Wyatt Earp Posted July 11, 2014 Share Would be my word against theirs. The guys I've referred to are friends. Yes, they cheated. That makes them flawed. But so am I. Exactly. What I have heard over the years is all off-the-record. It wouldn't be ethical for me to use info I have received to out anyone. Just remember one thing.On the Hub people don't have flaws, they are physically, mentally and morally superior. EZRider, lucmccann, dracs and 3 others 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tumbleweed Posted July 11, 2014 Share Just remember one thing.On the Hub people don't have flaws, they are physically, mentally and morally superior. Oops, sorry, I'm actually perfect! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eldron Posted July 11, 2014 Share It's been an interesting read this thread. I for one am not sure what to hope for. Daryl getting off on a technicality for a drug that is pretty difficult to ingest accidentally? Darryl getting done? Not cool when head and heart collide like this.... Edited July 11, 2014 by Eldron Andrew Steer, GaryvdM, Tumbleweed and 3 others 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger Dassie Posted July 11, 2014 Share So is David Walsh He protects his sources as well, and would understand TW. As would Kimmage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rouxtjie Posted July 11, 2014 Share It's been an interesting read this thread. I for one am not sure what to hope for. Daryl getting off on a technicality for a drug that is pretty difficult to ingest accidentally? Darryl getting done? Not cool when head and heart collide like this....With you but then you have to look at the facts....he tested positive aka he is standing over the body with a smoking gun. Now I am not saying he isn't innocent...he will get a chance to prove this, its just that if you look at the history books(doping and cycling) the smart money is that he is guilty. Getting off on a technicality is worst case for me....his defense needs to be sharp. The old contaminated steak / juice / penicillin course is getting stale and I really hope for his sake he has something better to base his defense on than that argument. I am also sure that he is a super nice guy but if he is guilty, well then he deserves what is coming(probably a 2 year ban). He knew the consequences. Being a saffa / maillot jaune owner shouldn't bend our opinions. Edited July 11, 2014 by rouxtjie Danger Dassie, Blackbeard, BigDL and 2 others 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kosmonooit Posted July 11, 2014 Share But doping is not as black&white as drug tests, LA is a case in point. http://youtu.be/VJz4kwm9mXc Testing clean does not mean you weren't doping, and conversely testing positive for a banned drug does not prove you were doping, although that is the belief and implication.There could be a reason. Mick Rodgers is a recent example. http://youtu.be/MT0zvXKIs-c Edited July 11, 2014 by kosmonooit Spoke101 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patchelicious Posted July 11, 2014 Share He protects his sources as well, and would understand TW. As would Kimmage. Ok, so the rights of those who cheat trumps those of the youngsters trying to do it honestly. Makes sense...So that's where it ends. Somebody KNOWS of other doping, but nothing will be done about it because they are friends.... Oh well. Just another day in dopers paradise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patchelicious Posted July 11, 2014 Share Being a saffa / maillot jaune owner shouldn't bend our opinions.Or a "friend". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rouxtjie Posted July 11, 2014 Share But doping is not as black&white as drug tests, LA is a case in point. That is testing positive for a banned drug does not prove you were doping, although that is the belief and implication.There could be a reason. Mick Rodgers is a recent example.Agree what is black and white is that said substance was in your system at time of test. There is no denying that. Your only defense is it got into your system by accident which considering the substance is going to be very hard to prove. Hence my reference to a smoking gun. Danger Dassie 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger Dassie Posted July 11, 2014 Share Ok, so the rights of those who cheat trumps those of the youngsters trying to do it honestly. Makes sense...So that's where it ends. Somebody KNOWS of other doping, but nothing will be done about it because they are friends.... Oh well. Just another day in dopers paradise. Not at all. It's a constant battle, like everything else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger Dassie Posted July 11, 2014 Share Agree what is black and white is that said substance was in your system at time of test. There is no denying that. Your only defense is it got into your system by accident which considering the substance is going to be very hard to prove. Hence my reference to a smoking gun. Very difficult. And lets be honest, it's nothing we haven't heard before over time.It has to be taken on a case by case basis with each athlete though, hopefully something (truthful) does come up in defence. Too much is being looked at from an accidental perspective though I feel, surely or options should be looked at and a purposeful contamination considered. How to find that though and prove it, is something else. Hopefully all these arguments are put forward. Either way, post ruling the final decision will have have to be accepted. rouxtjie 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rouxtjie Posted July 11, 2014 Share Very difficult. And lets be honest, it's nothing we haven't heard before over time.It has to be taken on a case by case basis with each athlete though, hopefully something (truthful) does come up in defence.Too much is being looked at from an accidental perspective though I feel, surely or options should be looked at and a purposeful contamination considered.How to find that though and prove it, is something else.Hopefully all these arguments are put forward. Either way, post ruling the final decision will have have to be accepted.Have to agree dassie, fans / cycling community have become immune against "accidental contamination". This will make it harder for Impey to prove his innocence I reckon and yes...the decision will be final. Danger Dassie 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kosmonooit Posted July 11, 2014 Share The Smoking Gun would be if he had tested +ve for drug that would have enhanced his performance in no uncertain terms and with no doubt whatsoever (ie DG) Yes, the drug in question can be used as a masking agent against PED's, but it is/was also a prescription drug used for purposes that have nothing to with enhancing performance. It should come down to the balance of probabilities, taking into account other factors such as Biological Passport (what does his say?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rouxtjie Posted July 11, 2014 Share The Smoking Gun would be if he had tested +ve for drug that would have enhanced his performance in no uncertain terms and with no doubt whatsoever (ie DG) Yes, the drug in question can be used as a masking agent against PED's, but it is/was also a prescription drug used for purposes that have nothing to with enhancing performance. It should come down to the balance of probabilities, taking into account other factors such as Biological Passport (what does his say?)Disagree....its on the banned list, no if or but....if wada says mcdonalds cheeseburgers are not allowed then that it is what it is. A counter argument is then what did the tests not pick up due it being masking agent. Smoking gun / knife....really doesnt matter. Edited July 11, 2014 by rouxtjie Patchelicious 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kosmonooit Posted July 11, 2014 Share Yes but the banned list is imperfect, what about all them new fangled drugz like Xylon? Was popular in Sochi, Although I think that is banned now. Chemists are one step ahead of the regulators and powers that be. And the presence of some drugs like Clenbuterol (which is banned as we know) can be explained but food contamination. Edited July 11, 2014 by kosmonooit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger Dassie Posted July 11, 2014 Share Disagree....its on the banned list, no if or but....if wada says mcdonalds cheeseburgers are not allowed then that it is what it is. A counter argument is then what did the tests not pick up due it being masking agent. Smoking gun / knife....really doesnt matter. Except that the bio passport could very provide an insight either way. That's one of the reasons it was introduced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts