Puerto trial
Comments
-
Not that I particularly care about high profile sportspeople having a fall from grace, this is intriguing.0
-
Where are those fancy bears when you need them?[Castle Donington Ladies FC - going up in '22]0
-
Perhaps this is a bit unfair, but the bit about WADA not being able to name because of Statute of Limitations seems a little odd. Limitations would stop you from prosecuting a charge, but there's no legal (it seems to me) reason why simply publishing a list of blood matches would be anything other than a factual account. I can see why they might be a little fearful of defamation proceedings ("WADA reported that my blood was part of the Puerto samples, that implies that I am a doper but in actual fact I deny that - I was seeing Dr Fuentes about something completely different so I am suing WADA for a defamation of my character") but that shouldn't necessarily stop them from publishing the "truth".2015 Canyon Nerve AL 6.0 (son #1's)
2011 Specialized Hardrock Sport Disc (son #4s)
2013 Decathlon Triban 3 (red) (mine)
2019 Hoy Bonaly 26" Disc (son #2s)
2018 Voodoo Bizango (mine)
2018 Voodoo Maji (wife's)0 -
If WADA name individual names there is no mechanism for those people to fully defend themselves against charges that will be inferred by the public. Ultimately WADA are there to serve athletes, not public curiosity.larkim wrote:Perhaps this is a bit unfair, but the bit about WADA not being able to name because of Statute of Limitations seems a little odd. Limitations would stop you from prosecuting a charge, but there's no legal (it seems to me) reason why simply publishing a list of blood matches would be anything other than a factual account. I can see why they might be a little fearful of defamation proceedings ("WADA reported that my blood was part of the Puerto samples, that implies that I am a doper but in actual fact I deny that - I was seeing Dr Fuentes about something completely different so I am suing WADA for a defamation of my character") but that shouldn't necessarily stop them from publishing the "truth".Twitter: @RichN950 -
Lubyanka Building, MoscowDeVlaeminck wrote:Where are those fancy bears when you need them?Twitter: @RichN950 -
RichN95 wrote:
If WADA name individual names there is no mechanism for those people to fully defend themselves against charges that will be inferred by the public. Ultimately WADA are there to serve athletes, not public curiosity.larkim wrote:Perhaps this is a bit unfair, but the bit about WADA not being able to name because of Statute of Limitations seems a little odd. Limitations would stop you from prosecuting a charge, but there's no legal (it seems to me) reason why simply publishing a list of blood matches would be anything other than a factual account. I can see why they might be a little fearful of defamation proceedings ("WADA reported that my blood was part of the Puerto samples, that implies that I am a doper but in actual fact I deny that - I was seeing Dr Fuentes about something completely different so I am suing WADA for a defamation of my character") but that shouldn't necessarily stop them from publishing the "truth".
Clearly need a wider remit0 -
Dammit, I really want that Champions League trophy from 2006..... I want names!Warning No formatter is installed for the format0
-
No, not really. This was an event 12 years ago. Barely anyone involved is still riding - the one we all know about people are generally Ok with.Shirley Basso wrote:RichN95 wrote:
If WADA name individual names there is no mechanism for those people to fully defend themselves against charges that will be inferred by the public. Ultimately WADA are there to serve athletes, not public curiosity.larkim wrote:Perhaps this is a bit unfair, but the bit about WADA not being able to name because of Statute of Limitations seems a little odd. Limitations would stop you from prosecuting a charge, but there's no legal (it seems to me) reason why simply publishing a list of blood matches would be anything other than a factual account. I can see why they might be a little fearful of defamation proceedings ("WADA reported that my blood was part of the Puerto samples, that implies that I am a doper but in actual fact I deny that - I was seeing Dr Fuentes about something completely different so I am suing WADA for a defamation of my character") but that shouldn't necessarily stop them from publishing the "truth".
Clearly need a wider remit
This sport needs to let go of the past. History won't be changed. Focus on the present.Twitter: @RichN950 -
Joelsim wrote:little ring needed wrote:Joelsim wrote:Not sure that Hamilton stole much really, they were all at it, it was the culture.
You could be right, there are certainly a lot of Lance fanboys who applaud that kind of thinking. Darned Europeans, bin cheatin' for generations, then us Yanks come over there and cheat like they do, but only we are good and do it better and beat them and suddenly they get all moral on us. Lance was not doin anything Bugno, Indurain, Fignion Zulle or any of the others weren't doin. Can't see what all the fus is about. Just makin him a scapegoat.
Or do you need a fence with heroes on one side, Floyd, Tyler, Levi, Big George and Barry and on the other "we was all sweet and innocent until he made us do it - evil bully Lance !" Just Lance.
It is exactly this deformed and dislocated thinking that allowed the time to pass from 1998 to 2006 without doping becoming a crime in Spain. It does not matter. Yes it does, it is stealing somebody's livelihood.
I agree with the level playing field thing, it is up to the authorities to stamp it out. As far as I can tell from reading many books on the subject, Verbruggen & Co systematically covered things up. Riders then have no choice but to do it, or fall by the wayside. The reason I don't like LA was because he was a bully, Simeoni, LeMond, Andreu, Hamilton and a whole peloton full of others who got in his way or threatened to break the omerta.
Wot joel said0 -
And yet Wiggins ........RichN95 wrote:
No, not really. This was an event 12 years ago. Barely anyone involved is still riding - the one we all know about people are generally Ok with.Shirley Basso wrote:RichN95 wrote:
If WADA name individual names there is no mechanism for those people to fully defend themselves against charges that will be inferred by the public. Ultimately WADA are there to serve athletes, not public curiosity.larkim wrote:Perhaps this is a bit unfair, but the bit about WADA not being able to name because of Statute of Limitations seems a little odd. Limitations would stop you from prosecuting a charge, but there's no legal (it seems to me) reason why simply publishing a list of blood matches would be anything other than a factual account. I can see why they might be a little fearful of defamation proceedings ("WADA reported that my blood was part of the Puerto samples, that implies that I am a doper but in actual fact I deny that - I was seeing Dr Fuentes about something completely different so I am suing WADA for a defamation of my character") but that shouldn't necessarily stop them from publishing the "truth".
Clearly need a wider remit
This sport needs to let go of the past. History won't be changed. Focus on the present.0 -
Jesus it was a joke. Inseine and now you.
Lighten up.0 -
How is that relevant in any way?Vino'sGhost wrote:
And yet Wiggins ........RichN95 wrote:
No, not really. This was an event 12 years ago. Barely anyone involved is still riding - the one we all know about people are generally Ok with.Shirley Basso wrote:RichN95 wrote:
If WADA name individual names there is no mechanism for those people to fully defend themselves against charges that will be inferred by the public. Ultimately WADA are there to serve athletes, not public curiosity.larkim wrote:Perhaps this is a bit unfair, but the bit about WADA not being able to name because of Statute of Limitations seems a little odd. Limitations would stop you from prosecuting a charge, but there's no legal (it seems to me) reason why simply publishing a list of blood matches would be anything other than a factual account. I can see why they might be a little fearful of defamation proceedings ("WADA reported that my blood was part of the Puerto samples, that implies that I am a doper but in actual fact I deny that - I was seeing Dr Fuentes about something completely different so I am suing WADA for a defamation of my character") but that shouldn't necessarily stop them from publishing the "truth".
Clearly need a wider remit
This sport needs to let go of the past. History won't be changed. Focus on the present.Twitter: @RichN950 -
Just not the same is it0
-
unless Fuentes gives up the names cant see this going far. Cant see any top name footballers being implicated, is it even possible to get DNA now the bags are over 12 years old0
-
I don't think we're particularly interested in naming any remaining cyclists, but are interested in having the stars of other sports have their reputations tarnished having cheated their way to glory with impunity, and their sports haven't had their names dragged through the mire either. Some justice0
-
Dorset Boy wrote:I don't think we're particularly interested in naming any remaining cyclists, but are interested in having the stars of other sports have their reputations tarnished having cheated their way to glory with impunity, and their sports haven't had their names dragged through the mire either. Some justice
Yeah, this is it for me too. Definitely have one pal who is sport daft, he's into everything except cycling because 'cycling is full of drug cheats'
Would be really interesting to see how rife it has been in other major sports even though I'm sure many of us have a hunch. But as others have said above, given what's at stake, is it really all going to come to light? Probably not.0 -
reported that WADA know who 11 of the athletes are now but statute has expired so nothing will be released
https://www.cyclingnews.com/news/wada-i ... on-puerto/
Kind of makes me wonder why anything has been announced really if nothing will happen0 -
This does seem to be the perception of the general public - cycling is inextricably linked with doping. As usual, and despite the lack of athletes from any sport being named, this story is under the cycling section of the BBC website... It’s easy to say that this is small fry compared to the other public perception problems created by the media, but there’s little doubt that cycling is negatively affected by the media’s treatment of the sport.hanshotfirst wrote:'cycling is full of drug cheats'
Heard roadside in Harrogate: ‘Armstrong got banned because he made all his teammates take steroids’. It’d be interesting to see their reaction if the Puerto names were published.0 -
thegibdog wrote:
This does seem to be the perception of the general public - cycling is inextricably linked with doping. As usual, and despite the lack of athletes from any sport being named, this story is under the cycling section of the BBC website... It’s easy to say that this is small fry compared to the other public perception problems created by the media, but there’s little doubt that cycling is negatively affected by the media’s treatment of the sport.hanshotfirst wrote:'cycling is full of drug cheats'
Heard roadside in Harrogate: ‘Armstrong got banned because he made all his teammates take steroids’. It’d be interesting to see their reaction if the Puerto names were published.
Possibly. "well that's why the premiership is the best in the world, they don't take drugs."0 -
thegibdog wrote:their reaction if the Puerto names were published.
Football is a game of skill, doping has no effect etc. etc.
Cycling has ever been a convenient euro*-whipping boy to people who don't want to look under their own carpets...much like the EU that way...
(*particularly when none of "out lot" did it...)We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
- @ddraver0
