move forward.

mousecp · June 2007

This is plain stupid.
Are they going to take Maitre Jaques 5 Tour wins away, and what about Fausto Coppi. He said he took drugs when necesary and when asked when it was necesary replied" Almost always".
It was proven (alegedly) that Marco Pantani used drugs, so what about his podium finishes.
You cant change the past. Lets concentrate on cleaning up the sport now.

[:(!][:(!]

Unknown · June 2007

What's done is done. Let's move on, clean the sport up and look forward not back.

Mr Bumble · June 2007

I say let the past be. Lets worry about the future of the sport.

I really hate any attempts at revisionism. The UCI are starting to sound like that arch-Tw@t David Irving who tried to tell us that the holocaust never happened....[}:)]

Achieves nothing

Stephen Sorba · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mr Bumble

I say let the past be. Lets worry about the future of the sport.

I really hate any attempts at revisionism. The UCI are starting to sound like that arch-Tw@t David Irving who tried to tell us that the holocaust never happened....[}:)]

Achieves nothing
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
I think you mean the ASO not the UCI

'e pur si muove

dag_on_a_bike · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Salsiccia

... wasn't caught breaking the rules in place at the time...
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Whether he was caught is surely irrelevant. If he wasn't breaking the rules that as I understand it didn't come in 'til later, then what was he going to get caught for?

Likewise Antequil didn't break the rules but did dope. Or were there rules in place but they didn't test?

If a rule doesn't prohibit something you can't be retrospectively found guilty if a later introduction of a rule does. Unless of course the rules explicitly allow such retrospective penalties.

<hr noshade size="1">Still old, Still here.

normal · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by flattythehurdler

Drives me mad. he is the only person to fully admit his guilt and apologise and they publicly humiliate him for it. All the other cheats are happily sitting there with their multiple wins still on the record. It is a stupid decision which will stifle future admissions.

Dan
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I agree entirely flatty.

wasp707 · June 2007

quote:

Originally posted by flattythehurdler

Drives me mad. he is the only person to fully admit his guilt and apologise and they publicly humiliate him for it. All the other cheats are happily sitting there with their multiple wins still on the record. It is a stupid decision which will stifle future admissions.

Dan

Yeah, what a great guy Riis is, apologising 11 years after winning the Tour. He shouldn't be allowed to be involved in professional cycling until he has served a ban as he is hardly a good role model.

Keith Oates · June 2007

The message sent out by this latest farce is 'do not on any circumstances confess or admit anything'. The code of silence will surely be put back into use!!

Ride Daily, Keep Healthy

yenrodcp · June 2007

>The code of silence is now back in use!!

[?]

[;)] 'tuono nel mio cuore...[:)]

redbicycle · June 2007

I dare say that if they removed all the pro riders who are using/were using dope they wouldn't have enough riders left to field a race! Need to address it at a more root organizational/team level to start to effect change. What's done is done as many have said - by stripping a few selective titles it diminishes the others just by associative guilt. I don't trust any of the riders from the mid 90's on but what are you going to do? - strip every rider of their wins...?

Unknown · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by redbicycle

I dare say that if they removed all the pro riders who are using/were using dope they wouldn't have enough riders left to field a race! Need to address it at a more root organizational/team level to start to effect change. What's done is done as many have said - by stripping a few selective titles it diminishes the others just by associative guilt. I don't trust any of the riders from the mid 90's on but what are you going to do? - strip every rider of their wins...?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

That's so true. I'd argue we rip out the people of the old school whether they admit or do not admit-remove every single director and team Dr from the 1990s. I'd bring in non pros, people from the business world with a cycling bakground but some sense of how to protect the brand of professional cycling, unlike the current elite who we now see are putting many on the unemployment queue over the next 2 years.

________Our behaviour is a function of our experience.

top_bhoy · June 2007

I'm still awaiting to hear Zabel has been suspended pending an investigation into his confession. Or have I missed it?? I don't think the fact that these events happened over 10 years ago should be relevant - I'm no fan of David Millar but he had his title stripped ands name removed from the record books because of banned drug use - I feel there should be consistency, more so when Riis is still a major influence within top level cycling.

This is my bike:
http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p66/ ... ure001.jpg
http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p66/ ... ure002.jpg
http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p66/ ... ure003.jpg

Unknown · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Top_Bhoy

I'm still awaiting to hear Zabel has been suspended pending an investigation into his confession. Or have I missed it?? I don't think the fact that these events happened over 10 years ago should be relevant - I'm no fan of David Millar but he had his title stripped ands name removed from the record books because of banned drug use - I feel there should be consistency, more so when Riis is still a major influence within top level cycling.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">There is a statute of limitation on doping offences. So if you confess after ten years you can't be charged. I think this applies to Zabel.

top_bhoy · June 2007

Thanks AndyP.

It seems wrong especially since there appears to have been little assistance in providing the authorities with contacts, network setup, etc - but it does explain why Zabel remains able to continue riding. I suspect this may be his last season all the same hence his confession.

This is my bike:
http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p66/ ... ure001.jpg
http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p66/ ... ure002.jpg
http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p66/ ... ure003.jpg

Unknown · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Top_Bhoy

Thanks AndyP.

It seems wrong especially since there appears to have been little assistance in providing the authorities with contacts, network setup, etc - but it does explain why Zabel remains able to continue riding. I suspect this may be his last season all the same hence his confession.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Also, T-Mobile (Team Aldag) offered him a gig if Milram chucked him, so he's okay to continue really.

Riis 'didn't' win in '96

Comments

Categories