The professional cycling thread

[VEA]

johnxjsc1985 said:

only the noisy minority ,the girl was in tears last night when she was being interviewed. I would be more concerned if she had previous form of doping but she is clean and always has been. I hope she wins so they can all choke on their bile.

Indeed, the hate, spite, jealousy and vitriol being pointed her way are quite frankly disgraceful. Put yourself in her shoes for one minute and have a think about it.

[_dobbo_]

Rich_W said:

I won't be supporting her. And it's a shame. Since like so many others I urged her to the line in 2012 hoping she'd kick past Vos.


Froome had the same trouble with regards to Testers not being able to access him. He pointed out the silliness of it and ACCEPTED it as his problem not to tell the staff that the testers may come and they should send them up. He hasn't had anymore missed tests. Cav had that thing where he was with the BBC and missed an appointment. Again he hasn't had the same problem since.

Maybe Froome and Cav place more emphasis on it than Armistead. Maybe they also don't try and throw some former employee of BC under the bus! Lack of responsibility reminds me of Millar and how "it was so very hard for him and it wasn't his fault".

Possibly, just possibly, the fact that Froome and Cav are pros who are paid millions plays a small part in the difference here? I'm just guessing.

Edit: Actually, also, who did she throw under a bus? The guy who left without anyone telling her? If so, I think your definition of throwing someone under a bus is very, very different to mine. All she did was state a fact.

Edited by _dobbo_ on Friday 5th August 13:26

[London424]

johnxjsc1985 said:

pablo said:

I just love the fact that as an example of how to "do it properly", he quoted an article using a Tinkoff rider!... irony is not lost on this one.

We Brit's do love to build them up and then knock them down. Tragic.

only the noisy minority ,the girl was in tears last night when she was being interviewed. I would be more concerned if she had previous form of doping but she is clean and always has been. I hope she wins so they can all choke on their bile.

The thing is where do you draw the line?

Ohuruogu missed three tests and was banned.
Ferdinand missed a test and was banned.

As a professional athlete surely this is just part of your job?

[_dobbo_]

London424 said:

The thing is where do you draw the line?

Well what you do is you have a governing body. Then you have an appeals process. The governing body hears an appeal then rules on the validity.

Which is what happened here.

Test 1.) Not her fault, the tester was at fault.
Test 2.) Filing error. Sketchy here but she was tested the next day and passed.
Test 3.) Family issue. We aren't privy to the details of this but the appeals panel were and they found this to be acceptable.

Now being really harsh, she's at most got two strikes. The first you can't hold against her.

[London424]

_dobbo_ said:

London424 said:

The thing is where do you draw the line?

Well what you do is you have a governing body. Then you have an appeals process. The governing body hears an appeal then rules on the validity.

Which is what happened here.

Test 1.) Not her fault, the tester was at fault.
Test 2.) Filing error. Sketchy here but she was tested the next day and passed.
Test 3.) Family issue. We aren't privy to the details of this but the appeals panel were and they found this to be acceptable.

Now being really harsh, she's at most got two strikes. The first you can't hold against her.

Fair enough and we could go round in circles so will just leave it at that.

[Rich_W]

JustinF said:

which part of 'she's been cleared of wrong-doing' do you need beating into your thick fking skull?

aww didums. Did the nasty man attack the object of your affection?

tt! Worse, White knight tt! Worse, you'd be singing a different tune if it was Valverde or Contador

I don't believe she's a doper. But I also realise that the first strike was EXACTLY the same as the Froome example. And yet he said "its daft, but its the way it is" If you're a professional athlete. Whereabouts goes hand in hand with that! Cleared of wrong doing by CAS. Does seem a bit of a strange decision. Froome, Farah. They didn't wipe the slate. But the facts are simple. She missed 3 tests in a 12 month window. I don't have an issue with her missing 1 or even 2. But I expect the rules to be held fairly to ALL athletes regardless of who or where they are from. IMO if they wanted to do it properly she should have either had the first case struck off as soon as it happened. And then she (and her people around her) should have done a detailed analysis to make sure she NEVER missed another test.

We can't moan about other nations doing similar if as soon as one of our girls we can find it ok to exonerate.

pablo said:

I just love the fact that as an example of how to "do it properly", he quoted an article using a Tinkoff rider!... irony is not lost on this one.

We Brit's do love to build them up and then knock them down. Tragic.

Not at all. I expect OUR athletes to adhere to the rules far, far better than other nations. We have enough money sloshing around. Armistead's situation shouldn't happen!

TInkoff may be suspect, but Jensen is on Orica now. Its a Rouleur link anyway. But it shows the lengths the clean athletes take to make sure they don't fail their obligations. Mo Farah failed a missed test in very similar fashion. But again, never managed to get all the way to the third strike.

VEA said:

johnxjsc1985 said:

only the noisy minority ,the girl was in tears last night when she was being interviewed. I would be more concerned if she had previous form of doping but she is clean and always has been. I hope she wins so they can all choke on their bile.

Indeed, the hate, spite, jealousy and vitriol being pointed her way are quite frankly disgraceful. Put yourself in her shoes for one minute and have a think about it.

I have given it some thought over the last week. You know what, I'd make damn sure that for the hundreds of thousands of pounds my career would generate. (And LA is one of the higher paid women in the sport) I'd be absolutely sure I filled that app in perfectly every single time. Instead of you know, posting on my verified Instagram account. Especially as Whereabouts is a sodding app on that very same phone!

_dobbo_ said:

Edit: Actually, also, who did she throw under a bus? The guy who left without anyone telling her? If so, I think your definition of throwing someone under a bus is very, very different to mine. All she did was state a fact.

The WADA code is unequivocal

WADA Code From UK ADA site said:

1.3 Core responsibilities
1.3.1 It is the PERSONAL responsibility of each Athlete
(f) to make him/herself availiable for testing at all times upon request

It's her life, her career, her responsibility. Not some lackey from British Cycling. Whilst it was clearly his job, and evidently she wasn't told he had left. Which suggests she wasn't in daily or regular contact with him. Especially since he left in MAY!

_dobbo_ said:

Which is what happened here.

Test 1.) Not her fault, the tester was at fault.
Test 2.) Filing error. Sketchy here but she was tested the next day and passed.
Test 3.) Family issue. We aren't privy to the details of this but the appeals panel were and they found this to be acceptable.

Now being really harsh, she's at most got two strikes. The first you can't hold against her.

Test 1. Cock up. Certainly but it doesn't stop it counting as a strike. Life just isn't fair. That's probably why it isn't 1 strike and you're out.
Tests 2 and 3 didn't factor in CAS, they only appealed test 1.

So love to know how you think the appeals panel decided to accept either of those!


I'm also irritated by the media just accepting it and trying to play her as a victim. As the rower said. If she was Russian...

I'm with Nicole Cooke on all this anyway.

http://nicolecooke.com/my-views-on-lizzie-armitste...

[johnxjsc1985]

Rich_W said:

Test 1. Cock up. Certainly but it doesn't stop it counting as a strike. Life just isn't fair. That's probably why it isn't 1 strike and you're out.
Tests 2 and 3 didn't factor in CAS, they only appealed test 1.

So love to know how you think the appeals panel decided to accept either of those!


I'm also irritated by the media just accepting it and trying to play her as a victim. As the rower said. If she was Russian...

I'm with Nicole Cooke on all this anyway.

http://nicolecooke.com/my-views-on-lizzie-armitste...

sorry to prick your self indulgent bubble but she is there and competing because she is clean and has not missed three tests.

[Rich_W]

johnxjsc1985 said:

sorry to prick your self indulgent bubble but she is there and competing because she is clean and has not missed three tests.

Sorry that you don't understand the rules. Under the rules she missed the first test by not being available when she said she would. Now it's far from perfect. And I commiserate that it happened. But under the current rules. It DOES count as a failed test. The reasons why it counts are obvious. She signed up to this code. It's HER responsibility to abide by it. For all it's flaws. And I'm sure that a professional athlete does read and understand the flaws of the system to avoid falling foul of it?

Bear in mind she can choose ANY hour from the day. And she can change that right up to a very short time before that hour starts. Granted most people choose early morning. But she could have chosen 7pm that day or even lunchtime. After Froome had his issue with a hotel, you'd think shed be made aware of it either by management or by reading the press like the rest of us. And put into place a way to avoid it happening. Her fiancée rides for Sky. He probably knew the story of Froome. I imagine they discussed it at some point in their lives.

Like I said earlier (but all the white knights ignore). I don't think she's a doper.

Ready for a motoring related similie?

The first test is one of those "fks sake" moments you get in life. You're doing 40 in a 30 and get flashed. You get 3 points and get on with your life. If you then got another 6 points for something. You make DAMN sure you don't get done again for a further 3 don't you? Especially if you need your licence for your job. Don't you?

Or do you then wait until you get the ban and then go back and try and get the first 3 points removed by getting legal help and trying to make out it was someone else fault for not telling you it was a 30mph zone? (Or slightly differently that the police didn't tell you that they would be hiding in the bushes down the road?)

But hey, apparently you can't criticise any Team GB athlete if get it wrong... Amazing that Pooley, Harris, Trott, Rowsell Shand, Cooke et al. Have never had this trouble in their careers don't you think.

For the record I think Millar is an excellent road captain. And can read a race very well. He's also a pretty good commentator But I still don't think he should have been in Team GB 2012 squad. Its easy to kick Cycling because of its history. Our athletes cannot expunge the past. And they shouldn't be blamed for it. But they can help get confidence back in the wider world by being 100% above board at all times. Utterly transparent (her scratch from the La Course was "to concentrate on Rio" which is just silly) They are carrying the mantle now. It's their job to show this sport isn't corrupt. That the past will never happen again. That there wont be anyone trying to bend the rules.


Anyway as Sir Chris just said. She's got a mountain to climb now to compete to her potential as she'll be so distracted. I forsee top 10 at best.

[JustinF]

rich says it counts, the relevant authorities say otherwsie, let me pick a side, tt or fact? hmmm tough.

[Magic919]

So bhy in here.

[johnxjsc1985]

its their job to earn a living by winning races and She is on the line cleared to go. I hope she wins I really do just so all the sanctimonious moaners can have a field day.

[WestyCarl]

johnxjsc1985 said:

its their job to earn a living by winning races and She is on the line cleared to go. I hope she wins I really do just so all the sanctimonious moaners can have a field day.

If she does win gold how will the other women lining up next to her who have worked hard not to have 3 strikes feel?

[johnxjsc1985]

WestyCarl said:

If she does win gold how will the other women lining up next to her who have worked hard not to have 3 strikes feel?

sorry to correct you she has two strikes that's why she is starting.

[Rocksteadyeddie]

johnxjsc1985 said:

WestyCarl said:

If she does win gold how will the other women lining up next to her who have worked hard not to have 3 strikes feel?

sorry to correct you she has two strikes that's why she is starting.

John is correct. CAS upheld her appeal against the first missed test, and therefore she is able to compete having only recorded two missed tests. My issue is that she should have a) ensured her phone was not 'on silent' when the testers were trying to contact her during the time she allocated to make herself available for testing, and b) appealed the missed test immediately not almost a year later when facing a ban.

For those who have read the various autobiographies of Tyler Hamilton and David Millar amongst others the 'phone on silent' has a lot of the 'hiding behind the sofa' to avoid the testers knowing you are in your 'glow time' about it. As a lifelong fan of cycling its all too familiar, and while I wish her well, I will take little joy in any Olympic success that she achieves.

[johnxjsc1985]

Rocksteadyeddie said:

John is correct. CAS upheld her appeal against the first missed test, and therefore she is able to compete having only recorded two missed tests. My issue is that she should have a) ensured her phone was not 'on silent' when the testers were trying to contact her during the time she allocated to make herself available for testing, and b) appealed the missed test immediately not almost a year later when facing a ban.

For those who have read the various autobiographies of Tyler Hamilton and David Millar amongst others the 'phone on silent' has a lot of the 'hiding behind the sofa' to avoid the testers knowing you are in your 'glow time' about it. As a lifelong fan of cycling its all too familiar, and while I wish her well, I will take little joy in any Olympic success that she achieves.

she does deserve criticism and rightly so but there has been something of a lynch mob mentality attacking her not only as a cyclist but as a person in her own right. I also think that Womens cycling has not been associated with drugs in the way that the men have . My cycling knowledge goes back to Tom Simpson weaving up the Ventoux so I am aware of the problem and how its become a war between the testers and the suppliers.
she will either ride everyone of her wheel in anger or climb off with her head in pieces after 30mins.

[Granfondo]

Rocksteadyeddie said:

johnxjsc1985 said:

WestyCarl said:

If she does win gold how will the other women lining up next to her who have worked hard not to have 3 strikes feel?

sorry to correct you she has two strikes that's why she is starting.

John is correct. CAS upheld her appeal against the first missed test, and therefore she is able to compete having only recorded two missed tests. My issue is that she should have a) ensured her phone was not 'on silent' when the testers were trying to contact her during the time she allocated to make herself available for testing, and b) appealed the missed test immediately not almost a year later when facing a ban.

For those who have read the various autobiographies of Tyler Hamilton and David Millar amongst others the 'phone on silent' has a lot of the 'hiding behind the sofa' to avoid the testers knowing you are in your 'glow time' about it. As a lifelong fan of cycling its all too familiar, and while I wish her well, I will take little joy in any Olympic success that she achieves.

I believe you have annonimity until the 3rd missed test so basically you have 2 "glow day" passes before it gets serious!

[anonymous-user]

Having seen the quality of women's road cycling I'd be appalled if Lizzie felt the need to cheat to win... Vos and Johansson are the only ones who can compete with Armitstead at the moment.

Any way, some blokes are racing today....

[WestyCarl]

Rocksteadyeddie said:

johnxjsc1985 said:

WestyCarl said:

If she does win gold how will the other women lining up next to her who have worked hard not to have 3 strikes feel?

sorry to correct you she has two strikes that's why she is starting.

John is correct. CAS upheld her appeal against the first missed test, and therefore she is able to compete having only recorded two missed tests. My issue is that she should have a) ensured her phone was not 'on silent' when the testers were trying to contact her during the time she allocated to make herself available for testing, and b) appealed the missed test immediately not almost a year later when facing a ban.

For those who have read the various autobiographies of Tyler Hamilton and David Millar amongst others the 'phone on silent' has a lot of the 'hiding behind the sofa' to avoid the testers knowing you are in your 'glow time' about it. As a lifelong fan of cycling its all too familiar, and while I wish her well, I will take little joy in any Olympic success that she achieves.

Exactly, she's a World Champ with all the support, experience and resources, not a 1st year pro.

To have 3 strikes and then go back and appeal the 1st one so you can compete makes it very difficult for the general public to believe in her.

[London424]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/olympics/2016/08/05/rio...

Pendleton has her say.

[spikeyhead]

193km to go in the Mens RR.

I can't help but think that a couple fewer laps would make for a better race. Tis just too long