jcza Posted October 12, 2012 Posted October 12, 2012 The one thing I'm amazed by is the fact that Nike are standing firm behind him One other thing, did he possibly get cancer from all the doping/ blood transfusions he has allegedly had/ done? Nike should drop him but I guess it's their decision. It has been mentioned before that the doping could have caused the cancer. They were years ahead of anyone else at US Postal with their doping programme.
jcza Posted October 12, 2012 Posted October 12, 2012 Bertagnolli testomony - http://thegaviafiles.tumblr.com/post/33378795535/the-bertagnolli-testimony-a-look-into-ferraris-world
Tumbleweed Posted October 12, 2012 Posted October 12, 2012 The one thing I'm amazed by is the fact that Nike are standing firm behind him One other thing, did he possibly get cancer from all the doping/ blood transfusions he has allegedly had/ done? HGH could have contributed to it. Although steroids are used in diseases which cause tissue to waste away, I seem to remember reading somewhere that some steroids can cause tumours to grow. Lance's cancer was said to be very aggressive, so I wonder…
andydude Posted October 12, 2012 Posted October 12, 2012 What is sure is these are watershed times for cycling - if not for all sport. For me this is the most important to take cognisance of. It happens in all sports, and if you don't believe that you're very naive. The fact remains that the odds are stacked against the organisations trying to clean a sport, as the money on the other side is just so much more. It's simple economics. The only real way to get caught is through investigations like the one done by USADA and relying on witnesses. If you're actually caught with illegal substances in your body, you and/or your doctor is pretty stupid. Many athletes across sport codes have demonstrated that it's easy to cheat the system and that never being tested positive doesn't mean you're not. Myra 1
fandacious Posted October 12, 2012 Posted October 12, 2012 So despite a ban for working with schumi, pozatto just signed with lampre for 3 years. Business as usual then it seems
TNT1 Posted October 12, 2012 Posted October 12, 2012 So despite a ban for working with schumi, pozatto just signed with lampre for 3 years. Business as usual then it seems But schumi is retiring. Hamilton's taking his place at Mercedes, so what difference does it make?
jcza Posted October 12, 2012 Posted October 12, 2012 So despite a ban for working with schumi, pozatto just signed with lampre for 3 years. Business as usual then it seems Yip no change and it will continue until such time as there is a clean out at UCI
GrumpyOldGuy Posted October 12, 2012 Posted October 12, 2012 The one thing I'm amazed by is the fact that Nike are standing firm behind him Hmm, yeah, they must still see value somewhere, otherwise I cant see whats the reason, but then they also stuck with Tiger Woods when a number of his sponsors jumped ship, although Tigers fall from grace was not as dramatic and more a personal issue, perhaps they saw he could still and has redeemed himself, so yeah they made a wise decision there and will reap the rewards for years to come. However LA is very different, basically he is an athlete without a platform as he has been banned from competing, so apart from him wearing his Nike sunnies at some low key event somewhere in Tucson Arizona, I cant see where they are getting value and the potential fall out from bad publicity is also very real. Maybe its just Nike culture to stick with their athletes no matter what..........but I suspect they will slowly start to unravel ties and drift away from LA over time, in a year or two they would have moved away completely.
TNT1 Posted October 12, 2012 Posted October 12, 2012 Hmm, yeah, they must still see value somewhere, otherwise I cant see whats the reason, but then they also stuck with Tiger Woods when a number of his sponsors jumped ship, although Tigers fall from grace was not as dramatic and more a personal issue, perhaps they saw he could still and has redeemed himself, so yeah they made a wise decision there and will reap the rewards for years to come. However LA is very different, basically he is an athlete without a platform as he has been banned from competing, so apart from him wearing his Nike sunnies at some low key event somewhere in Tucson Arizona, I cant see where they are getting value and the potential fall out from bad publicity is also very real. Maybe its just Nike culture to stick with their athletes no matter what..........but I suspect they will slowly start to unravel ties and drift away from LA over time, in a year or two they would have moved away completely. Or it could be he has something in his contract with them that says something along the lines of no actual positive test means they stay with him.
GrumpyOldGuy Posted October 12, 2012 Posted October 12, 2012 Or it could be he has something in his contract with them that says something along the lines of no actual positive test means they stay with him. Yeah, could be. The crunch time will be when they come to the end of the contract, somehow I dont think they will renew.
surferchickie Posted October 12, 2012 Posted October 12, 2012 My opinion, leave him alone. What is done is done. Why bother - hulle krap obviously waar dit nie jeuk nie - let bygones be bygones! seriously! they are acting up like old women with wet pants.... seriously!
jcza Posted October 12, 2012 Posted October 12, 2012 My opinion, leave him alone. What is done is done. Why bother - hulle krap obviously waar dit nie jeuk nie - let bygones be bygones! seriously! they are acting up like old women with wet pants.... seriously! I don't agree. Whoever is found guilty should be punished and UCI should have a clear out. No matter how uncomfortable it is. Time is always right do to the right thing.
tombeej Posted October 12, 2012 Posted October 12, 2012 My opinion, leave him alone. What is done is done. Why bother - hulle krap obviously waar dit nie jeuk nie - let bygones be bygones! seriously! they are acting up like old women with wet pants.... seriously! How did surfer chickie find herself in Pretoria?
surferchickie Posted October 12, 2012 Posted October 12, 2012 I don't agree. Whoever is found guilty should be punished and UCI should have a clear out. No matter how uncomfortable it is. Time is always right do to the right thing. well - then they shouldve done this while he was still racing! obviously someone wasnt doing there job back then - right is right and wrong is wrong - agree! but still, if you do something wrong now, you cant be punished after 55 years from now, you should be punished now!
surferchickie Posted October 12, 2012 Posted October 12, 2012 How did surfer chickie find herself in Pretoria? havent you seen the last wave ride up here?
Kranky Posted October 12, 2012 Posted October 12, 2012 (edited) My opinion, leave him alone. What is done is done. Why bother - hulle krap obviously waar dit nie jeuk nie - let bygones be bygones! seriously! they are acting up like old women with wet pants.... seriously! Reminds me of this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHmvkRoEowc Edited October 12, 2012 by Goobacks petatodd 1
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now