Tour of Flanders

13»

Comments

  • dave_1
    dave_1 Posts: 9,512
    Kléber wrote:
    As much as I have suspicions over Cancellara's past and might raise an eyebrow at his dominance today - the cynic's reflex action - there is no compelling trail of evidence. He's not boasting about working with a crook, he's not got covered-up EPO tests, his team weren't found binning medicines, people have not given sworn testimony, etc etc.

    Am sure Rossi would have an opinion re your conviction of LA on single sample testing, not able to be repeated to confirm methods. Nothing got found that incriminated.

    Some say the Riis/CSC connection is enough to convict poor old Yatesy and yet here we have Cance on CSC , riding like a motorbike and coached by Luigi...plenty proof if you want to look. Kleber, you are a bit of a fanboy , no? :wink::wink:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKBacb2V ... ata_player
  • Kléber
    Kléber Posts: 6,842
    Dave, I'm not convicting Armstrong, just saying he has loads of questions to answer. I could do a forensic interview with him for two, even four hours, based on all of this.

    With Cancellara there are only a few questions to ask before the trail goes cold quite quickly, and on that basis I'm not going to go down the route of the cyclingnews forum and scream "he's jacking" as mere allegations add little to the conversation.

    If you can't spot the difference between the weight of evidence here, then I'm sure Biking Bernie will appear soon to ensure you're informed about the mountain of evidence pointing towards Armstrong :wink:

Categories