Contador June 6

frenchfighter

No tA Doctor wrote:

Cumulonimbus wrote:

To anyone who wont watch the tour because Contador is in it - wouldnt it be better to not watch the vuelta if you blame the Spanish - or the world champs if you blame the UCI? Admittedly some people might not watch them in the first place, maybe we will have a decision by the time they are on. Besides in the tour Contador should be tired from the Giro and a lot of journalists will be keeping a very close eye on him. Should make things difficult for him, wouldnt you like to watch it and see him get beaten?

As for other riders ganging up on him, ie not allowing him any space in the peloton, i have no idea if this would happen or not.

His very presence in the TdF risks ruining the actual racing. The Giro looked very much like a lot of riders that rode for 2nd and hoped CAS ruled in their favour. Attacking Contador to go for the win was too dangerous. If the TdF is reduced to that as well it will be a travesty.

You might as well ban Gilbert, Merckx, Hinault, Cancellara, etc etc. Basically if a rider is supreme in his domain.

Show me a quote from a cyclist who races for 2nd? I would be pretty sure they race to win regardless of the participants.

Seems like the hate on Alberto is due to his supremacy more than anything.

sketchley

Abdoujaparov wrote:

The bookies have started taking bets on Contador to win the Tour. He's currently 4/6

So what happens if you place a bet, win the money then he gets banned on appeal? Of worse bet money on AS only to loose it because he came 2nd, will you then be able to claim the win and the money in the future if Contador looses?

I'm afraid the TDF will now be a race for 2nd place. Not sure I'll be watching, I tried to get enthusiastic about the Giro but found myself switching off towards the end.

sketchley

frenchfighter - I don't hate Alberto and it's not about his supremacy. I have a problem that when watching a race when AC is being supreme at the moment my constant thought is "this is meaningless if he looses the appeal", this kind of spoils watching him be supreme just a bit for me.

BarryBonds

Quite why this loser mentality exists to hate contador for "ruining the sport" is beyond me.

Hes been through the sanction process and was found innocent.

But aside from that I am struggling to thnk of one team that has clean team leaders and has no whiff of druggery in his helpers DS or team and we all know, that grand tours cannot be won on the merits of the individual alone.

Can anyone show me a team without a smear?.....................

edhornby

The UCI are also responsible for the system that tests and produces the result then lets the national federation decide on the ban before ratifying it - completely silly arrangement in the first place

iainf72

edhornby wrote:

The UCI are also responsible for the system that tests and produces the result then lets the national federation decide on the ban before ratifying it - completely silly arrangement in the first place

Are you suggesting only the UCI do that?

It's silly the organisation who are responsible for the promotion of the sport are also responsible for policing the doping rules. That needs to change for all sport.

BarryBonds

iainf72 wrote:

edhornby wrote:

The UCI are also responsible for the system that tests and produces the result then lets the national federation decide on the ban before ratifying it - completely silly arrangement in the first place

Are you suggesting only the UCI do that?

It's silly the organisation who are responsible for the promotion of the sport are also responsible for policing the doping rules. That needs to change for all sport.

dam, have to agree with Ian

but sadly that would be like turkeys voting for christmas. It would be funny watching footballers wriggle and squirm. Oh hang on we wouldnt becasue thyed all get injuctions.........

BarryBonds

iainf72 wrote:

edhornby wrote:

The UCI are also responsible for the system that tests and produces the result then lets the national federation decide on the ban before ratifying it - completely silly arrangement in the first place

Are you suggesting only the UCI do that?

It's silly the organisation who are responsible for the promotion of the sport are also responsible for policing the doping rules. That needs to change for all sport.

dam, have to agree with Ian

but sadly that would be like turkeys voting for christmas. It would be funny watching footballers wriggle and squirm. Oh hang on we wouldnt becasue thyed all get injuctions.........

calvjones

BarryBonds wrote:

Quite why this loser mentality exists to hate contador for "ruining the sport" is beyond me.

Hes been through the sanction process and was found innocent.

But aside from that I am struggling to thnk of one team that has clean team leaders and has no whiff of druggery in his helpers DS or team and we all know, that grand tours cannot be won on the merits of the individual alone.

Can anyone show me a team without a smear?.....................

Um.. Bbox? Maybe?

frenchfighter

If I go to the Tour, it’s because I’m at a hundred percent, because I want to fight for the race.

dougzz

frenchfighter wrote:

If I go to the Tour, it’s because I’m at a hundred percent, because I want to fight for the race.

Who said that then? Wiggins?

thegibdog

dougzz wrote:

frenchfighter wrote:

If I go to the Tour, it’s because I’m at a hundred percent, because I want to fight for the race.

Who said that then? Wiggins?

If he did I'll go and put a tenner on him to win as it will mean that he is a True Champion.

Pokerface

Sketchley wrote:

Abdoujaparov wrote:

The bookies have started taking bets on Contador to win the Tour. He's currently 4/6

So what happens if you place a bet, win the money then he gets banned on appeal? Of worse bet money on AS only to loose it because he came 2nd, will you then be able to claim the win and the money in the future if Contador looses?

I'm afraid the TDF will now be a race for 2nd place. Not sure I'll be watching, I tried to get enthusiastic about the Giro but found myself switching off towards the end.

Most betting websites will have the option to pick the winner of the Tour WITHOUT Contador - so you're picking who you think will come second. But it also pays if your choice happens to win.

As for retrospective banning and new winners being named - generally they pay out based on who the declared winner AT THE TIME is. Not based on revisionist history.

I know everyone expect Bertie to just ride away with the Tour title, but I'm wondering if it will be closer than we think, due to him just winning the Giro. Very hard to be at peak form for 2 big Tours back to back.

Cumulonimbus

Sketchley wrote:

Abdoujaparov wrote:

The bookies have started taking bets on Contador to win the Tour. He's currently 4/6

So what happens if you place a bet, win the money then he gets banned on appeal? Of worse bet money on AS only to loose it because he came 2nd, will you then be able to claim the win and the money in the future if Contador looses?

You can probably ask them for terms and conditions under those circumstances but i think the bets are settled at the end of the race, ie on the podium, same as PTP.

iainf72

UCI want his results deleted if he's banned by CAS

http://velonews.competitor.com/2011/06/ ... led_176789

frenchfighter

iainf72 wrote:

UCI want his results deleted if he's banned by CAS

http://velonews.competitor.com/2011/06/ ... led_176789

Standard stuff.

You know those riders dont want wins like that. You know they know that Contador is better.

RowCycle

Why does the Spanish Cycling Federation get to decide if he's guilty or not? Why not the UCI or WADA?

It seems to me that it is the job of the international governing body (UCI) with the help of the international doping body (WADA) to decide, not the Spanish federation.

LangerDan

frenchfighter wrote:

If I go to the Tour, it’s because I’m at a hundred percent, because I want to fight for the race.

Doesn't he know that 100% is dangerous? Riis was at 60% and it could have killed him.

iainf72

RowCycle wrote:

Why does the Spanish Cycling Federation get to decide if he's guilty or not? Why not the UCI or WADA?

It seems to me that it is the job of the international governing body (UCI) with the help of the international doping body (WADA) to decide, not the Spanish federation.

The UCI and WADA can't sanction riders directly in most cases. WADA is a policy body which can provide technical assistance or legal assistance in cases.

The rider holds their licence with their national federation. Only the authority which issues the licence can sanction a rider (by removing their licence)

Snorebens

http://inrng.com/?p=3365

frenchfighter

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/8635/ ... -part.aspx

dougzz

frenchfighter wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

UCI want his results deleted if he's banned by CAS

http://velonews.competitor.com/2011/06/ ... led_176789

Standard stuff.

You know those riders dont want wins like that. You know they know that Contador is better.

Spot on, but it's the why he's better that worries many people. That's why him in the Giro was as ludicrous as him in the Tour will be. What glory or reward for the riders and sponsors if the results are decided in Switzerland a few months later. What ever the rights and wrongs of Bertie and this individual case, UCI/WADA and the National Federations must see that the system isn't working. On the tail of Valverde, not riding Tour because in went into Italy, but then two months later winning Vuelta, this case just makes Pro Cycling look silly at best, and very corrupt and incompetent at worse.

frenchfighter

Note it is all due to the terrible governing bodies.

It is unfair to keep a rider out of competition in any sport just because they cannot be quick.

Think about it as someone removing you from your work for several months until you wait for them to make a decision on some issue or other.


Not sure why people always talk about making it bad for the sport, poor image, etc and what tangible implications this does have.
It seems just like a handful of disenfranchised fans....

bompington

frenchfighter wrote:

Think about it as someone removing you from your work for several months until you wait for them to make a decision on some issue or other.

Errr, isn't this is exactly what happens in most places if someone is suspected of gross misconduct?

disgruntledgoat

bompington wrote:

frenchfighter wrote:

Think about it as someone removing you from your work for several months until you wait for them to make a decision on some issue or other.

Errr, isn't this is exactly what happens in most places if someone is suspected of gross misconduct?

Quite so. Plus, I'd love to be off work on full salary for months if I knew I'd done nowt wrong. Seriously, however, it would motivate me to get my representatives to stop dicking about and entering stalling tactics.

Not sure why people always talk about making it bad for the sport, poor image, etc and what tangible implications this does have.

Lack of interest from sponsors, leading to lots of riders etc losing their jobs. The sport being a laughing stock with fans worldwide hindering development. Parents not wanting their children to take up the sport etc etc.

frenchfighter

Obviously I refer to being off work with no pay etc.

Who is losing jobs? Who is struggling for a sponsor?

disgruntledgoat

frenchfighter wrote:

Obviously I refer to being off work with no pay etc.

Who is losing jobs? Who is struggling for a sponsor?

Every team struggles for sponsorship. Look at the problems Riis had when CSC pulled out! Can you honestly say that you can't envisage that potential sponsors would be put off by the sports biggest rider being suspended and the results of 3 of the bggest races on the calender, including tw Tours be declared null and void?

The knock on effect of sponsors withdrawing and not being replaced, would obviously be job losses and pay cuts, you'd think.

dougzz

frenchfighter wrote:

Note it is all due to the terrible governing bodies.

It is unfair to keep a rider out of competition in any sport just because they cannot be quick.

But don't you think Contador and his legal team have played a delaying game, with the (un?)intentional support of the UCI through their tardy application of the process. I agree in principal with your point that keeping the rider sidelined through the appeal process is unfair, but that's why the appeal process needs to be done in a clearly defined period of time, and not continually ignored by both the UCI and the National Federations.

frenchfighter

I dont see many teams losing sponsors or jobs due to 'dirty image'.

One or two doesnt prove anything.

CSC - doping related?

To be honest I think the reality is that things function just fine.

Re Contador's defense team - maybe they are, I cant comment on that as I dont know. I would have thought (and he has said) that Contador himself would prefer it was cleared much much sooner.

andyp

I see it differently, how many genuine blue chip sponsors are involved in cycling? Not many, most sponsors are medium sized businesses whose involvement stems from the passion of the boss (Quick Step, Omega-Pharma, Liquigas et al).

Some major teams have struggled to replace title sponsors in recent seasons (Riis being one until Saxo Bank agreed to stay on longer, Movistar only came in to save that team at the last possible minute, possibly after political pressure was applied in Spain).

There is news just today that Radioshack are considering their options for next year too, and that's clearly due to doping allegations.

Having a sport that is perceived as 'dirty' does not help when it comes to attracting larger sponsors. Whether that matters in a sport where sponsorship is mainly aimed at local markets, is a another matter.