ohurugu - Rasmussen whats the diff ????

RichN95.

leguape wrote:

Likewise are we meant to believe that someone who can handle the complexities of a UCL linguistics course and who was checking split times after the semis to work out her tactics for the final is somehow so stupid/forgetful/disorganised that they managed to miss three tests in about 8 months, including 2 in less than a month and nearly a fourth save for her coach driving her to it. And all that after both Cousins and Don had served bans and UKA had flagged up the dangers of missed tests to its athletes?

I can easily believe it. Academic intelligence and common sense/organisation are completely different. I know someone who got a first class degree from Oxford who had to phone his mother to ask how to boil an egg. There's also a story (probably apocraphal) about Einstein phoning Princeton Uni's switchboard to ask where his house was.

Her tests were missed because she was stupid, disorganised and didn't understand the seriousness of it all. Ignorance is certainly no excuse and she's paid for her mistake, but some people expect her to keep paying. I see no evidence that she has doped.

Rasmussen on the other hand was guilty of willful deception.

slojo

What's the difference?

CO: suspended immediately after third missed test, faces official inquiry, banned for one year and loses lottery funding, ban expires, returns to competition.
MR: misses 2,3,4 tests (who knows?), starts TdF anyway, faces trial by press/rumour, thrown off Tour, sacked by team for lying, now in limbo, not banned but probably unemployable.

Strikes me that athletics had a system and stuck to it. Cycling was a mess.

redddraggon

slojo wrote:

MR: misses 2,3,4 tests (who knows?), starts TdF anyway, faces trial by press/rumour, thrown off Tour, sacked by team for lying, now in limbo, not banned but probably unemployable.

He is banned.

iainf72

slojo wrote:

MR: misses 2,3,4 tests (who knows?), starts TdF anyway, faces trial by press/rumour, thrown off Tour, sacked by team for lying, now in limbo, not banned but probably unemployable.

Strikes me that athletics had a system and stuck to it. Cycling was a mess.

There was no rule which could've prevented MR from starting the Tour.

Kléber

I thought there was?

Shouldn't the UCI should have notified ASO under the rules? And that he should not have ridden any Pro Tour events until he was investigated and cleared. Not a suspension, just a background check. ASO were livid that the UCI didn't reveal the news of Rasmussen's dodging.

slojo

He is banned.

Sorry, my mistake. Two-year ban imposed last month. Over a year after the original offence.

It still seems very messy to me.

iainf72

Kléber wrote:

I thought there was?

Shouldn't the UCI should have notified ASO under the rules? And that he should not have ridden any Pro Tour events until he was investigated and cleared. Not a suspension, just a background check. ASO were livid that the UCI didn't reveal the news of Rasmussen's dodging.

Nope - He's missed 2 UCI test and 1 Danish test.

The UCI will only take action on 3, as per the rules. But they'd sent him a stern letter.

cougie

How long did Tricky Dicky get banned for ? Didnt he just miss a year, and then go onto clinch yet more KOM awards, and become the housewives favourite ? And he still works on the tour commentary I believe. Terrible double standards there.

richa

AndyRAC wrote:

I heard on 5Live that Athletics is the most tested sport in the world - which made me laugh. Not even close,......

.....so wrong it's not funny. That's what Cycling is up against.

It appears that in the UK football is the most tested. With Rugby League having the most positives.

http://www.uksport.gov.uk/drugstests/

cougie

Octopush hasnt had any tests yet - clearly a dirty sport....

So football 1732 tests over 8 months. But how many players ?

In the four leagues - theres what 92 teams ? Maybe each team has an average of 20 players ? So thats 1920 players there ? And how far does the dope testing go down the leagues ?

Its clearly a step up from just a couple of years back when the average player statistically would never have a dope test.

Oh hang on - thats not including the Scottish league, but you can get an idea of teh frequency of testing. Maybe once per year ?

Kléber

Assuming you're not shopping :roll:

Just look how many professional footballers whose looks have changed during their career with mysterious changes to the bone structure on their face during their 20s. Normally most of us have stopped growing at this stage but these guys seem different.

cougie

Erm - not noticed that.

bigdawg

those figures arent really the whole story though. Yes there were more tests but then how many more football players are there than cyclists or athletes?? what you need is a tests per head figure...

deal

cougie wrote:

Octopush hasnt had any tests yet - clearly a dirty sport....

So football 1732 tests over 8 months. But how many players ?

In the four leagues - theres what 92 teams ? Maybe each team has an average of 20 players ? So thats 1920 players there ? And how far does the dope testing go down the leagues ?

Its clearly a step up from just a couple of years back when the average player statistically would never have a dope test.

Oh hang on - thats not including the Scottish league, but you can get an idea of teh frequency of testing. Maybe once per year ?

25 players is a very low figure, had a quick look at a few teams and according to wikipedia manchester united first team squad is 41 players, blackburn 37, Arsenal 55 and chelsea 40

cougie

Yeah - I was thinking that the big teams will have more, but I guess the lower teams probably dont have those resources ? I know nuffink about football though - but you could hardly argue that one test per player is the most highly tested sport could you ?