Contador tests positive for Clenbuterol

Pokerface

Garry H wrote:

Pokerface wrote:

Of course they will back him. They want the Vuelta win if they can't get the Tour win. Plus there's always next year....

Assuming the sponsor is willing to hang around

It's an interesting question.

If you're the sponsor - do you want to hang around, knowing that eventually your team will win the Tour - and probably the Vuelta this year. Or are you scared off because you don't want to be associated with a 'cheat'.

I think history has shown us that winning erases the memory of past wrongdoings very quickly. (Basso comes to mind).

Garry H

Pokerface wrote:

Garry H wrote:

Pokerface wrote:

Of course they will back him. They want the Vuelta win if they can't get the Tour win. Plus there's always next year....

Assuming the sponsor is willing to hang around

It's an interesting question.

If you're the sponsor - do you want to hang around, knowing that eventually your team will win the Tour - and probably the Vuelta this year. Or are you scared off because you don't want to be associated with a 'cheat'.

I think history has shown us that winning erases the memory of past wrongdoings very quickly. (Basso comes to mind).

Normally I would agree with you, but not so sure with this one. Riis is lucky that Saxo hung around for this year, this could be just enough to make them change their minds about next year.

cajun_cyclist

Basso came back, I still look a bit in wonder when I see Basso in an advertisement in a cycling magazine, but they are common. So, I think IF Contador gets this likely suspension, Basso would be an accurate parallel to AC's situation though I know Basso per se was not nailed for a foreign substance in his blood.

ozzzyosborn206

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest/514226/contador-banned-for-a-year-has-10-days-to-appeal.html

Garry H

cajun_cyclist wrote:

Basso came back, I still look a bit in wonder when I see Basso in an advertisement in a cycling magazine, but they are common. So, I think IF Contador gets this likely suspension, Basso would be an accurate parallel to AC's situation though I know Basso per se was not nailed for a foreign substance in his blood.

I'm sure that some team will want to sign him. Not so sure it will be Saxobank paying the salary.

fleshtuxedo

RichN95 wrote:

I wonder what Saxo Bank will do? Sack him or back him?

Crack him?

Alex_Gill

RichN95 wrote:
I wonder what Saxo Bank will do? Sack him or back him?

Smack him round the ear 'ole?

Saxo's big money investment has turned sour

all show no go

What FF thinks...

frenchfighter wrote:

What the rest of the world thinks...

Tusher

The Schlecklette can't be that bothered- he's twittering about guitars.

Garry H

Tusher wrote:

The Schlecklette can't be that bothered- he's twittering about guitars.

His silence speaks volumes??

Gazzetta67

BLAND of Brother`s = Schlecks - Yawnnnnnn to another bland tour de france sportive

Think i will dig out the Tour 84 and watch REAL Cyclists Hinault.Lemond.Kelly.Fignon.

Better than watching these 2 stick insects holding hands

deejay

all show no go wrote:

allah be praised he's not a muslim, so it's not our fault

It's that Useless Conniving Irishman and his Texan friend dredging the depths that only money can buy.
The Argentinian Beef tested @ 40 times below the other riders testing limits at another Laboratory after the TDF had finished and you want me to believe this was not a Witch Hunt.
Tell me who paid for this expensive testing proceedure and could it have been spiked to get a result commensurate with this high cost.

cajun_cyclist

deejay wrote:

all show no go wrote:

allah be praised he's not a muslim, so it's not our fault

It's that Useless Conniving Irishman and his Texan friend dredging the depths that only money can buy.
The Argentinian Beef tested @ 40 times below the other riders testing limits at another Laboratory after the TDF had finished and you want me to believe this was not a Witch Hunt.
Tell me who paid for this expensive testing proceedure and could it have been spiked to get a result commensurate with this high cost.

Headline: "Bruyneel brushes off latest LA accusations; Stands by Contador",

http://velonews.competitor.com/2011/01/ ... nce_156831

And Bruyneel stands by both of them, so where does that leave us??

frenchfighter

What's the problem, he will be back in half a year. I am annoyed because the racing suffers this year as a result of his exclusion and his ban is a result of politics from the inept UCI and other governing bodies. Typically I might go to France to see some of the Tour but the Vuelta beckons this year as the riding will be more exciting.

So funny reading some of the comments, you love to hate on a champion. I hope you realise that he will come back and be at the top just like he was all the time all throughout the years.

You should face it - clenbueterol is a minor substance in the scheme of doping, so the majority of the cycling World (I am talking the professionals, the people involved in the sport all year round for their jobs) will not care and he will be welcomed back. He is well liked and respected; for good reason.

frenchfighter

What is also worrying in this and all these cases is the 'leaking'. All the news seems to come from leaks first and official second. This shows the corruptness of the people involved and/or the media.

frenchfighter

RFEC accepted Contador's explanation for accidental ingestion of clenbuterol


And you still get a ban? Ok, all the other cyclists are looking at this and thinking wtf. This further proves the point that certain fat twats are being apeased.

frenchfighter

Also, whatever Andy may say now, he said last year that if he gets given the Tour as a result of a ban for Contador, he would not feel like he has won the Tour or words to that effect.

stevie_90210

frenchfighter wrote:

You should face it - clenbueterol is a minor substance in the scheme of doping, so the majority of the cycling World (I am talking the professionals, the people involved in the sport all year round for their jobs) will not care and he will be welcomed back. He is well liked and respected; for good reason.

How minor or major it is doesn't matter so much. It is still a banned substance, so he still cheated.

shakey88

Stop ranting FF ffs! i sometimes think you take things too seriously.Do you ride a bike at all? If so i suggest you go out and ride and let all that anger and frustration dissappear with every turn of the pedals.
Chill out dude

jimmythecuckoo

Cycling on the news on Daybreak this morning, obviously not for the right reasons.

Yellow Peril

Who can really say they take joy in the performance of a TdF winner when, by a concensus of the forum, you have to go back to Lemond for the last believed clean winner. Thank God for the likes of Cav et al and the sprinting sideshow. There's nothing to say they are any less free of drugs but their performance in the GC would suggest that is probably the case.

Gazzaputt

frenchfighter wrote:

RFEC accepted Contador's explanation for accidental ingestion of clenbuterol


And you still get a ban? Ok, all the other cyclists are looking at this and thinking wtf. This further proves the point that certain fat twats are being apeased.

Come on FF get your head out the clouds.

He failed a dope test end of.

I think a years ban is getting off lightly.

I now await Friday to see if he carries out his threat to quit if he were banned.

I hope he carries out the threat.

iainf72

frenchfighter wrote:

RFEC accepted Contador's explanation for accidental ingestion of clenbuterol


And you still get a ban? Ok, all the other cyclists are looking at this and thinking wtf. This further proves the point that certain fat twats are being apeased.

Have you heard of something called WADA and the concept of "strict liability"?

It's got nothing to do with McQuaid or the UCI.

The tinfoil hat brigade on both sides are certainly out in force.

wicked

Oh deary me. Some people do seem to struggling with the fact that their beloved little hero is nothing more than a cheat and a fraud. He tested positive. The end. Get over it.

rick_chasey

I'm not that fussed if people dope (see the Haussler thread) - i'd rather they didn't - but I'd be massively p!ssed off if Contador only gets a 1 year ban.

We still don't even know the winner of the race of the year, because of him. It's a sh!t show and he's the one squating over it with his cheeks spread wide apart.

wicked

Rick Chasey wrote:

I'm not that fussed if people dope (see the Haussler thread) - i'd rather they didn't - but I'd be massively p!ssed off if Contador only gets a 1 year ban.

We still don't even know the winner of the race of the year, because of him. It's a sh!t show and he's the one squating over it with his cheeks spread wide apart.

Nice analogy there

frenchfighter

Keep on trying to get one over on me. I'm afraid nothing you say can touch me. I guess if your lives are so boring you need to try and excite yourself by trying to illicit a reaction out of me from ill chosen, weak, low vocab posts, you should continue you but you are fighting a losing game.

Contador will come back and be hurting people just like Ricco, just like Basso, just like Vino, just like Millar, just like take your pick, are.
Looking forward for Valverde's return where he will also crush the opposition.

frenchfighter

Lots of double standards and choice of who to support and rubbish. Sort your credibilities out.

frenchfighter

iainf72 wrote:

frenchfighter wrote:

RFEC accepted Contador's explanation for accidental ingestion of clenbuterol


And you still get a ban? Ok, all the other cyclists are looking at this and thinking wtf. This further proves the point that certain fat twats are being apeased.

Have you heard of something called WADA and the concept of "strict liability"?

It's got nothing to do with McQuaid or the UCI.

The tinfoil hat brigade on both sides are certainly out in force.

Please explain how taking a banned substance accidentally should mean you get a ban?

simon_e

Garry H wrote:

Tusher wrote:

The Schlecklette can't be that bothered- he's twittering about guitars.

His silence speaks volumes??

His attitude beforehand spoke volumes:

"I don't think he's done anything wrong,"

Worrying, I'd say. If I was a clean rider beaten to the biggest prize in cycling by a doper I would give him the benefit of the doubt / avoid judgement until it was proven but certainly wouldn't defend his actions. But dopers stick together, perhaps?

Nothing is going to really change until more of the clean riders in the peloton speak out instead of letting the dopers have an easy time.