Come home Vino, all is forgiven...

135

Comments

  • micron
    micron Posts: 1,843
    But no positives under the current Astana regime - unlike Bruyneel's little slip up at RS...
  • DaveyL
    DaveyL Posts: 5,167
    Give them time...
    Le Blaireau (1)
  • iainf72
    iainf72 Posts: 15,784
    micron wrote:
    But no positives under the current Astana regime - unlike Bruyneel's little slip up at RS...

    It's fortunate Giuseppe Martinelli hasn't ever had any doping problems with riders under his management...

    Oh wait...
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
  • pedro118118
    pedro118118 Posts: 1,102
    Charm goes a long way.
    Vino is charmless and therfore a convenient focal point for vilification.
    He is a (former) cheat, who has served his suspension and has a right to ride.
    Just like all the other former cheats in the peleton.
    Including the charming David Millar.
  • Squaggles
    Squaggles Posts: 875
    Not a David Millar fan either although I suppose some people are because he is British/Scottish
    The UCI are Clowns and Fools
  • pedro118118
    pedro118118 Posts: 1,102
    British Scottish Maltese - it really doesn't make much difference.
    He is an articulate/intresting guy and seems popular within the peleton and beyond.
    My point is that someone like Millar can talk his way out of his situation and turn things around; including public opinion.
    The likes of Vino will never be able to do that - regardless of the number of open letters they write.
    It just smacks of hyprocrasy to me.
    But then again I suppose that's why we love squirrels and hate rats - both of which are dirty rodents.
  • iainf72
    iainf72 Posts: 15,784
    Remember, Vino used the Mancebo gambit [(c) DaveyL] got a token ban from the Kazak Fed and then secretly started training to take part in the Olympics. My understanding is it took some fancy footwork from La Gripper to make sure that didn't happen.

    Then all of a sudden he is coming back. But no monotone "I'm sorry" back then. Only when he gets his ass booed when he wins a race.
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
  • British Scottish Maltese - it really doesn't make much difference.
    He is an articulate/intresting guy and seems popular within the peloton and beyond.
    My point is that someone like Millar can talk his way out of his situation and turn things around; including public opinion.
    The likes of Vino will never be able to do that - regardless of the number of open letters they write.
    It just smacks of hyprocrasy to me.
    But then again I suppose that's why we love squirrels and hate rats - both of which are dirty rodents.

    Could be because Millar didn't just write letters, he got himself advisory roles with WADA and the UK authorities, part owns a team that has a transparent internal testing programme, will speak candidly about his experiences and about being a cheat with anyone who asks and went so far as to criticise his own employer (Saunier Duval) for not doing enough to ensure their riders were clean.
    "In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"

    @gietvangent
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,243
    http://vannieuwkerke.wordpress.com/2010 ... inokourov/

    For the Dutch speakers, Vannieuwkerke has 'written a letter' to Vino in his blog.

    It's pretty long, but explains very well precisely why people are sceptical and dubious about his win.

    Seems pretty balanced...

    But then again, he doesn't like Basso very much :wink:


    Eitherway, it's a bloody good read.
  • pedro118118
    pedro118118 Posts: 1,102
    British Scottish Maltese - it really doesn't make much difference.
    He is an articulate/intresting guy and seems popular within the peloton and beyond.
    My point is that someone like Millar can talk his way out of his situation and turn things around; including public opinion.
    The likes of Vino will never be able to do that - regardless of the number of open letters they write.
    It just smacks of hyprocrasy to me.
    But then again I suppose that's why we love squirrels and hate rats - both of which are dirty rodents.

    Could be because Millar didn't just write letters, he got himself advisory roles with WADA and the UK authorities, part owns a team that has a transparent internal testing programme, will speak candidly about his experiences and about being a cheat with anyone who asks and went so far as to criticise his own employer (Saunier Duval) for not doing enough to ensure their riders were clean.

    Yep - all admirable stuff.
  • dave_1
    dave_1 Posts: 9,512
    the only thing I would say in Vino's defence is that an explicit admission he blood doped would lead to demands for answers like who helped do it and so on, French authorities would be on him wanting to know if it was done in France and so on, find out what other team helpers/ members were involved and then another judicial level investigation -all headline news in Europe's sports pages and not great for sponsorship....see why Robbie mac and JV accept his open letter-he could bring the house of cards down if he really wanted.
  • If I may use a football analogy, this letter is equally as deplorable as after UEFA said there was no way France's play off could be replayed, Thierry Henry coming out and saying he'd like to replay it.
  • paulcuthbert
    paulcuthbert Posts: 1,016
    If I may use a football analogy, this letter is equally as deplorable as after UEFA said there was no way France's play off could be replayed, Thierry Henry coming out and saying he'd like to replay it.

    Thierry Henry is a worse cheat than any doper. Twice he handled that ball. TWICE!!! And 3 of them were offside...

    Let's not even go there!

    :evil:
  • dougzz
    dougzz Posts: 1,833
    Dave_1 wrote:
    the only thing I would say in Vino's defence is that an explicit admission he blood doped would lead to demands for answers like who helped do it and so on, French authorities would be on him wanting to know if it was done in France and so on, find out what other team helpers/ members were involved and then another judicial level investigation -all headline news in Europe's sports pages and not great for sponsorship....see why Robbie mac and JV accept his open letter-he could bring the house of cards down if he really wanted.

    The only thing in his defence is if he admitted the crime he'd have to face the consequences :)

    If he had remorse for what he'd done he'd be pleased to reveal these things and make a clean start. He didn't and I'd like to see him boooed mercilessly everywhere he rides. I really don't understand why the ban isn't permanent for those that do not co-operate. Why should they be allowed to make a living from a sport they have damaged?
  • dave_1
    dave_1 Posts: 9,512
    dougzz wrote:
    Dave_1 wrote:
    the only thing I would say in Vino's defence is that an explicit admission he blood doped would lead to demands for answers like who helped do it and so on, French authorities would be on him wanting to know if it was done in France and so on, find out what other team helpers/ members were involved and then another judicial level investigation -all headline news in Europe's sports pages and not great for sponsorship....see why Robbie mac and JV accept his open letter-he could bring the house of cards down if he really wanted.

    The only thing in his defence is if he admitted the crime he'd have to face the consequences :)

    If he had remorse for what he'd done he'd be pleased to reveal these things and make a clean start. He didn't and I'd like to see him boooed mercilessly everywhere he rides. I really don't understand why the ban isn't permanent for those that do not co-operate. Why should they be allowed to make a living from a sport they have damaged?

    a full confession would lead to an investigation..media coverage...JV and Robbie Mac know enough to know that would hurt the image of the sport more. Vino has come as close as he can to admitting it. The riders, even the self promoted clean team, don't want him to admit it now. Ricco is more worthy of a welcome than Vino as he owned up straight away.

    The body , physiology Vino has to work with is from a decade of drug fueled training regimens no natural human being could do. His body isn't even his, he isn't himself. It should be life bans cause they've banked years of training benefits which never leave their physiology. Life bans are essential now.
  • If I may use a football analogy, this letter is equally as deplorable as after UEFA said there was no way France's play off could be replayed, Thierry Henry coming out and saying he'd like to replay it.

    Thierry Henry is a worse cheat than any doper. Twice he handled that ball. TWICE!!! And 3 of them were offside...

    Let's not even go there!

    :evil:

    Apparently I may not then ;)
  • secretsqirrel
    secretsqirrel Posts: 1,713
    Jeez............

    Vino has been back since August last year.

    All this has blown up now because he had the 'audacity' to win a high profile race live on TV before our very eyes.

    He has a blood passport which, although not perfect keeps all riders within certain parameters. Therefore he undergoes the same monitoring as everyone else (and probably extra scrutiny because of who he is!).

    Also, if you read Andy Schlecks account of the race on CN on Monday, it is clear that Vino could escape because Contador was still in a group with the favourites. The Schlecks hedged their bets by marking AC. The outcome for Vino was perhaps flattering due to Astana's smart tactics.

    And yet. if he had finished the race somewhere in the top 20, or even if Kolobnev had managed to outsprint him, he would have done the 'decent' thing and lost, and we would all be more comfortable, and move on. This thread probably would not have been started.

    He has faced the consequences of what he has done, and is still doing so. He is competing within the rules., and if not, he risks losing the rest of his career in pro-cycling, Contador will go, and his team will be finished , including the livelihoods of his prescious young Kazakhs.

    Some people really want their pound of flesh. :evil:
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,243
    http://cyclocosm.com/2010/04/how-the-ra ... iege-2010/

    Cyclocosm on what he feels the press should be reporting.
  • iainf72
    iainf72 Posts: 15,784

    Cyclocosm on what he feels the press should be reporting.

    Cyclocosm vs Lionel Birnie on twitter is going on at the moment. Worth a peep.
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,243
    iainf72 wrote:

    Cyclocosm on what he feels the press should be reporting.

    Cyclocosm vs Lionel Birnie on twitter is going on at the moment. Worth a peep.
    :lol:

    Cycling weekly always came across as a little pious anyway.
  • micron
    micron Posts: 1,843
    Where does it end, though? And who judges what is a heartfelt apology or a cynically expedient one? Are riders only allowed to come back if they promise they won't win anything?

    David Millar is always held up as the poster boy for the properly contrite rider but, when he was first named by Gaumont he called him a nutter and set his lawyers on Kimmage when he made a few critical noises. He only confessed when threatened with criminal action - I've no doubt if that hadn't happened he'd have continued to deny and sic his lawyers on any nay sayers.

    I know the sport needs scapegoats for its dirty image and it's tempting to go the 'few bad apples' route (identifying Vino as the baddest), but there have been plenty of other riders over the years who've stuck two fingers up at the sport with their performances - only difference is that most of them haven't been caught. To single Vino out, in the light of Frei's recent admissions, for not being contrite enough is just daft.

    I'm no fan of Vinokourov's and would prefer to see him out of the sport for good but think it's hypocritical that his performance should be so vilified when a blind eye is so often turned to other suspicious performances - and the fact that he has served a suspension and come back shouldn't make any difference to that.
  • iainf72
    iainf72 Posts: 15,784
    micron wrote:
    Where does it end, though? And who judges what is a heartfelt apology or a cynically expedient one? Are riders only allowed to come back if they promise they won't win anything?

    This is why I propose something akin to a parole board for riders returning from a ban. Let your peers decide whether or not you're ready to come back.

    It vaguely happens, if you think about it. The Chicken can't get a decent ride because people think he's not worth the risk. Ricco is in a slightly better position. Vino would've been Chicken like if he didn't control Astana.
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    iainf72 wrote:
    micron wrote:
    Where does it end, though? And who judges what is a heartfelt apology or a cynically expedient one? Are riders only allowed to come back if they promise they won't win anything?

    This is why I propose something akin to a parole board for riders returning from a ban. Let your peers decide whether or not you're ready to come back.

    I would venture that a "parole board" of sorts is already in place. I'm not sure of "official" policy toward testing of reformed riders but I would bet they get extra scrutiny. By both
    the doping agencies and potential sponsors and employers.
  • iainf72
    iainf72 Posts: 15,784
    dennisn wrote:

    I would venture that a "parole board" of sorts is already in place. I'm not sure of "official" policy toward testing of reformed riders but I would bet they get extra scrutiny. By both
    the doping agencies and potential sponsors and employers.

    I'm talking about an interview process and things like that, before you get a licence. So even if your uncle owns a Pro Tour team, you have an extra gate to go through before you get a licence.
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    iainf72 wrote:
    dennisn wrote:

    I would venture that a "parole board" of sorts is already in place. I'm not sure of "official" policy toward testing of reformed riders but I would bet they get extra scrutiny. By both
    the doping agencies and potential sponsors and employers.

    I'm talking about an interview process and things like that, before you get a licence. So even if your uncle owns a Pro Tour team, you have an extra gate to go through before you get a licence.

    I guess that's where we will have to agree to disagree. I feel that the punishment(2 year suspension) fits the crime MORE than adequately. You on the other hand, don't see it that way. I'm ok with that. In any case it's out of our hands.
  • dave_1
    dave_1 Posts: 9,512
    micron wrote:
    Where does it end, though? And who judges what is a heartfelt apology or a cynically expedient one? Are riders only allowed to come back if they promise they won't win anything?

    David Millar is always held up as the poster boy for the properly contrite rider but, when he was first named by Gaumont he called him a nutter and set his lawyers on Kimmage when he made a few critical noises. He only confessed when threatened with criminal action - I've no doubt if that hadn't happened he'd have continued to deny and sic his lawyers on any nay sayers.

    I know the sport needs scapegoats for its dirty image and it's tempting to go the 'few bad apples' route (identifying Vino as the baddest), but there have been plenty of other riders over the years who've stuck two fingers up at the sport with their performances - only difference is that most of them haven't been caught. To single Vino out, in the light of Frei's recent admissions, for not being contrite enough is just daft.


    I'm no fan of Vinokourov's and would prefer to see him out of the sport for good but think it's hypocritical that his performance should be so vilified when a blind eye is so often turned to other suspicious performances - and the fact that he has served a suspension and come back shouldn't make any difference to that.

    Millar did not have to admit and should not have admitted. Look at the likes of Iainf who subsequently claimed Millar should have confessed away more than the 90% of his palamares he did but defend Basso with his offensive 06 Giro win.
  • iainf72
    iainf72 Posts: 15,784
    dennisn wrote:
    I guess that's where we will have to agree to disagree. I feel that the punishment(2 year suspension) fits the crime MORE than adequately. You on the other hand, don't see it that way. I'm ok with that. In any case it's out of our hands.

    I think 2 years is more than enough too.

    But if someone is going to come back and carry on exactly as they did before, then we have a problem.

    Like I said, if Vino didn't own Astana, there is NO WAY he'd get a job on a Pro Tour team
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
  • blazing_saddles
    blazing_saddles Posts: 21,741
    Then Vino is lucky, as is Millar, who just got inside the deadline and Basso, who was only thinking about it.
    Different circumstances, but all 3 are fortunate.
    "Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    iainf72 wrote:
    dennisn wrote:
    I guess that's where we will have to agree to disagree. I feel that the punishment(2 year suspension) fits the crime MORE than adequately. You on the other hand, don't see it that way. I'm ok with that. In any case it's out of our hands.

    I think 2 years is more than enough too.

    But if someone is going to come back and carry on exactly as they did before, then we have a problem.

    Like I said, if Vino didn't own Astana, there is NO WAY he'd get a job on a Pro Tour team

    I think there is always a chance anyone will revert to their old habits, but the human race is somewhat forgiving and I guess that's a good thing. Cheats are everywhere. You catch some and some of them learn their lesson and some don't, but I don't think anyone can predict who will and who won't.
  • iainf72
    iainf72 Posts: 15,784
    Then Vino is lucky, as is Millar, who just got inside the deadline and Basso, who was only thinking about it.
    Different circumstances, but all 3 are fortunate.

    2 of them did things to demonstrate they'd changed. And they're both fairly likeable characters. The other kept mucking around all through his suspension.

    They're all different cases

    Looks at say, Basso and Ricco or Rasmussen. Why did Ivan get a decent gig and the other 2 not. Too high a risk? Their attitudes? Or did they not even give a sense they'd "changed"?
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.