Kohl test positive for CERA

Gazzetta67

WHAT SHOW MUST GO ON....THE FREAK SHOW! CAUSE THAT'S WHAT THIS IS AND WITH THE OLD GUARD COMING BACK 'VINO AND LANCE' NEXT YEAR IS GOING TO BE A TOTAL SWITCH OFF. I CANNOT RESPECT THESE GUYS CAUSE THEY HAVE NO RESPECT FOR THEMSELVES. FANS VOTE WITH YOUR REMOTES AND DO NOT GIVE THIS CROWD OFF FREAKS A PLATFORM!

dennisn

jimycooper wrote:

is this a joke! i've had enough of these tw%ats doping i quit!

Quit what? :? :?

Dennis Noward

afx237vi

"When it was announced that there was a new test for CERA, we were all happy. We sat on the bus and really celebrated," said Sebastian Lang. "The whole team... except Stefan. He was suddenly very quiet and withdrawn.

Oh, and Bernie too... he sat there with a face like a smacked arse, but we thought that was just his natural look, so we carried on celebrating."

(I may have made a small bit of that quote up.)

emadden

delighted the ugly wanchor got caught.... but makes me wonder if there was a systematic doping program at the Gerolsteiner camp...

Rebellin is filthy ... ... and Zberg, something strange there...

afx237vi

Don't forget Moletta and his dad's big box o' viagra.

Le Commentateur

dennisn wrote:

jimycooper wrote:

is this a joke! i've had enough of these tw%ats doping i quit!

Quit what? :? :?

Dennis Noward

Right, that's it!!!

*flounce*




...Actually, all its done is further tip the balance towards doubt and make it harder for anyone who suddenly blooms into a podium contender/climber/TTer to be taken seriously.

It will be interesting to see if the biathlon and cross country skiing federations dare use the CERA test this winter.

Jeff Jones

gabriel959 wrote:

Surely, even being vaguely implicated doesn't count. I mean the way it should work is, you test positive, you are cheating, you don't test positive, you haven't been cheating.

Like being a little bit pregnant, you mean? OK fine. If you test positive, refuse a test, or are found out another way, then you are cheating.

There, we've saved a few past Tour winners from the flames.

Back on your heads.

stagehopper

Kohl's positive doesn't matter one iota in the long term he's just a small cog in this new era of doping detection, caught on the wrong side of the line in the sand that's been drawn with the blood passports, freezing and storage of samples for years and retroactive testing taking place. You can't step back from that level of scrutiny of the riders and this first (positive) swathe of positives is merely underlining the point to current and future riders that it ain't going to be that easy anymore to routinely dope and get away with it, with the anti-doping agencies able and prepared to jump in their time machines to chase you down. It's a three dimensional approach to drug testing that hasn't existed before.

Also interesting that we keep coming back to this 14 rider figure now, that's about the third time I've seen that number quoted in the last week and much less than the 30 that Belgian newspaper was claiming.

itisaboutthebike

Wonder if they're annoucning the 'winners' in reverse (or is that perverse) order ?

damage36

Wim for the win!

gabriel959

Jeff Jones wrote:

gabriel959 wrote:

Surely, even being vaguely implicated doesn't count. I mean the way it should work is, you test positive, you are cheating, you don't test positive, you haven't been cheating.

Like being a little bit pregnant, you mean? OK fine. If you test positive, refuse a test, or are found out another way, then you are cheating.

There, we've saved a few past Tour winners from the flames.

Back on your heads.

I am just saying it's a bit risky to say that because someone has said someone doped he is less clean than other riders. I don't beleive in that, you are basically saying that people like Indurain or Hinault are not as clean as Lemond. We need facts in order to incriminate, I think we should give people like Evans, Sastre or F.Schelk the benefit of the doubt, until they are caught.

st68

just seen this thread this is just getting more depressing most of my mates who dont cycle are like "well theyre all on drugs those tour riders " too which ive always argued that there not i think now even im starting to have my doubts WHOS NEXT i wonder?

SCR Pedro

st68 wrote:

just seen this thread this is just getting more depressing most of my mates who dont cycle are like "well theyre all on drugs those tour riders " too which ive always argued that there not i think now even im starting to have my doubts WHOS NEXT i wonder?

My thoughts exactly. The Gerolsteiner team has always been one of my favourites. I was so dissapointed to hear that they were folding, so this is bitterly dissapointing news.

I wonder how those people who bought the Gerolsteiner Polka dot jersey must feel. I'd want my money back. Maybe there should be a 'Jersey Insurance'. Get your money back if the team is busted.

Pedro

oldwelshman

Wot a wanker. Are these guys idiots? Maybe the drugs affect their brain , or perhaps their iq was already less than their hct levels?
I would say have an amnsety for all, last chance, then anyone caught whether at event or retrospective testing, banned for life, simple.
No grey areas, no ambiguity, straight and simple, caught doping, banned for life.

pmac1893

man.. gerolsteiner must be the worst team in cycling now

deal

oldwelshman wrote:

Wot a wanker. Are these guys idiots? Maybe the drugs affect their brain , or perhaps their iq was already less than their hct levels?
I would say have an amnsety for all, last chance, then anyone caught whether at event or retrospective testing, banned for life, simple.
No grey areas, no ambiguity, straight and simple, caught doping, banned for life.

I agree, I want ASO to take the lead if the UCI is unwilling. Come out and simply say all the wankers caught dsuring this years tour and any riders caught in future will never again be welcome at the tour or other ASO races again.

The idea of seeing all these wankers riding the tour again in a few season makes me really angry.

Alex_Simmons/RST

gabriel959 wrote:

Jeff Jones wrote:

gabriel959 wrote:

Surely, even being vaguely implicated doesn't count. I mean the way it should work is, you test positive, you are cheating, you don't test positive, you haven't been cheating.

Like being a little bit pregnant, you mean? OK fine. If you test positive, refuse a test, or are found out another way, then you are cheating.

There, we've saved a few past Tour winners from the flames.

Back on your heads.

I am just saying it's a bit risky to say that because someone has said someone doped he is less clean than other riders. I don't beleive in that, you are basically saying that people like Indurain or Hinault are not as clean as Lemond. We need facts in order to incriminate, I think we should give people like Evans, Sastre or F.Schelk the benefit of the doubt, until they are caught.

I don't recall Rasmussen testing positive (happy to be proved wrong).

But there doesn't seem to be any issue with calling him a cheat, since he was cheating the system.

Patrick1.0

I want more heads to roll. This is the way we have to go. Take them out one by one, team by team until everybody gets so sick of it that the sponsors can't afford to sponsor a team without total assurance that the riders within that team won't be doping. Life bans for those who test positive. Raise the risk for these riders. Make it clear that if they dope and get caught that's their future within the sport gone. No more pro salary to support their families, nothing but humiliation for these deserving people.

stagehopper

Apparently Kohl and Schumacher were room mates throughout the tour. Who'd have guessed?

dennisn

Patrick1.0 wrote:

I want more heads to roll. This is the way we have to go.

"we"? Just who is "we". Leave "me" out of your "we" please. You wouldn't want me anyway. I'm no where near self righteous enough.

Dennis Noward

richard wants a baum

For crying out loud, Dennis get over it the 'we' is suppose to mean the cycling loving community, like it or not its the nature of humans to group people. You have been grouped into the hated cyclist group. Cars will try to run you off the road in an aggressive attempt to claim there territory. Question do you actually disagree with what Patrick1.0 said, or do you think we should be going the way of every other sport and cover up positives.

Patrick1.0

richard wants a baum wrote:

For crying out loud, Dennis get over it the 'we' is suppose to mean the cycling loving community, like it or not its the nature of humans to group people. You have been grouped into the hated cyclist group. Cars will try to run you off the road in an aggressive attempt to claim there territory. Question do you actually disagree with what Patrick1.0 said, or do you think we should be going the way of every other sport and cover up positives.

Right. I think the simplest truth is that we - as cyclists and/or cycling fans - would all (the majority and ones that matter) love to see the total eradication of peds so that everybody has an equal chance to compete and so that we can see genuine winners rather than those with the best chemical enhancement.

That's never going to happen so definitively, at least not in the near future, but it doesn't mean that we shouldn't want to see that state of affairs and by the strength of conviction, we can go part of the way to that place. It is a case of tipping the balance from the dopers' favour to the clean riders'.

I never mentioned you specifically, Dennis. I'd just hope that you and many others in the cycling comunity share a similar view.

babyjebus

dennisn wrote:

"we"? Just who is "we". Leave "me" out of your "we" please. You wouldn't want me anyway. I'm no where near self righteous enough.

Dennis Noward

"We" is everyone who contributes to debates on these boards. "You" however are a troll, who even when unfed persists in bothering the grown-ups to zero effect.
Don't bother replying. I won't respond.

Alex_Simmons/RST

Patrick1.0 wrote:

Right. I think the simplest truth is that we - as cyclists and/or cycling fans - would all (the majority and ones that matter) love to see the total eradication of peds ....

Unfortunately I don't think that's actually the case. It wouldn't be hard to find those that think PEDs should be legalised and clearly there are those that grew up with and love the sport of competitive cycling that are still doping, so they aren't in that group either. Neither are the people that are helping them to make it happen.

I have read many items from those that miss the days of attacking riding like Vino or Pantani or went "wow" at rides like Ricco.

I'm not one of them though.

But the good thing is the more that get caught, the better the testing protocols, the better off we'll all be eventually. There will be significant costs but the investment will be worth it. Cycling as a sport has the opportunity to show leadership sadly lacking in many aeobic endurance sports.

richard wants a baum

Theres another argument, does doping equal attacking intresting riding and clean riders all look like Cadel. Is it one or the other , or can you have both. Personally i think you can be explosive and attacking and be clean. I think the vast majority of people want a clean sport, ive never seen anyone on this forum say they want PEDs legalised?

iainf72

oldwelshman wrote:

I would say have an amnsety for all, last chance, then anyone caught whether at event or retrospective testing, banned for life, simple.
No grey areas, no ambiguity, straight and simple, caught doping, banned for life.

??

What's an amnesty going to prove?

Kids, this is what it looks like when a sport which has been rotten to the core for decades starts to address it's issue. Did you think people would say "oh, I won't dope then" If you can't perform at the same level without the needle, you will use the needle. Let's not make this more complicated than it already is.

mercsport

Not sure if this ought to be a different thread , but whilst it's a form of exquisite torture logging on daily to discover who the latest pedalling malefactor may be , I'm as intrigued by the freshly restored relationship between the ASO and the UCI . Specifically : whither Patrice Clerc ? What exactly happened there ? I always had him down as one of the good guys . Was he just fagged out with everything and legged it down the road ?

BTW , if for nothing else , this doping stuff certainly makes for a lively read on these forums . I particularly enjoyed the ' Filth about Armstrong ' thread . Good stuff !

jimmythecuckoo

so the one thing we all agree on is that we can't agree. Nice!

Jeff Jones

Patrick1.0 wrote:

Right. I think the simplest truth is that we - as cyclists and/or cycling fans - would all (the majority and ones that matter) love to see the total eradication of peds so that everybody has an equal chance to compete and so that we can see genuine winners rather than those with the best chemical enhancement.

It's not that clear cut. For example, there are differing opinions across our editorial team, all with valid arguments.

I have argued both sides: from a sporting point of view and as a competitor myself, then yes I'd like to see cheating via drugs (and anything else) eliminated. Otherwise you don't know how valid the result is.

From an entertainment point of view - these riders are professionals, after all - then it shouldn't matter. We don't impose anti-doping laws on musicians do we?

That said, I would still like to see clean sport because right now it's a confusing mess. And 'we' seem to have crossed the line towards anti-doping and it doesn't seem likely that we'll retrace our steps. Other sports are starting to face this too.

I do think that the tests are working, although it is an arms race. I'd hate it to get to a point where gene doping is de rigeur, because then I will lose all interest.

OTOH, Nicole Cooke rocks. She is a genuine inspiration to me.

flattythehurdler

Retrospective testing won't work, it will just lead to the "it's been spoiled/tampered with/ the lab/country/continent all hate me/it's a worldwide conspiracy" sh1te we see used as an excuse by cheats at the moment.