Danger Dassie

Have seen USN pushing for some of their products being recognised by both Informed Sport and HFL. Was the original invite to discus accepted? Why post selected private messages instead of the entire string, for context? With respect Jarred, you did go on the attack, going by both twitter timelines, don't accuse someone of being personal when you follow that exact same tactic. That aside, the issues raised can hopefully be answered within the context of other products available out there. So now the ultimate tragedy is can this be pursued objectively? I sincerely hope so.

So granted, Jarrad has some valid questions, which could have been answered had he taken the invitation to discuss. Absolutely it would have been best if USN's CEO have responded that way, despite the provocation. Consequently the whole real issue is getting lost in a cloud of petty bickering and childish remarks. I'm hoping those making such remarks aren't holding any real positions of responsibility, that would be a real example of irony. GJ Powell is providing some proper feed back, so without the trolling, which is bullying really (another irony) it would be good to see some proper interaction and debate with what he's posted.

The post does raise a valid point, everything aside is forthright and constructive. For me I believe Jarrad raised some valid questions, unfortunately the way it was done to provoke reaction leaves a lot to be desired. This kind of post below is irrelevant. "If you are affiliated with USN in ANY matter, your comment is irrelevant."

Rather that than the varying extremes from this year... hot/cold/windy/rain/hot ... yoh.

It was a typo, there was a mix up what with that particular model been ridden and the lower level Genius is currently for retail and also a model in the give away comp. The top end genius is certainly a whack of cash, but the mid and lower level models certainly do represent good value for money on the k30- k50. Albeit still a fair expenditure for many of us. Unfortunately that slipped through on the current issue and both of us who normally proof the mag missed it. Totally our mistake and we really do apologise, given our deadlines on this current issue and extra commitments the human element came in and we made a mistake. No excuse I know, nobody likes their passion to be messed with, once again though, sincere apologies. That aside, definitely some bikes out there that are really expensive, this is true of all sports though. There will always be that market who feels defined more by what their spend on a sport is, rather than the experience. Each to their own, me personally I just enjoy the ride rather, if they're happy, good for them.

Neigh man, have a copy for you!

Afraid I'll be Eshowe over the weekend, so I'm out.

"As much as the programme raises serious questions about Armstrong, it also paints the UCI in a bleak light. Former pro Jorg Jaksche was interviewed about his drug use and admission, and his claims that he tried to provide the UCI with clear information about doping in the sport, but nothing as acted upon. However perhaps more damaging was an account of former WADA president Richard Pound about an exchange he said he had in the past with the UCI’s previous president, Hein Verbruggen. “I said ‘Hein, you guys have a huge problem in your sport.’ He said ‘what do you mean?’ I said ‘the doping.’ ‘Well,’ he said, ‘that is really the fault of the spectators.’ “I said, ‘I beg your pardon...it is the spectators’ fault?’ He said, ‘yes…if they were happy with the Tour de France at 25 k [km/h], it would be fine. But if they want it at 41, 42, the riders have to prepare.’” Read more: http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/13065/Liggett-admits-he-now-finds-it-very-difficult-not-to-believe-Armstrong-took-drugs.aspx#ixzz29NneDjuY

Which threads?

Below is a link to an audio clip of the BBC interview. "Lance Armstrong's lawyer brings a halt to an interview with BBC Radio 5 live's Garry Richardson when the subject turns to lie detectors. Sportsweek presenter Richardson suggests Armstrong could clear his name by taking a lie detector test and, while Tim Herman refuses to rule out the possibility, he calls time on the interview insisting he "needs to run". http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/19941445

Not sure I follow. If the UCI, or people within the UCI are corrupt is becoming clearer by the week. How could USADA or any anti-doping authority take the reigns of a governing body? Is it being suggested that Travis Tygart has designs on being appointed at the head of the UCI? The investigation is into US Postal, which has broader ramifications than JB or LA, we're seeing that already.

The call for lie detectors. http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/oct/14/lance-armstrong-lie-detector-usada?CMP=twt_gu But then, "Asked if Armstrong would take a lie detector test himself, Herman said: "We might do that, you never know." He added later: "I don't know if we would or we wouldn't. We might." Asked what reason there could be for not submitting to a test, Herman added: "Because he's moved on. His name is never going to be clear with anyone beyond what it is today. People are fans, most of the people that I've talked to, this is their opinion, it is: 'We don't care whether he did or he didn't'." Hmm, much double talk and contradiction.

Well that's a broad speculation, it's still a weak legal argument without a sound basis. That's half the problem, there are plenty fans out there not separating emotion. Well the policy/constitution is about to come under severe scrutiny, or rather the application of it. More so if the Kimmage case falls apart.

By what assertion are the witnesses not credible, and most? 11 of the 26 are former pro's, so all 11 (less than half) aren't credible? If that's the argument any defence lawyers run, it's a weak and spurious one at best. Especially in lieu of any material evidence of their own. Guaranteed, the UCI are going to look at the effect on them very closely. Sample vault or not, the UCI cannot restrict access to samples if they come under pressure. Indeed, the issue is far from over, and it sure as hell isn't all about LA. The sport is bigger than any individual or group ever will be.

About that once in a blue moon Breedts time again, can provisionally put me in.

Actually I'm sure the UCI's concern is more than upholding the sanctions, it's must surely also be concerned with what Kimmage can use in his defence against their court action. Haven't heard anything from Ligget either since his rather outrageous statements on the Ballz interview.

I think he needs to stop posturing and do things properly, not as suits him. The lawyer/s needs to decide if they're lawyers or PR/Spin doctors FFS. There's a litany of evidence and information contained in 1000 pages, challenge that instead. But no.

Civil court he said, the point does stand though. People have had criminal records and civil rulings against them, with less for greater offences. 26 people, is a hell of a lot more than "some friends" not all of them are former cyclists with a career to lose either. This USADA evidence in the report is heavily propped by what was already gathered by the federal investigation itself. The opportunity would have presented itself with CAS, LA opted not to go with that option post the federal investigation. The rebuke has continuously been one of a "witch hunt" and USADA not following processes. So why not take the opportunity which was there to provide evidence of this in defence? To date no reasoning or anything near that. I don't see much happening in civil due to the fact that LA himself chose not to defend against the USADA action and carry through to the CAS, which is the legally recognised body for arbitration.

The UCI referring it to their legal could just as well be so as to see how it affects their own ineptitude in the context of the report. That and what could be the ramifications in the legal action brought against Kimmage. Damn those conflicts of interest eh. Things are far from cut and dry for anyone in this.

Quite possibly, the knees shouldn't be so sensitive. Outside of that, the point stands though.

Everyone? He didn't? based on? There seems to be a clear reputation of bullying, but then that's not what this is about. Witch hunt? Of course it's a an over reaction, a witch hunt, in fact it's all one big conspiracy by that association then. Yes? The list of respondents and the report makes it counters the silliness of the above statement. Hint: It's not all about Lance, but a far greater scope of people involved and sophisticated doping ring. LA is but one element, albeit one of the higher profile people in the investigation.

Seperate issue entirely. Or using that logic should everyone just be let off altogether? Fantastic. The real issue at play is the investigation into US Postal and associated persons, just reading the title of the report will tell you that. In fact even before the report was issued, that was clear in USADA's letter of intent.

As was tweeted earlier, this could also give Kimmage some ammo in the court case brought about by Mc Quaid and Verbruggen.

It is sad and tragic, but overall a necessary purge of the sports professional level imo. No glory to be had anywhere here. To paraphrase though, it's not (all) about LA

For any insomnia-maniacs wanting the full read of approx 1000 pages http://cyclinginvestigation.usada.org/