Chicken sings
Comments
-
FocusZing wrote:raymond82 wrote:That's probably how many implicated regard the situation. They are innocent until enough evidence makes their situation untenable.
In that case I wonder how to value the book and the revelations that are in there. I usually think that the caught dopers have little reason to lie, contrary to what the accused say that haven't been caught yet. But while it can all be denied, what's the point? I have to admit I enjoy the gossip side of it too but mainly I would be so happy if we truly find out everyone was doped in that era, some sort of reduction in punishment is agreed on and we can all move on. And I can cheer again for Contador without having to defend it.
That would be my thought too, but they need enough evidence to avoid litigation. I expect it was written in a style to not name names to avoid this, just generalised implications.
It's just sensational twaddle. How the hell does the Chicken know he could have dropped Ribs by 2" (what ifs).
The book would have been gone over to the 'nth degree by the publishers lawyers. None of this 'the entire Rabo '07 squad were on the sauce' lark as although Rassmussen might have reason to believe that to be the case, the ability to provide cast iron evidence in the face of a law suit, is pretty damn important to anyone but the most risk-taking publisher. However let Chicken loose uncensored on an online forum or a live tv show, and I can see sweat breaking out on his lawyers' brow very fast.0 -
I have to say I haven't watched the news on tv but the newspaper websites do report on it. Of course they asked Weening who just said that Rasmussen got frustrated after loosing the case against Rabobank. I don't think it's as big as with Boogerd, but then again some newspapers had been working on revealing Boogerd for years and he actually gave an interview for dutch tv, very much like Armstrong. In the end I think people understand and don't really blame him since it's so clear that was how things went back then. The only thing I didn't like is how he made it sound like it wasn't all that bad and that the doping use was only occasionally. And the fact that Erik Dekker is still out there keeping his mouth shut, these two were the most prominent dutch riders of that era I think.
That brings me to another point that fascinates me though, I tend to think of it as an era but it all overlaps. People like Boonen en Cancellara who are not very often accused of using doping were already winning lots of races during these times.0 -
The book would have been gone over to the 'nth degree by the publishers lawyers. None of this 'the entire Rabo '07 squad were on the sauce' lark as although Rassmussen might have reason to believe that to be the case, the ability to provide cast iron evidence in the face of a law suit, is pretty damn important to anyone but the most risk-taking publisher. However let Chicken loose uncensored on an online forum or a live tv show, and I can see sweat breaking out on his lawyers' brow very fast.
hahaha that's probably true, it just shows that it's unlikely we'll ever get to know the whole truth unless riders are questioned under oath. Interestingly though when a dutch commission asked (former) riders under anonymity they found that 90% of the riders admitted to using doping.
Here's an example of how little attention the Weening case gets in dutch newspapers:
http://www.volkskrant.nl/vk/nl/2698/Spo ... eerd.dhtml0 -
We have been made aware of certain allegations put forward regarding Pieter Weening.
We have asked Pieter to fully re-confirm his legally binding written statement to the team regarding his career and these issues before and after joining the team, specifically with regards to the current allegations.
The team is also aware that Pieter has made himself fully available to any formal inquiry by the Dutch Federation and will follow up when these have been concluded, should there be a relevant reason to.
-OricaContador is the Greatest0 -
ddraver wrote:It's going to be harder to publish it in english given the UK Libel laws....(that said I ve no idea what the Danish libel laws are like)
UK's libel laws are generally regarded as the toughest in the world.
Which is a big reason why David Millar's book was very guarded re names except the likes of Ricco and Vandenbroucke.
Changes even had to be made to the version of The Secret Race published here.0 -
We have been made aware of certain allegations put forward regarding Pieter Weening.
We have asked Pieter to fully re-confirm his legally binding written statement to the team regarding his career and these issues before and after joining the team, specifically with regards to the current allegations.
The team is also aware that Pieter has made himself fully available to any formal inquiry by the Dutch Federation and will follow up when these have been concluded, should there be a relevant reason to.
-Orica
How should that be judged? I don't think he'll be the first to lie on one of these statements, anyway if Rasmussen is right than he did lie before. He probably knows there's no hard evidence so he'll deny what Rasmussen said, that's at least what he did to the press. I realize now I'm assuming that Rasmussen is telling the truth simply because he has less to loose than Weening...0 -
We have been made aware of certain allegations put forward regarding Pieter Weening.
We have asked Pieter to fully re-confirm his legally binding written statement to the team regarding his career and these issues before and after joining the team, specifically with regards to the current allegations.
The team is also aware that Pieter has made himself fully available to any formal inquiry by the Dutch Federation and will follow up when these have been concluded, should there be a relevant reason to.
-Orica
How should that be judged? I don't think he'll be the first to lie on one of these statements, anyway if Rasmussen is right than he did lie before. He probably knows there's no hard evidence so he'll deny what Rasmussen said, that's at least what he did to the press. I realize now I'm assuming that Rasmussen is telling the truth simply because he has less to loose than Weening... Didn't Hesjedal also sign something similar when joining Garmin? Or do they have a special legal statement where if you confess but keep it indoors they won't fire you?
EDIT: my apologies for the double post, my internet connection and/or my laptop are giving me a hard time...0 -
Cyclists will only come clean if they have to. Armstrong swore under oath he did not dope. Lets see some cyclists now own up to taking PEDs who are in the prime of their racing life. It's not going to happen. Riders know which other riders are doping. Look at Armstrongs rivals they hold no grudge against LA because they doped as well.
It's just something no rider will admit to unless they are caught.0 -
“Desperate needs lead to desperate deeds,” Weening said. “Rasmussen comes up with different stories every time. He declared something else when he was under oath at the court. It’s obvious he is frustrated because he lost the case against Rabobank.”
Rasmussen received €665,000 in damages when a court found that Rabobank wrongfully sent him home from the 2007 Tour de France while the Dane was in the yellow jersey. Both parties appealed the decision and when Rasmussen eventually lost, he had to re-pay the original sum.
Grischa Niermann, who was also part of the 2007 Rabobank Tour de France team has also reacted to Rasmussen's statement that 100% of the team was on doping. “I don’t know where he gets that from,” the now-retired German rider said on national television. “I can say for myself that I only received vitamins and supplements from the team doctor but no banned substances.”Contador is the Greatest0 -
raymond82 wrote:We have been made aware of certain allegations put forward regarding Pieter Weening.
We have asked Pieter to fully re-confirm his legally binding written statement to the team regarding his career and these issues before and after joining the team, specifically with regards to the current allegations.
The team is also aware that Pieter has made himself fully available to any formal inquiry by the Dutch Federation and will follow up when these have been concluded, should there be a relevant reason to.
-Orica
How should that be judged? I don't think he'll be the first to lie on one of these statements, anyway if Rasmussen is right than he did lie before. He probably knows there's no hard evidence so he'll deny what Rasmussen said, that's at least what he did to the press. I realize now I'm assuming that Rasmussen is telling the truth simply because he has less to loose than Weening... Didn't Hesjedal also sign something similar when joining Garmin? Or do they have a special legal statement where if you confess but keep it indoors they won't fire you?
EDIT: my apologies for the double post, my internet connection and/or my laptop are giving me a hard time...
Well, that's certainly the case as far as JV's concerned. But I think that anything contractual Slipstream-wise is around doping whilst on the team, rather than any nasties from the past.0 -
"He declared something else when he was under oath at the court."
That is actually an interesting point, also the the fact that he might be frustrated could count. From what I understood the court case in the end was about millions of euros. It looks like Niermann is taking the same route as Weening. It is quite confusing anyway, I had gotten used to the idea of riders doping with support from the team of some sort also at Rabobank, especially with all the accusations against Leinders.But I think that anything contractual Slipstream-wise is around doping whilst on the team, rather than any nasties from the past.
This sounds like a much more sensible policy than the one that Sky has, where team leaders are fired for admitting doping use in the 90s...0 -
raymond82 wrote:"He declared something else when he was under oath at the court."
That is actually an interesting point, also the the fact that he might be frustrated could count. From what I understood the court case in the end was about millions of euros. It looks like Niermann is taking the same route as Weening. It is quite confusing anyway, I had gotten used to the idea of riders doping with support from the team of some sort also at Rabobank, especially with all the accusations against Leinders.But I think that anything contractual Slipstream-wise is around doping whilst on the team, rather than any nasties from the past.
This sounds like a much more sensible policy than the one that Sky has, where team leaders are fired for admitting doping use in the 90s...
Which team leaders have been fired? Oh, a coach and a DS.
To be honest, Vaughters has made a screwup here. He and Garmin presented Hesjedal as a clean rider winning the Giro clean - not as an ex-doper (which Vaughters and Garmin knew very well to be the case) winning the Giro clean. Whether or not you believe Hesjedal was clean when he won it, the obfuscation means that for some there's now a taint and another entry to the list of GTs won by riders who are know to have doped in their career.0 -
I checked again and he wasn't fired but Steven de Jongh did resign when he was forced to sign a statement that he had never been involved with doping and then confessed to trying EPO in 1998 while riding for Rabobank. Now he's working for Riis, of all people!
EDIT: The other one was Sean Yates. Team leader was maybe too direct a translation from dutch, should have said coach...0 -
raymond82 wrote:I checked again and he wasn't fired but Steven de Jongh did resign when he was forced to sign a statement that he had never been involved with doping and then confessed to trying EPO in 1998 while riding for Rabobank. Now he's working for Riis, of all people!
And like Julich, continued to draw a salary until he found another team - which was 3 months later in his case, and a little longer in Julich's.
Here's the deal. If there is one, just one, rider who tests positive during their time on that team, the team will be closed down - according to insiders. The connection to the entire GB track set up would be damaged by association, the sponsorship of the sport in the UK would be affected.
They've taken a hard(er) line since last Oct. That's their perogative. The sponsor calls the tune. Their set-up is totally different to Garmin's. You could say that OGE's is a little similar to Sky's with Gerry Ryan putting so much sponsorship into Cycling Australia, but it actually pales in comparison. And that Vance review was an utter farce designed mainly so that someone else could say that they should be allowed to bring back Matt White.0 -
To be honest, Vaughters has made a screwup here. He and Garmin presented Hesjedal as a clean rider winning the Giro clean - not as an ex-doper (which Vaughters and Garmin knew very well to be the case) winning the Giro clean. Whether or not you believe Hesjedal was clean when he won it, the obfuscation means that for some there's now a taint and another entry to the list of GTs won by riders who are know to have doped in their career.
I guess you're right, but there's a taint on any rider who wins a GC lately even when there's no evidence at all. If you believe that the peloton is cleaner these days and blood passport etc make it more difficult to dope (which I tend to do) then the Vaughters strategy appeals more to me. But you're right that then it would be better to present him as a previous doper, encourage other previous dopers to do the same and then move on.Here's the deal. If there is one, just one, rider who tests positive during their time on that team, the team will be closed down - according to insiders. The connection to the entire GB track set up would be damaged by association, the sponsorship of the sport in the UK would be affected.
Thanks for pointing that out, I hadn't really looked at it from that angle to be honest but it might very well be the most important one. In that sense it's a good thing I guess, it's extra pressure along with all the blood tests etc for riders to be clean these days.0 -
Teams cannot control any single rider who decides he wants to dope. He will find a way. Just like an alcoholic will find a drink.They can keep an eye on riders at training camps and at races but if someone wants to do something it's almost impossible to stop them. I tend to believe most riders dope anyway and pro cycling has turned into a hypocritical farce.0
-
rayjay wrote:Teams cannot control any single rider who decides he wants to dope. He will find a way. Just like an alcoholic will find a drink.They can keep an eye on riders at training camps and at races but if someone wants to do something it's almost impossible to stop them. I tend to believe most riders dope anyway and pro cycling has turned into a hypocritical farce.
Have you thought about contributing to this:
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/forumdisplay.php?f=20
I think you might actually find some stimulating brains over there. Some great ideas on who's doing what and how, too. You'd be amazed what you could learn0 -
I have to say I don't feel like "Chicken tonight"0
-
still good tv spectacle: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WRqxW9Jyt8 .TailWindHome wrote:Wasn't watching in 2007
But if you just present me with the photos above and ask who the doper was with fire in his legs I'd have to say the one in the white. The rider in the yellow looks like he's about to go backwards very quickly...
Must look out the you tube clip.
Like FF says the images are from this stage 15. Rasmussen's quote about dropping Bertie by 2 minutes was about stage 17, less viewing spectacle.0 -
Richmond Racer wrote:
Here's the deal. If there is one, just one, rider who tests positive during their time on that team, the team will be closed down - according to insiders. The connection to the entire GB track set up would be damaged by association, the sponsorship of the sport in the UK would be affected.
Fair summary. What's interesting is the same standards don't apply to BC itselfFckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
iainf72 wrote:Richmond Racer wrote:
Here's the deal. If there is one, just one, rider who tests positive during their time on that team, the team will be closed down - according to insiders. The connection to the entire GB track set up would be damaged by association, the sponsorship of the sport in the UK would be affected.
Fair summary. What's interesting is the same standards don't apply to BC itself
Cant have everything0 -
Richmond Racer wrote:rayjay wrote:Teams cannot control any single rider who decides he wants to dope. He will find a way. Just like an alcoholic will find a drink.They can keep an eye on riders at training camps and at races but if someone wants to do something it's almost impossible to stop them. I tend to believe most riders dope anyway and pro cycling has turned into a hypocritical farce.
Have you thought about contributing to this:
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/forumdisplay.php?f=20
I think you might actually find some stimulating brains over there. Some great ideas on who's doing what and how, too. You'd be amazed what you could learn
I was not trying to get in on your posts. I was just finding it a bit boring and decided to throw in a spanner in the works hoping for a change of direction. No offence meant. Don't really appreciate the snobby response but I suppose people of an higher intellect etc etc yawn yawn0 -
still good tv spectacle: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WRqxW9Jyt8 .
Really awesome to see this, this kind of riding is what made me like Contador so much but in general it's great to watch. Of course I don't know what to think of it anymore and I think attacks like these are very rare the last couple of years.0 -
They were...until the baby faced South African came along and starts racing faster than anyone before with his distinctive 200rpm cadence and head facing down. Fast but devoid of style. Not sure how the younger fans are supposed to be motivated by it. Still, there are Nibali and Quintana and after a small handful of very exciting younger riders.Contador is the Greatest0
-
frenchfighter wrote:They were...until the baby faced South African came along and starts racing faster than anyone before with his distinctive 200rpm cadence and head facing down. Fast but devoid of style. Not sure how the younger fans are supposed to be motivated by it. Still, there are Nibali and Quintana and after a small handful of very exciting younger riders.
I agree. We're on the cusp of a golden age. The wild, unpredictable, feral spirit of the High Veldt riding at the head of androids in dire need of a IT dept visit, vs the finest, tried and tested Old Skool methods from Eastern and Southern Europe....a rare 100% loyal Pro Race poster. A poster boy for the community.0 -
Macaloon wrote:frenchfighter wrote:They were...until the baby faced South African came along and starts racing faster than anyone before with his distinctive 200rpm cadence and head facing down. Fast but devoid of style. Not sure how the younger fans are supposed to be motivated by it. Still, there are Nibali and Quintana and after a small handful of very exciting younger riders.
I agree. We're on the cusp of a golden age. The wild, unpredictable, feral spirit of the High Veldt riding at the head of androids in dire need of a IT dept visit, vs the finest, tried and tested Old Skool methods from Eastern and Southern Europe.
He he
0 -
this does make me wonder about Contador though how could he put in those digs against someone as dirty as Rasmussen and still be clean ?
It's notable that these days he can't seem to put in a sting like he could which makes me think he may be cleaner now and the sport may have some future0
