Frank Schleck gets away with it - virtually

stickman
stickman Posts: 791
edited February 2013 in Road general
Should have got a lifetime ban, not a slap on the wrist by a malnourished gnat.
Bikes, saddles and stuff

http://www.flickr.com/photos/21720915@N03/
More stuff:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/65587945@N00/

Gears - Obscuring the goodness of singlespeed
«1

Comments

  • alihisgreat
    alihisgreat Posts: 3,872
    wrong section.
  • stickman
    stickman Posts: 791
    Why? There has been numerous postings on Armstrong's cheating here.
    Bikes, saddles and stuff

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/21720915@N03/
    More stuff:
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/65587945@N00/

    Gears - Obscuring the goodness of singlespeed
  • Mikey23
    Mikey23 Posts: 5,306
    One year backdated ban... Not quite getting away with it I would have thought
  • john1967
    john1967 Posts: 366
    Mikey23 wrote:
    One year backdated ban... Not quite getting away with it I would have thought[/quote

    Are you having a laugh.Football gave Rio Ferdinand a 9 month ban for missing a test yet cycling fails to set an example.
    This decision is pathetic.
  • stickman
    stickman Posts: 791
    He'll miss the tdf which no-one would have expected him to win but he'll be in the Vuelta when most of the big names may be worn out from the season. Net result looks more like a reward.
    Bikes, saddles and stuff

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/21720915@N03/
    More stuff:
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/65587945@N00/

    Gears - Obscuring the goodness of singlespeed
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 40,465
    john1967 wrote:
    Mikey23 wrote:
    One year backdated ban... Not quite getting away with it I would have thought[/quote

    Are you having a laugh.Football gave Rio Ferdinand a 9 month ban for missing a test yet cycling fails to set an example.
    This decision is pathetic.

    Citing football as an example of being tough on doping?!! I'm amazed the testers even turned up for Rio.
  • john1967
    john1967 Posts: 366
    Football has its doping house in order were as cycling is still struggling to get its anti drugs message across.Weak punishment like this don't do cyclings image any good.
  • alihisgreat
    alihisgreat Posts: 3,872
    stickman wrote:
    Why? There has been numerous postings on Armstrong's cheating here.

    and they're in the wrong section too?
  • john1967 wrote:
    Football has its doping house in order were as cycling is still struggling to get its anti drugs message across.Weak punishment like this don't do cyclings image any good.

    Football fan are we?

    Only reason I ask is if you google football & drugs testing the top 20 items either relate to the PFA not wanting to bring in home testing for players, FIFA dismissing failed drugs tests as a public health issue or a handful of newspaper reports all citing similar issues.

    Whilst I agree that Frandy's ban was too light & I'm all for tighter bans in the sport (but thats my opinion and slightly off topic) a rider should only be banned from the date of the incident with the real issue being how slow the system seems to be getting to a conclusion.
    Pain hurts much less if its topped off with beating your mates to top of a climb.
  • thegibdog
    thegibdog Posts: 2,106
    john1967 wrote:
    Football has its doping house in order
    It certainly does!! :)
  • stickman
    stickman Posts: 791
    I used to be able to say to people: look how cycling's sorting out the cheats compared to all the other sports. It's been a few years since then. It seems to be softer and softer nowadays. I hated the Vuelta being tainted by Contador last year.
    Bikes, saddles and stuff

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/21720915@N03/
    More stuff:
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/65587945@N00/

    Gears - Obscuring the goodness of singlespeed
  • Mccaria
    Mccaria Posts: 869
    Wenger doesn't seem to think football has its act together

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2013 ... corruption

    I think he also avoided some players coming out of Italy where he had concerns on some of the figures they were putting out in tests.

    In the Feuntes case isn't there comment on him being in Germany when there was no cycling event on, but there was a rather big football tournament? Also the comments by the various presidents of Real Sociadad on their links to Fuentes doesn't exactly inspire confidence.

    If you look at the recent Australian report on drugs in sport, antler secretions use in American football and golf (VJ Singh take a bow), Murray calling for blood testing in tennis etc etc I wouldn't be relying on too many sports getting a clean bill of health.

    My favourite testing regime is the NBA, where, if I understand it correctly, a player can only be tested 4 times in a season. Accordingly once they are through 4 tests they can then use whatever substances they want with total confidence through to the end of the season. Imagine how bad the Vuelta would be if a 4 tests a year rule was introduced into cycling !
  • RonB
    RonB Posts: 3,984
    Mccaria wrote:
    Imagine how bad the Vuelta would be if a 4 tests a year rule was introduced into cycling !

    Might want to think about rescheduling the Worlds too!
  • gpreeves
    gpreeves Posts: 454
    Mccaria wrote:
    Wenger doesn't seem to think football has its act together

    Danny Mills doesn't seem to think so either

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/england/9858898/Former-Leeds-and-England-defender-Danny-Mills-says-players-would-do-almost-anything-to-get-an-edge.html

    With the rewards on offer for winning, it seems naive to assume they wouldn't also be using illegal methods to get an edge. Does anybody know how strict the drug testing regime in football actually is?
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 40,465
    john1967 wrote:
    Football has its doping house in order were as cycling is still struggling to get its anti drugs message across.Weak punishment like this don't do cyclings image any good.

    :lol::lol::lol::lol:

    Have you seen how few tests are done in football considering all the people playing each week? They don't have a bio passport and as far as I know they don't do blood tests. It's easy to make your house look to be in order when no-one is looking in the cupboards or under the bed. The Schleck decision is bad and I am hoping it gets challenged but to hold football up as a shining beacon is laughable.
  • mike6
    mike6 Posts: 1,199
    Backdated ban? Sounds like a let off to me.
  • shinyhelmut
    shinyhelmut Posts: 1,364
    Backdated to the date on which he withdrew from racing doesn't seem unreasonable.

    It should by rights be a two year ban, or lifetime if you don't believe his training plan excuse for the money transfer to Fuentes.
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 40,465
    Backdated to the date on which he withdrew from racing doesn't seem unreasonable.

    It should by rights be a two year ban, or lifetime if you don't believe his training plan excuse for the money transfer to Fuentes.

    Exactly. Back dated here is fine as he was suspended as soon as he tested positive. The 1 year ban however is wholly inappropriate and should be appealed. We have seen plenty of examples now of national ADA doing this sort of thing.

    This isn't a cycling problem, it is a problem of national ADAs refusing to properly punish their biggest name sport stars. I suspect that had Messi been a Luxembourg footballer and committed a similar offence then the result would have been much the same.
  • john1967
    john1967 Posts: 366
    Pross wrote:
    john1967 wrote:
    Football has its doping house in order were as cycling is still struggling to get its anti drugs message across.Weak punishment like this don't do cyclings image any good.

    :lol::lol::lol::lol:

    Have you seen how few tests are done in football considering all the people playing each week? They don't have a bio passport and as far as I know they don't do blood tests. It's easy to make your house look to be in order when no-one is looking in the cupboards or under the bed. The Schleck decision is bad and I am hoping it gets challenged but to hold football up as a shining beacon is laughable.

    And the last player tested positive for performance enhancing drugs was?
  • thegibdog
    thegibdog Posts: 2,106
    john1967 wrote:
    And the last player tested positive for performance enhancing drugs was?
    Ah, the Armstrong defence!
  • shinyhelmut
    shinyhelmut Posts: 1,364
    I think Marion Jones used that one too :wink:
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 40,465
    john1967 wrote:
    Pross wrote:
    john1967 wrote:
    Football has its doping house in order were as cycling is still struggling to get its anti drugs message across.Weak punishment like this don't do cyclings image any good.

    :lol::lol::lol::lol:

    Have you seen how few tests are done in football considering all the people playing each week? They don't have a bio passport and as far as I know they don't do blood tests. It's easy to make your house look to be in order when no-one is looking in the cupboards or under the bed. The Schleck decision is bad and I am hoping it gets challenged but to hold football up as a shining beacon is laughable.

    And the last player tested positive for performance enhancing drugs was?

    In the UK there is currently one player on the banned list the same as cycling. That list suggests both codes of rugby and athletics are the worst offenders. But that doesn't show the full picture, cycling has more stringent testing than football. Football doesn't have blood testing as FIFA / UEFA feel there may be ethical issues. The Puerto investigation was basically derailed when doping in Spanish football was uncovered and Fuentes received several death threats if he spoke out. In the 1999-2000 season testers turned up at 32 matches out of over 3,500 testing two players from each tam - that's 128 players out of a potential 400,000ish. It's simple to have a clean sport if you don't go looking for the dirt, maybe cycling should take the ostrich approach too then they could claim to have got their house in order :roll:
  • john1967 wrote:
    Pross wrote:
    john1967 wrote:
    Football has its doping house in order were as cycling is still struggling to get its anti drugs message across.Weak punishment like this don't do cyclings image any good.

    :lol::lol::lol::lol:

    Have you seen how few tests are done in football considering all the people playing each week? They don't have a bio passport and as far as I know they don't do blood tests. It's easy to make your house look to be in order when no-one is looking in the cupboards or under the bed. The Schleck decision is bad and I am hoping it gets challenged but to hold football up as a shining beacon is laughable.

    And the last player tested positive for performance enhancing drugs was?

    The entire Barcelona team..................but of course you wouldn't know anything about that.

    Someone who should know, clearly disagrees with you.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/articl ... z2KR1x8RsL

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/footba ... ed-up.html
    "Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.
  • john1967 wrote:
    Football has its doping house in order were as cycling is still struggling to get its anti drugs message across.Weak punishment like this don't do cyclings image any good.


    Bwahahahahahahaahhahahahahhaha

    Today's news.
    I have a policy of only posting comment on the internet under my real name. This is to moderate my natural instinct to flame your fatuous, ill-informed, irrational, credulous, bigoted, semi-literate opinions to carbon, you knuckle-dragging f***wits.
  • john1967
    john1967 Posts: 366
    Oh it was in the papers so it must be true.The bottom line is that cyclings reputation at pro level is screwed.Handing a pathetic ban to schleck does nothing to alter that rep.I don't give a toss about football or footballers but the sport has an overall clean image whatever you hear in the news.
    I do however pity Cav and company who are tarnished yet again by a sport they love.
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 40,465
    john1967 wrote:
    Oh it was in the papers so it must be true.The bottom line is that cyclings reputation at pro level is screwed.Handing a pathetic ban to schleck does nothing to alter that rep.I don't give a toss about football or footballers but the sport has an overall clean image whatever you hear in the news.
    I do however pity Cav and company who are tarnished yet again by a sport they love.

    But cycling did it's job in Frank's case. He tested positive in a race and was suspended. The case was then handed by the UCI to Luxembourg's anti-doping agency and it was their panel that accepted Frank's argument of contaminated supplements which, as the supplements weren't available for testing, breaches WADA's code on strict liability. The UCI and / or WADA can appeal the ban and hopefully will. That is what happened in the Contador case when the Spanish ADA let him off. The UCI could do a better job on the detection front but lenient sentences aren't their fault (unless they don't try to appeal them).

    As for football having a clean image, as I've said before if you don't look closely you won't find dirt.

    EDIT I don't think you read that report did you? It's a direct report from the Fuentes case not 'paper talk'
  • john1967 wrote:
    Oh it was in the papers so it must be true.The bottom line is that cyclings reputation at pro level is screwed.Handing a pathetic ban to schleck does nothing to alter that rep.I don't give a toss about football or footballers but the sport has an overall clean image whatever you hear in the news.
    I do however pity Cav and company who are tarnished yet again by a sport they love.

    Besides, bribery and match fixing is a much bigger problem in football than drugs.
    (Well, until they start to take the problem seriously, that is.)
    "Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.
  • john1967
    john1967 Posts: 366
    Forget about footballl its big enough and rich enough to look after its self.Instead listen to the recent radio 5live interview with Cav in which he spends 15 minutes deflecting questions about doping.Cycling still has a long way to go if it really wants show its cleaning up its image.The technical details of Schleks case are immaterial,it should be a 2 year ban.
  • john1967 wrote:
    Oh it was in the papers so it must be true.The bottom line is that cyclings reputation at pro level is screwed.Handing a pathetic ban to schleck does nothing to alter that rep.I don't give a toss about football or footballers but the sport has an overall clean image whatever you hear in the news.
    I do however pity Cav and company who are tarnished yet again by a sport they love.

    Did you bother to read the link I posted? Let me summarise for you: The president of a La Liga club told the press 'we were doping for years, when I took over the club we were paying Eufemiano Fuentes £290,000 a year' What does it take to get your head out of the sand?
    I have a policy of only posting comment on the internet under my real name. This is to moderate my natural instinct to flame your fatuous, ill-informed, irrational, credulous, bigoted, semi-literate opinions to carbon, you knuckle-dragging f***wits.
  • john1967 wrote:
    Oh it was in the papers so it must be true.The bottom line is that cyclings reputation at pro level is screwed.Handing a pathetic ban to schleck does nothing to alter that rep.I don't give a toss about football or footballers but the sport has an overall clean image whatever you hear in the news.
    I do however pity Cav and company who are tarnished yet again by a sport they love.

    Overall clean image except what you hear in the news, what about sleeping with players wives, drunk driving, rape the list goes on & this is what you call an overall clean image :?:
    Pain hurts much less if its topped off with beating your mates to top of a climb.