|
Alberto Contador Positive
|
| kida |
Posted on 06-02-2012 23:18
|
Domestique
Posts: 405
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
valverde321 wrote:
#3. What about Fuyu Li, what about Alessandro Colo?
#4 Letting him ride after he was found guilty was a disgrace imo. Just because it was someones favourite rider it was a disgrace though that he was being banned (What has this world come to?).......
And they hardly like Conta anyway after chaingate. I would go on record and say they like Voeckler, Rolland and Andy more.
And why bring up Schlecks case? Completely irrelevant.
You either want the sport to get rid of all dopers or for them to all have a free pass, you can't have your cake and eat it. Although there's more chance of the Beatles reformimg than either Schleck getting busted, due to daddy Schleck being friends with uncle Pat. |
| |
|
|
| Lachi |
Posted on 06-02-2012 23:43
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 8516
Joined: 29-06-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Look, if you bring up Schleck, then you would have to bring up all other clients of Fuentes as well. And this would include Contador one more time. I only believe that Contador did not visit Fuentes if he has his blood checked against the blood bags found in Fuentes Lab (and it is proven that is was not his blood). |
| |
|
|
| kida |
Posted on 06-02-2012 23:52
|
Domestique
Posts: 405
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
Lachi wrote:
Look, if you bring up Schleck, then you would have to bring up all other clients of Fuentes as well. And this would include Contador one more time. I only believe that Contador did not visit Fuentes if he has his blood checked against the blood bags found in Fuentes Lab (and it is proven that is was not his blood).
I'm in the camp that supports the ban for Contador, I only wish life time bans were the norm, if that didn't stop doping I don't know what would. The point I was trying to make is this one, you have fans of rider x or y who are happy that Contador is banned and take great delight in posting about it, yet they're somewhat blind when it comes to their favourite rider.
Edited by kida on 06-02-2012 23:54
|
| |
|
|
| Avin Wargunnson |
Posted on 07-02-2012 06:18
|
World Champion
Posts: 14236
Joined: 20-06-2011
PCM$: 300.00
|
issoisso wrote:
Ennyzor wrote:
All of this is true, except for the fact that Contador has not been banned for the use of doping, but due to the fact that he could not prove how he got the substance in his blood.
So its not really fair to label him as a cheater.
What?
You mean he wasn't able to provide an explanation as to why a DOPING SUBSTANCE was found in his fluids.
You are able to bring an explanation of why every substance in your body is in it? I know he is a proffesional sportsman and must be aware of it, but you cannnot deny that this specific substance could have more sources then doping related. I dont know the thruth, you dont know the thruth (if you do,give us your fantastic sources), so stop judging please. If you were bothered to read the verdict, he is banned because of probable food contamination.
|
| |
|
|
| Aquarius |
Posted on 07-02-2012 06:34
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 5220
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
More than one explanation ? Definitely.
But how many credible explanations are there ? Not that many in the end... Contaminated meat ? Unlikely, the meat was traced, none of the cow had any clenbuterol. Blood transfusion ? Likely, but the guy who was to defend that theory was prevented from testifying, so the court ruled it as equally unhappy to the meat theory?
Food complement ? I'm not sure which of them have clenbuterol in it. But I very much doubt it was "accidental". |
| |
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 28-11-2024 18:09
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| DaBobScotts |
Posted on 07-02-2012 08:08
|
Domestique
Posts: 606
Joined: 15-01-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
You do drugs, you get done. But even if he didn't it's only six months 
Edited by DaBobScotts on 07-02-2012 08:10
|
| |
|
|
| kumazan |
Posted on 07-02-2012 08:46
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6662
Joined: 02-07-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
Avin Wargunnson wrote:
issoisso wrote:
Ennyzor wrote:
All of this is true, except for the fact that Contador has not been banned for the use of doping, but due to the fact that he could not prove how he got the substance in his blood.
So its not really fair to label him as a cheater.
What?
You mean he wasn't able to provide an explanation as to why a DOPING SUBSTANCE was found in his fluids.
You are able to bring an explanation of why every substance in your body is in it? I know he is a proffesional sportsman and must be aware of it, but you cannnot deny that this specific substance could have more sources then doping related. I dont know the thruth, you dont know the thruth (if you do,give us your fantastic sources), so stop judging please. If you were bothered to read the verdict, he is banned because of probable food contamination.
If you were bothered to read the verdict you'd see how they never say food contamination is "probable". They only say how it is more likely than contamination via blood doping (not blood doping itself) and via contaminated meat, but still it's not a satisfying explanation, not even for themselves, who can't say this hypothesis is true beyond reasonable doubt. Thing is, they don't have a freaking clue of how the clen ended up in AC's body, and therefore a two year ban is the logical consequence.
Actually, I'm pretty puzzled on how the hell they do arrive to the conclussion that the supplement theory is more likely, as they pretty much pull it out their asses, providing all the info about this is available in the verdict, but that is entirely another matter.
Edited by kumazan on 07-02-2012 08:47
|
| |
|
|
| Eden95 |
Posted on 07-02-2012 09:09
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4505
Joined: 05-10-2010
PCM$: 900.00
|
It was always going to be controversial, They have a No-Tolerance policy to doping, no matter how small the amount found in someone's system is, so he was always going to get band, but as I said, it would be extremely controversial for such a small amount.
But if they didn't ban him, they would have been labelled as hypocrites for letting him go, considering they're no-tolerance policy.
I honestly think the was this was all handled was absoloutely horrible, but I don't think they should have stripped his Giro title, he was clean and tested almost daily for that.
Indosat - ANZ HQ
"This Schleck sandwich is going to cause serious indigestion for Evans" - Phil Liggett |
| |
|
|
| Avin Wargunnson |
Posted on 07-02-2012 09:09
|
World Champion
Posts: 14236
Joined: 20-06-2011
PCM$: 300.00
|
kumazan wrote:
Avin Wargunnson wrote:
issoisso wrote:
Ennyzor wrote:
All of this is true, except for the fact that Contador has not been banned for the use of doping, but due to the fact that he could not prove how he got the substance in his blood.
So its not really fair to label him as a cheater.
What?
You mean he wasn't able to provide an explanation as to why a DOPING SUBSTANCE was found in his fluids.
You are able to bring an explanation of why every substance in your body is in it? I know he is a proffesional sportsman and must be aware of it, but you cannnot deny that this specific substance could have more sources then doping related. I dont know the thruth, you dont know the thruth (if you do,give us your fantastic sources), so stop judging please. If you were bothered to read the verdict, he is banned because of probable food contamination.
If you were bothered to read the verdict you'd see how they never say food contamination is "probable". They only say how it is more likely than contamination via blood doping (not blood doping itself) and via contaminated meat, but still it's not a satisfying explanation, not even for themselves, who can't say this hypothesis is true beyond reasonable doubt. Thing is, they don't have a freaking clue of how the clen ended up in AC's body, and therefore a two year ban is the logical consequence.
Actually, I'm pretty puzzled on how the hell they do arrive to the conclussion that the supplement theory is more likely, as they pretty much pull it out their asses, providing all the info about this is available in the verdict, but that is entirely another matter.
Now we play only with words. Okay, it is not probably, it is more likely than the other possibilities according to the verdict...
Dont get me wrong , i understand why he had to be banned, i have no problem with it, i am just unhappy with the word doping and calling him a doper. How these people who didn't mostly achieved a fraction of what Alberto did are so sure about it and spread the "thruths" they got from the media ?
Call me a naive dumb, but i believe him, as many as his opponents or cycling legends do. If i would not believe in people, who i think deserve it, the world would be very sad place for me. This is all i can say to his case, i will try not to jump anymore when reading something i dont agree with,it will be cleaner here 
|
| |
|
|
| CrueTrue |
Posted on 07-02-2012 09:20
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 29989
Joined: 20-10-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
Let me quote this for you - it's from the announcement made to the press:
"The CAS has found that Alberto Contador was guilty of a doping offence, and the sanction is that Alberto Contador will be suspended for two years"
It's completely fair to call Contador a doper when he's guilty of a doping offence. |
| |
|
|
| jack888 |
Posted on 07-02-2012 09:25
|
Protected Rider
Posts: 1280
Joined: 09-06-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
Do people think the anti-doping scientists wanted to get caught up in this circus? Or that they are out to get Contador more than any other rider?
I think they'd rather Contador just didn't break the rules so they can avoid all this stress and just do their jobs in peace... |
| |
|
|
| rorzcp |
Posted on 07-02-2012 09:45
|
Domestique
Posts: 704
Joined: 21-07-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
I wish they lifetime banned every single doper.
noone would touch the stuff then. |
| |
|
|
| wackojackohighcliffe |
Posted on 07-02-2012 10:37
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7681
Joined: 19-02-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
You'd need prison sentences before it actually worked.
|
| |
|
|
| iambennyboy |
Posted on 07-02-2012 10:40
|
Domestique
Posts: 601
Joined: 10-03-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
rorzcp wrote:
I wish they lifetime banned every single doper.
noone would touch the stuff then.
but it's then easier for people to tamper others, therefore knocking out the competition out of cycling. banning people for life is nonsense unless they done something completely out of the ordinary |
| |
|
|
| kida |
Posted on 07-02-2012 10:41
|
Domestique
Posts: 405
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
wackojackohighcliffe wrote:
You'd need prison sentences before it actually worked.
Agreed, stop banning them for 6 months or 2 years stick them in jail for 5 years and then ban them from riding again when they're rleased from jail, if that doesn't work then nothing will. |
| |
|
|
| CountArach |
Posted on 07-02-2012 10:46
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 8290
Joined: 14-07-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
iambennyboy wrote:
rorzcp wrote:
I wish they lifetime banned every single doper.
noone would touch the stuff then.
but it's then easier for people to tamper others, therefore knocking out the competition out of cycling.
The exact same thing is possible now.
|
| |
|
|
| Aquarius |
Posted on 07-02-2012 11:26
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 5220
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
Eden95 wrote:
I honestly think the was this was all handled was absoloutely horrible, but I don't think they should have stripped his Giro title, he was clean and tested almost daily for that.
No, you don't know that. And neither do I. He didn't return any positive test though. |
| |
|
|
| wackojackohighcliffe |
Posted on 07-02-2012 11:33
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7681
Joined: 19-02-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
And if that's the case then the ban should be two years from yesterday. His ban is backdated so he loses all the results from when he should have been banned, which means he still got to throw up his arms in triumph.
|
| |
|
|
| Eden95 |
Posted on 07-02-2012 11:55
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4505
Joined: 05-10-2010
PCM$: 900.00
|
Aquarius wrote:
Eden95 wrote:
I honestly think the was this was all handled was absoloutely horrible, but I don't think they should have stripped his Giro title, he was clean and tested almost daily for that.
No, you don't know that. And neither do I. He didn't return any positive test though.
Of course I don't know that, nobody knows and never will except Contador and maybe some trusted associates or something. But I was just going from the fact that he didn't return any positive results during the Giro, he may have been doping, but I think that it'd be ridiciolous to do that after the Tour the previous year. But also, he may have though he'd get banned and just went for it.
Also, pardon my spelling etc. from my last post, I was in a rush.
Edited by Eden95 on 07-02-2012 11:56
Indosat - ANZ HQ
"This Schleck sandwich is going to cause serious indigestion for Evans" - Phil Liggett |
| |
|
|
| Aquarius |
Posted on 07-02-2012 12:16
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 5220
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
If you'd be sure not to be caught, would you dope, if you had already doped before ?
I'd say that when you can't conceive cycling without doping, you'd surely dope again and again.
Just speculating of course, but to me, Contador and his likes must think the clenbuterol thing is an accident (yes he took it, purposely, but very probably not during that TDF, and no, he was never meant to be caught with it, which is why it must look like an accident to him/them). So, 2 years for an accident is a harsh price, in their opinion.
I very much doubt it's going to make them change their habits for less dope, but for more control over the way they use it maybe. |
| |
|
