Looks like they're going to get Mayo by hook or by crook
Comments
-
We don't have 5 pages on lab work. We have 5 pages of ill-informed speculation.Le Blaireau (1)0
-
Tomato.0
-
iainf72 wrote:DaveyL wrote:We don't have 5 pages on lab work. We have 5 pages of ill-informed speculation.
You say tomato, I say we've got 5 pages of differences of opinion whether the 2nd LNDD test should have been allowed.
You can discuss the case all you want, but there is not enough information available to make anyone's opinion here relevant. Did the Gent lab run controls? How did they turn out? Did the LNDD lab run controls? How about them? Anyone know the answers to that?Le Blaireau (1)0 -
If Mayo cycled for T Mobile, Iain would be leading the lynch mob.Dan0
-
Yep, he's never forgiven the Germans for bombing his chippy...Le Blaireau (1)0
-
flattythehurdler wrote:If Mayo cycled for T Mobile, Iain would be leading the lynch mob.
Not Iain's style. He'd prefer to put the bearded one in the stocks for a bit for some ritual humiliation.It's a little like wrestling a gorilla. You don't quit when you're tired. You quit when the gorilla is tired.0 -
flattythehurdler wrote:If Mayo cycled for T Mobile, Iain would be leading the lynch mob.
Nahhhh. If this happened to someone on T-Mobile I'd have the same opinion. My beef with "you wanna get High Road" is with the management, not the riders.
If LNDD had returned the second sample as "inconclusive", what would everyone say?Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
We know very little. What does "inconclusive" mean, does it mean the sample can't be checked properly, is it contaminated, is it borderline positive/negative, are the lab unable to test properly, etc, what's the issue here? Why did the lab return this result?
So far everyone's speculating, chipping in with views often on the basis of a bad quote from Anne Gripper or because they think LNDD is leaky so it's bad at testing too. But in reality, nobody knows.0 -
iainf72 wrote:aurelio wrote:I wouldn't say so, especially given that the depth of his 'journalistic investigations' appears to amount to regurgitating all the nonsense put around about the LNDD lab by those with a vested interest in trying to undermine it's credibility.
But you suffer from complete blindness when it comes to LNDD - Could you admit they may have made a mistake? From reading your posts, I'd say you know what you're talking about but LOVE LNDD because of the work they did on the Armstrong samples.
They're probably not some complete toilet lab but there definately seem to be some issues. They were the comments from the Landis arbitration and the fact Landaluze won his CAS case. In both cases they were silly things but critical never-the-less. I fail to see why wanting good quality control to help tighten the noose is generating so much debate.
I agree Iain...I don't really trust Mayo because of his association with an EPO pusher on his ex team who was quoted pre TDF 04 discussing Mayo's form in detail-a close working relationship was what it read like...but I have to say...the fact that labs don't agree on test results is a very serious cause for concern as it means the procedure is not be replicated in each lab...positive or negative and nothing in between is what is must be..the lab have one chance on each sample, not two...as that looks like they are trying to save their credibility as scientists...0 -
And so the uninformed spouting continues...
Kleber is right on the money.Le Blaireau (1)0 -
I totally agree we are seriously lacking in information to pass any kind of judgement, but that's part of the problem. Someone at the UCI must read the papers. If they do, they'll know what a mess this story has become. A simple press release stating the exact sequence of events, and reasons for decisions taken, would help infinitely in clearing up the waters. That'd take up about 4 man-hours. As it is, we can all interpret the story whatever way we want. We can't agree on a final judgement, but we can all agree that this case has been handled very badly.0
-
I can just picture the scene at the UCI HQ: "Oh no, there's a load of bloggers and forum posters up in arms about the Mayo situation. We must act quickly and decisively - stop working on re-wording the rules on use of overshoes in time trials, let's sort this one out right now!!!!"
Hmmm....Le Blaireau (1)0 -
You're assuming they're intelligent, media savvy and give a damn.drenkrom wrote:they'll know what a mess this story has become. A simple press release stating the exact sequence of events, and reasons for decisions taken, would help infinitely in clearing up the waters. That'd take up about 4 man-hours.
I think you're crediting them with skills and a willingness to act that, based on the way the UCI's behaved this year alone, is far and above anything they can hope for.0 -
I'm being positive. Must be the Christmas spirit rubbing off on me or something... :roll:0
-
Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0
