If Contador is cleared will you be happy, upset?
Comments
-
See the other thread for 129 pages of opinion
0 -
You're missing other options.
Personally I'm happy for him to not be banned. A scheme whereby a tiny minority of cheating riders get caught, and get caught for things that aren't going to make a difference I don't like, as it does seem it's quite likely to be corruption etc.
I want a clean sport, banning one guy doesn't make a clean sport, it looks more like a token to pretend the sport is clean.Jibbering Sports Stuff: http://jibbering.com/sports/0 -
If he's cleared because the Spanish federation says "ok, we've reviewed things and on balance, given the evidence, we're sure you are clean" then great.
If he's cleared because the Spanish federation says "tranquilo", then :twisted:0 -
I don't undertsand, the banned drug was in his body (irrespective of how it got there) - 2 year ban. Case closed.0
-
I'd just as rather see Ricco lining up in this year's Tour.
it's a hard life if you don't weaken.0 -
It is knda missing the option where there is a good reason to clear him. If it were proven he ingested it innocently then I'd be happy for him to be let off.
But just now they seem to be trying to just prove the possibility of it which isn't enough for me.
If a pro cyclist has clenbuterol in their system the most reasonable explanation is that they doped. Saying it's possible they could have injested it innocently falls a little short of a defence.Scottish and British...and a bit French0 -
I'd be annoyed.
It's bad enough they cheat, but I can live with that as long as they don't get caught.
What irritates me is that when you do, the severity of your punishment is directly correlated to how many friends you have in your own national framework, and how willing they are to give you up (or not).
Especially since said positive has thrown the sport into disrepute, since he tested positive in the Tour, which he 'won'. Realistically it's the worst thing a rider can do - winning the Tour and then testing positive in said win.0 -
If he's cleared and then, as seems likely, he is banned after an appeal by the UCI or Wada, then the conduct of the Spanish federation must surely be examined. After the burying of Puerto and the multiple attempts to let Valverde off the hook, they must surely be in danger of being excluded from international competition. Other nations are trying to clean up the sport whilst the Spanish authorities drag their heels.0
-
plasticisers0
-
To be honest in the grand scheme of things it doesn't really bother me, I don't think he ate contaminated beef, but then again I don't think he took clenbuterol during the tour, I just don't think he would have been that stupid whilst leading the tour.
This leaves the fact of how it got into the body. Obviously with the talk of plasticisers allegedly found in the samples leads to one scenario, but the UCI said the talk of plasticisers was a non starter, so I don't know what to think. If he was blood doping, he certainly isn't the only one, but until a 100% reliable test for this comes along it will always happen.
I don't think cycling is any more dirty than alot of other sports though, I think alot of elite sports people will seek a more dubious path if the rewards are there, but there alot more that do their sport to a very high level without illegal assistance.0 -
However it ends up cycling has suffered more bad press and continues to look like a dirty sport.
Clearly the one thing cycling needs right now is a foolproof test for blood transfusions, as unless you do a Ricco you probably aren't going to be caught.0 -
What if he had said this?
"I have been tested positive for clenbuterol and although I have not intentially taken it, out of respect for the sport I love, I have to accept the rules that because an illegal substance has been found, I will have to accept the ban required."
He could then have gone on to appeal, and possibly had the ban lifted entirely if it was proved that he had eaten it by accident.
I think I would have believed him if he'd done that. As it is, I don't know what to think0 -
Dave Cornwall wrote:What if he had said this?
"I have been tested positive for clenbuterol and although I have not intentially taken it, out of respect for the sport I love, I have to accept the rules that because an illegal substance has been found, I will have to accept the ban required."
He could then have gone on to appeal, and possibly had the ban lifted entirely if it was proved that he had eaten it by accident.
I think I would have believed him if he'd done that. As it is, I don't know what to think
+1 would have shown him to be a true bloke to look up to then; unfortunately he hasn't and IMO looks more shifty than ever0 -
Just ban him.
Suspicions have been swimming around him since his Liberty Seguros days.
He's been openly caught ingesting a known banned substance and unless he can prove his innocence beyond doubt (I believe he hasn't) then he should get hit the same as everyone else.
This whole case just reeks of a Spanish Federation and quite possibly the UCI operating in a very dark and underhand way.Let's close our eyes and see what happens0 -
I counted £20,000 in tenpound notes the other day. Had i taken the Drug and Alcohol test later I may very well have failed. This is a safety based test but would it be fair in the circumstances?
Im just going to enjoy the battle with Schleck0 -
all show no go wrote:Just ban him.
Suspicions have been swimming around him since his Liberty Seguros days.
He's been openly caught ingesting a known banned substance and unless he can prove his innocence beyond doubt (I believe he hasn't) then he should get hit the same as everyone else.
This whole case just reeks of a Spanish Federation and quite possibly the UCI operating in a very dark and underhand way.
guilt has to be proven, not innocence'dont forget lads, one evertonian is worth twenty kopites'0 -
fast as fupp wrote:all show no go wrote:Just ban him.
Suspicions have been swimming around him since his Liberty Seguros days.
He's been openly caught ingesting a known banned substance and unless he can prove his innocence beyond doubt (I believe he hasn't) then he should get hit the same as everyone else.
This whole case just reeks of a Spanish Federation and quite possibly the UCI operating in a very dark and underhand way.
guilt has to be proven, not innocence
It has - with a positive dope test.0 -
fast as fupp wrote:all show no go wrote:Just ban him.
Suspicions have been swimming around him since his Liberty Seguros days.
He's been openly caught ingesting a known banned substance and unless he can prove his innocence beyond doubt (I believe he hasn't) then he should get hit the same as everyone else.
This whole case just reeks of a Spanish Federation and quite possibly the UCI operating in a very dark and underhand way.
guilt has to be proven, not innocence
How long have you managed to exist in this forum without reading the term 'strict liability'?Scottish and British...and a bit French0 -
Right, wrong, a little of both? Sad, happy, angry, mad, gave a sh*t, or never cared? It's over, nothing to see here, move on with your lives. I know it was like a train wreck, sort of impossible not to watch, but it's over.0
-
Percy Vera wrote:I don't undertsand, the banned drug was in his body (irrespective of how it got there) - 2 year ban. Case closed.
i think even if proved unintentional its 1 yr like the uk skier?"If I was a 38 year old man, I definitely wouldn't be riding a bright yellow bike with Hello Kitty disc wheels, put it that way. What we're witnessing here is the world's most high profile mid-life crisis" Afx237vi Mon Jul 20, 2009 2:43 pm0 -
dennisn wrote:Right, wrong, a little of both? Sad, happy, angry, mad, gave a sh*t, or never cared? It's over, nothing to see here, move on with your lives. I know it was like a train wreck, sort of impossible not to watch, but it's over.
Not a chance, this will run for months yet.0 -
Nah it will be done fairly soon. If it drags anywhere near the start of the tour ASO will go mental at UCI once again.
It is a disgrace and I hope Contador gets pushed off a cliff.
If I Team Sky, I would realise pretty soon that the only way to win le Tour is to spend £1m not on a star rider but to spend it on a team of private investigators to do 24 hour surveillance on the top 20 tour cyclists and collate evidence of them doping and on the eve of le Tour present the whole dossier anonymously to ASO, UCI, WADA and all national federations.
Videso of riders in an out of clinics, hacked emails, bugged phones etc etc etc. Just get the lot and place the simple threat, clean up or the whole lot gets sent to Times etc...0 -
plectrum wrote:Nah it will be done fairly soon. If it drags anywhere near the start of the tour ASO will go mental at UCI once again.
It is a disgrace and I hope Contador gets pushed off a cliff.
If I Team Sky, I would realise pretty soon that the only way to win le Tour is to spend £1m not on a star rider but to spend it on a team of private investigators to do 24 hour surveillance on the top 20 tour cyclists and collate evidence of them doping and on the eve of le Tour present the whole dossier anonymously to ASO, UCI, WADA and all national federations.
Videso of riders in an out of clinics, hacked emails, bugged phones etc etc etc. Just get the lot and place the simple threat, clean up or the whole lot gets sent to Times etc...
Just where do you think Sky, or their parent company, News International, will be able to find people who are specialists in phone bugging, e-mail hacking or surveillance.
I'm waiting for a 'Shiek' to offer big money to take over a cycling team - no questions asked.Twitter: @RichN950 -
Personally I am glad to see that the drugs cheat Contador is innocent0
-
Percy Vera wrote:I don't undertsand, the banned drug was in his body (irrespective of how it got there) - 2 year ban. Case closed.
Yes, case closed. I'm betting you still don't understand. Whether you like it or not it's over.
Try and find something a bit more useful to do than worry and obcess over whether a cyclist doped. Surely you can find family, friends, and work to be more rewarding than debating about a small quantity of drug someone took. How could something like that be
more important than family,...?0 -
dennisn wrote:...
How could something like that be
more important than family,...?
You've not met my family have you. --
Burls Ti Tourer for Tarmac, Saracen aluminium full suss for trails0 -
Con by name CON by nature
The man has no class - just look at what he did on the last tour when Schleck dropped his chain on that crucial climb - he won the tour by cheating and that is without the drugs
Just ban him as there is no smoke without fire - contaminated meat my @rse. Probably residual from 'training' before the tour hence such low levels and he just mistimed his cold turkey. authorities need to get tough and make example0
