Frank Schleck gets away with it - virtually
Comments
-
2 year bans are not working - as we have seen with decades of cheating. It should be life.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 singlespeed0 -
stickman wrote:2 year bans are not working - as we have seen with decades of cheating. It should be life.
No, the only way to eliminate doping is to have effective testing. The end.0 -
Froomes Edgar wrote:stickman wrote:2 year bans are not working - as we have seen with decades of cheating. It should be life.
No, the only way to eliminate doping is to have effective testing. The end.
Sadly the drug manufacturers will always be ahead of the testers.....always0 -
john1967 wrote: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.
So forget about football (which you raised as an example of a sport that has got it's house in order) and forget about the minor technical issue that the length of ban is not decided by the cycling authorities (which is the issue this thread is about)? It would appear that your argument has fallen apart.
No-one has said cycling doesn't have an image problem and I agree it should be a 2 year ban and have said I hope that it gets appealed by the UCI. However, holding football up as a beacon of goodness was just ludicrous as was saying 'ignore what the papers say football has a good image' whilst then effectively saying cycling has an image problem just look at what the media say. That just smacks of double standards and ignores the problems in football, some of which are more serious than doping.0