Topic Title

I'm fed up with listening to uninformed twaddle on the radio regarding the current melt-down of our sport at a professional level. Maybe we can have a more enlightened debate on here?

What's the answer? Will you still watch tonight? Where will it end? Do you think it reflects on us? Who do you trust?

i wish they'd leave it out of the news like they ignore the results etc. snooker gets better publicity for god sake! no wonder people have no respect for cyclists. and no, i wont be watching tonight, ill be getting wet in the tt!

Now Mayo is positive for EPO.

I'd like to think that this will change things, but we've been here before and it clearly hasn't. When was the last clean winner of the tour? A long, long time ago I suspect.

I get quite a lot of 'and-what-were-you-on?' type of comments from people here at work. My usual response is that probably in all sports people do what they can get away with in order to get an advantage over others. Only big-time cycle sport has probably more go-faster trick and substance testing going on than most other sports, so more are caught.

Are snooker players tested for taking stuff to stop them falling asleep? I certainly would need a 3 star substance to stay awake watching!!!

An interesting side to this is that children have a finely honed sense of fairness. At least they do when it comes to getting equal treatment. But somehow it all changes into cheating when you can when it concerns games and winning! But those who don't know that cheating has wrecked the enjoyment, and probably will lose interest in playing.

Meanwhile I shall continue to make sure myself always to be last cresting over the tops of ascents so fellow Cliftonites need not raise their eyebrows wondering what WilierWilly had for breakfast!

I think the line between legal and illegal slips easily when a rider comes close to winning. When a rider has had his knees stitched so that he may keep pedalling when also has to question the ethics of the team management. It seems the rewards for winning are enough for the teams to take the gamble.

Me I like to have a large strong black coffee before I set off I think its important to drink something.

Helen

I was kicking myself for not having got organised enough to see any of this year's tour. Then this happened and I am glad I didn't see it. At least I don't feel cheated. I haven't even bothered to see who has been credited with the win. Sad isn't it?

The only pro cycling I watch now is the older stuff. They may have been on something then too, but if it hasn't come out by now I guess it never will, so I can still enjoy it (almost as much as I used to).

I suspect - and this is only on the basis of a relatively recent interest in the sport - that competitors in "the older stuff" were up to their eyes in it. The reason it's not subject to confirmation is that test results aren't available and no-one seems to feel the need to own up - well, apart from a few who are still involved in the sport - Zabel, Riis etc.

Likewise I found this year's shambles demoralising - I was over in France during the final week and each day's press coverage trumped the preceding one in unravelling it all. The attitude over there seemed pragmatic though - the Tour will go on, they said; it should be cleaner, it may be different.

I have very mixed feelings about where it all goes. It's good that better testing and monitoring is catching more riders out, but it's sad that such sophistication is necessary. Teams' "codes of ethics"? Yeah, right. Maybe, just maybe, T-Mobile are all clean now, and maybe, just maybe, CSC. But look at their respective recent histories and think what a change it takes, and look at all the other teams who've yet to make that change.

I was really enjoying this year's Tour. But I just had a feeling Vino was doping. His 'comeback' just smacked of what Floyd did last year; bonked on the day before and blew the field away the day after. Surely even the pros can't recover that quickly??

Then there was Rasmussen. To be honest, I was rooting for him, with Cadel my next 'choice'. But at least Rasmussen was clean (I hope). What gets me is how easy Rabobank just dumped him on someone's word saying that 'they saw him' in Italy when he should have been in Mexico. No proof. Rasmussen could not defend himself. Sure he'd had warnings, but how long had he ridden for Rabobank? How many times has he worn the polka dot jersey? Yet he's sacked, just like that after years of loyal service. The same way Jan was with T-Mobile too. I miss Jan, for me the Tour isn't the same without him, even if his performance was inconsistent.

And poor Brad and the rest of Cofidis who were apparently clean. Especially when they were one of the teams staging that protest.

Hats off to Contador for winning, but personally, for me Rasmussen was the winner.

I'm sick of the drugs and all the big names putting their career on the line (when they are already at the top of their game). But it will always draw me back.

In my opinion, doping will never be stamped out. But I'll still watch the Tour and I'll still ride my bike with the same enthusiasm and love for the sport I've always had.

Peace.

I don't agree Elton - I think Rasmussens as guilty as a puppy next to a pile of sh*t. It simply isn't acceptable to miss out of competition tests - he's a pro cyclist for god sake - he can't have that much to remember!
As for Brad - he should be more careful which team he risks his reputation with - wasn't that the team Millar was with?
Life bans for riders and the team managers are the answer.
To be honest I'm not altogether suprised about the positive tests - perhaps the professional sport has nearly reached rock bottom and the only way is up?

Having started this thread I think the most interesting aspect is how long its taken for any responses - fatigue, can't get head around it?????

Anyway for what its worth my views are:

Cycling is a professional sport - competitors cheat; fottballers dive, cricket tamper with the ball, cyclists dope. That doesn't mean its acceptable of course, but we shouldn't be riunning around like the world's coming to an end either!

Rassa broke the spirit of the rules if not the letter of the rules and behaved as though it didn't matter. Remember he was kicked out by his team after pressure from sponsor - good sign in my book.

Its possible that this Tour has the most credance ever. More tests, more accurate results and importantly, riders not being allowed to get off on a technicality. Add to all the disqualifications during the race all the riders that weren't allowed to ride in the first place! In the "older stuff" Delgado tested +ve for probenicide, a masking agent. This wasn't on the UCI banned list until the end of the month, just the IOC list - so he got away with it and won the Tour. Later Indurain tested +ve for Salbutamol - his successful defence was basically; "how dare you accuse me!" "Oh sorry, our fault Mr I".

The sad thing for me is that the riders don't appear to get it! Its about us, not them. We want to see courage and tenacity, a spectacle. At the end of the day we aren't that bothered who wins. We don't particularly support a team (like in tribal football) and will shout for anyone that goes up the road. They earn our respect or otherwise. If Floyd had not doped last year and had been reeled back in on that infamous stage he would have been a hero and would be now on a big contract....

So the answer for me - more tests, tough penalties, make the results stick and pressure from US through the sponsors. WE have to make it plain what is acceptable or not.....

On the guilty or not guilty debate...

Now I'm no detective, but even when some of the accused aren't speaking English and we only have subtitles it's usually glaringly obvious.

When asked to respond to allegations, the response of some is "I have had no positive tests" and they are semi articulate about that. When asked "have you ever doped / cheated", the body language changes, they look like scared rabbits and they respond with one word answers or re-itterate they have had no positive tests" and that to me screams "GUILTY!"

Granted, it aint scientific and won't stand up in court, but then again Paul's puppy sat next to a pile of s**t could probably get off with the aid of some of these lawyers!

On the general perception of cycling...

It really aint all bad! Rob is right, there are cheats in all walks of life and it's not surprising in the ultimate high profile endurance event that people will still try and cheat. But they are being caught and they are in the minority. In the old days when controls weren't as tight and testing wasn't as tough and regular as it is now, people did get away with it.

It's not fair to attribute the blame to all though for the actions of the minority. The fight is being won and we should stress that. We want to encourage more young cyclists with dreams of one day winning the Tour themselves to believe that you CAN do it and not cheat!

Some comment from sport insider Cervelo's Gerard Vroomen at http://www.cervelo.com/blogs.aspx?id=gv

The constant comparison of doping control in cycling with other sports does not really wash. The thing is that road cycling is 80% physical ability and 15% luck, whereas most other sports (except maybe track and field and rowing) require significant levels of skill. EPO won't turn a reserve team footballer into David Beckham but it could turn a domestique into a race winner. The truth is that most sports don't need to have a drugs policy like ours as, even if doping was widespread, its impact would be minimal.

As I've hinted at before, there are far better ways to cheat at football. Witness the quarter finals of the 06 World Cup. Italy v Australia. Italy were never going to score even if the game went on all year and the match was going towards extra time. In the 90th minute there followed the most blatant Italian dive I have ever seen - penalty - Italy go through and end up winning the whole thing. Italy, World Champions and even more one-dimensional that England and Portugal

Hmmm.. ..but hold on; consensus is that most doping is at an individual, not team, level (although teams often turn a blind eye). Given that most doping presents significant health risks, if there IS widespread doping in footie, why are these sportsmen taking risks with their lives if it gives them no significant advantage? I'm assuming that all those other bags of blood in Dr Fuentes' fridge weren't just there in case Madrid's star centre-forward cuts his finger while signing autographs?!?