Dopey few cast long shadow over Tour
Roar Pro By SamClench, 19 Jul 2012 SamClench is a Roar Pro
- Tagged:
- Bradley Wiggins, Cadel Evans, Cycling, Frank Schleck, Tour de France
2012 Tour de France winner Bradley Wiggins leads a new era of clean cycling. AFP PHOTO / JOEL SAGET
Related coverage
- Tour de France TV schedule news
- 2013 Spring Classics news
- National Road Series news
- 2013 Tour de France news
Very few people will be shocked by the news that another rider has allegedly been caught for doping at the Tour de France. The only surprise is that it took so long for this year’s competition to be marred by another scandal.
Luxembourgish rider Frank Schleck has left the race after testing positive for Xipamide, a banned substance that can assist in weight loss and potentially mask the presence of performance enhancing drugs.
Schleck had been sitting almost ten minutes behind race leader Bradley Wiggins, with absolutely no chance of winning the tour. Even if he had pumped himself full of every super-drug on the planet, Schleck would never have touched the yellow jersey.
The potential reward hardly seems to have been worth the risk. Schleck could definitely use some performance enhancing substances for his brain.
But of course, the reputation of one rider is nothing compared to the embarrassment that this incident will cause for his sport.
There has been a long overdue push to clean up competitive cycling in recent years, with more drug cheats then ever being caught and punished for their actions. Floyd Landis and Alberto Contador have both been stripped of tainted Tour de France victories. And there is now a huge question mark over Lance Armstrong.
But there will always be idiots who try to beat the system, and they ruin the spectacle for everyone else involved. Whenever a rider seems to be winning too easily, your first instinct is to wonder whether he is juiced up on drugs.
This constant suspicion is a real shame, because a clean victory at the Tour de France must rank among the very toughest of sporting achievements. The level of fitness and mental strength required to ride for three weeks on end, scaling towering mountains along the way, is unmatched in any other sport.
Reigning tour champion Cadel Evans is so admired as an athlete because cycling insiders and casual spectators alike are convinced that he races clean. You can see the strain on his face and feel the exhaustion in his legs.
It is obvious that the man struggles, and that makes his effort all the more impressive. For Evans, the difficulty of racing without drugs must make each victory feel infinitely more satisfying.
I would be amazed if Contador or Landis ever felt such genuine satisfaction, yet both stood on the podium in Paris smiling from ear to ear. How could anyone be truly proud of an accomplishment tainted by blatant cheating?
When athletes are caught doping, they bring shame on their sport, their competitors and themselves. It takes a special kind of selfishness to risk all of that for the sake of a coloured jersey.
If Bradley Wiggins does win this year’s Tour de France, thousands upon thousands of fans will regard his triumph with the utmost suspicion, despite a lack of any incriminating evidence.
That is horrendously unfair. But when the deplorable actions of a selfish few bring the entire sport into disrepute, it is entirely unavoidable.
The Roar have special SKODA prize packs to award to Roar of the Crowd writers who send us their thoughts on cycling. Each month we're giving away a prize pack, and at the end you could win a SKODA road bike. Simply submit an article to The Roar and you could win! More details here.
The Crowd Says (22) | Page 1 of Comments
Have Your Say
- Explore:
- Bradley Wiggins, Cadel Evans, Cycling, Frank Schleck, Tour de France
July 19th 2012 @ 8:18am
Dscaper said | July 19th 2012 @ 8:18am | Report comment
Let’s put things into perspective a little shall we?
Not many years ago, there were teams of riders being dragged off buses and out of hotels, al because doping was a huge part of cycling. The tour nearly collapsed in on itself as a result of so many being caught.
Today, we have 1 – yes ONE, cyclist who has been found to have a positive A-sample. We’ll be waiting another 2 or 3 days until the B-sample is tested. The other rider who left the tour under a cloud left due to a case outside the Tour, and not through a positive test within the Tour.
But I’d like to look at the article above and attempt to provide what may be seen as counter-balance.
Quote: “It is obvious that the man struggles, and that makes his effort all the more impressive. For Evans, the difficulty of racing without drugs must make each victory feel infinitely more satisfying.”
This fact is based upon his returning negative to his drug tests – any other reason, be it fan faith, team policy, etc, means nothing in the cold, hard light of day. If returning negative tests is to be the ruler by which cyclist are measured, then you cannot measure other cyclists by anything else but that same ruler. Only one cyclist has returned a positive test – the ruler did it’s job.
I would also highlight the fact that Frank struggled and showed strain on his face. But his A-sample returned positive. If showing emotion and strain whilst cycling is proof that a cyclist isn’t doping, then Voeckler must never have been near a drug; legal or illegal in his life.
Quote: “If Bradley Wiggins does win this year’s Tour de France, thousands upon thousands of fans will regard his triumph with the utmost suspicion, despite a lack of any incriminating evidence.”
Then more fool them. If people are going to argue the burden of proof, and treat someone as guilty first, then there’s no point in going down that road any further. You may as well turn off now, and watch the darts – because if you take away the only one true measure of a cyclist’s innocence and replace it with moral suspicions and theory-craft, then it won’t be the cyclists that have failed, it will be the media and the media-buying public that will have failed them. They cannot win that fight – ever – full-stop.
Quote: “That is horrendously unfair. But when the deplorable actions of a selfish few bring the entire sport into disrepute, it is entirely unavoidable.”
You’re completely right – it is unavoidable – but what you, I and everyone else can do to help is treat cycling with a little more respect for the efforts that they have made since those dark, dark days when the Tour nearly fell apart.
Quote: “Very few people will be shocked by the news that another rider has allegedly been caught for doping at the Tour de France. The only surprise is that it took so long for this year’s competition to be marred by another scandal.”
Firstly, I’m not shocked – infact I’m glad someone was found, because it means the tests are working. But to say you’re suprised it took so long to find one is an indication that taking the view that there are many rather than few. What proof do you have that there are many? Why do you feel it took so long?
As a fan of the Tour for many years (yes, I’m old enough to remember Robert Millar), I think it’s firmly about time that the press started to give up the moral high ground and treat the cyclists who are innocent until proven guilty with a little bit more respect, and stopped with the lazy speculations and ad hominem attacks.
July 19th 2012 @ 12:38pm
Heidi said | July 19th 2012 @ 12:38pm | Report comment
Well say Dscaper. I so disagree a lot of comments in this article, particular this one ‘ Reigning tour champion Cadel Evans is so admired as an athlete because cycling insiders and casual spectators alike are convinced that he races clean. You can see the strain on his face and feel the exhaustion in his legs.’ There is no reasonable logic and fairness in this adjustment. The strain on his face and Exhaustion in his legs, can also mean he is not 100% as good as last year, or he goes against much stronger riders and team this year. If struggles = Clean, does it mean those riders who want to show they are “CLEAN” should have the strain on their face and exhaustion in their legs?
July 19th 2012 @ 2:26pm
SamClench said | July 19th 2012 @ 2:26pm | Report comment
I actually don’t disagree with anything that either of you have said. But both of you are failing to see the issue from the layman’s perspective.
When it comes to the Tour de France, half of the talk in pubs and living rooms is conjecture over who may or may not be doping. Any rider who appears to be doing too well is immediately the subject of suspicion, even if he has never returned a positive drugs test in his life. Your average casual spectator does not automatically accept that a rider is clean because his tests have all come back negative. They speculate one way or the other based on instinct. Is that unfortunate? Yes. Fair? No. But that’s the way it is.
The cycling world has done a heck of a lot right in recent years, trying to clean up the sport. Great progress has been made. There are undoubtedly fewer cheats now than there were before. But it is going to take many years of sustained improvement to stop the constant speculation re doping.
This article is not about having a go at cyclists in general, it is lamenting the fact that the majority of riders, who are clean, still have their accomplishments tarnished by the suspicions that inevitably arise as a consequence of the actions of a few ‘dopes’.
July 19th 2012 @ 9:12am
WoobliesFan said | July 19th 2012 @ 9:12am | Report comment
Dont be so confident. The spoils and glory of winning will drive most to taking banned substances. Great sporting event, but with a shocking drugs history. In other words, just because this dude got caught doesnt reflect or mean squat….lance never got caught but we all know he did it.
July 19th 2012 @ 9:39am
Colin N said | July 19th 2012 @ 9:39am | Report comment
“lance never got caught but we all know he did it.”
Well……I would like to see how that argument stands up in court considering, although he’s been changed, no official judgement has been passed!
July 19th 2012 @ 9:44am
Dscaper said | July 19th 2012 @ 9:44am | Report comment
I remember as a child, a friend once said “That guy over there, he’s a policeman”. I asked how he knew, he responded: “He’s wearing black boots”. *sigh*
Seriously, there’s no helping some folk.
July 19th 2012 @ 10:43am
sittingbison said | July 19th 2012 @ 10:43am | Report comment
ColinN the problem is that Lance WAS caught (1999), but because his cancer survivor story meant big bickies (hehe) to UCI and ASO it got swept under the carpet by concocting the retrospective TUE. So when he was caught again (2001), the first ploy being so successful but flawed by being in the press, they did it again but this time REALLY swept it under the carpet by not even announcing it. Then they didn’t follow protocols when he avoided an OCC test completely in Texas (as testified by his long time mechanic and assistant), followed by the 20 minute shower delay with the Hog waylaying the tester.
And we wont even go into the 2005 retrospective EPO testing of his 1999 samples.
So no ColinN, there are an awful lot of people that have no faith in “official judements”.
July 19th 2012 @ 6:55pm
WobbliesFan said | July 19th 2012 @ 6:55pm | Report comment
Appreciate the supporting facts dude.
The Fan-boys can’t handle the the truth.
July 19th 2012 @ 7:45pm
Colin N said | July 19th 2012 @ 7:45pm | Report comment
But the only fact that matters is whether he is found guilty or not guilty, then legally you wouldn’t risk going around saying: “Lance Armstrong definitely took drugs,” unless you have the evidence to back it up (if you have enough evidence yourself to testify yourself, then good luck with that).
However, I’m generally talking in newspaper speak here though.
Of course there are severe suspicions around Armstrong, but at the moment, it’s like going around saying “John Terry is definitely a racist,” or “Steven Gerrard definitely repeatedly punch that DJ in the face with intent to harm.” Both were found not guilty.
July 19th 2012 @ 11:35am
liquorbox_ said | July 19th 2012 @ 11:35am | Report comment
Schleck is the second rider caught this year, Confidis had a lesser known cyclist found with Anabolic Steroids last week.
I have come to the conclusion that I just dont care anymore, The sport is still enjoyable to watch either way!
Quote-”Reigning tour champion Cadel Evans is so admired as an athlete because cycling insiders and casual spectators alike are convinced that he races clean. You can see the strain on his face and feel the exhaustion in his legs.
It is obvious that the man struggles, and that makes his effort all the more impressive. For Evans, the difficulty of racing without drugs must make each victory feel infinitely more satisfying.”
This will make me possibly unaustralian as we all know Australians dont cheat and it is always an innocent mistake when we take a drug….BUT Could a purely speculative case (like Armstrong) be made that Cadel won on Drugs and the performances this season are clean? Other cyclists who have a sever drop in form are questioned, just as those who surge to top form from nowhere.
I dont think Cadel has anything to do with doping, but if he was from another country many people would suggest otherwise
July 19th 2012 @ 2:29pm
SamClench said | July 19th 2012 @ 2:29pm | Report comment
Agreed, we undoubtedly give Cadel more leeway because he’s an Aussie. But there is virtually no conjecture about Evans doping, from anywhere. So it’s not just an Australian thing. The whole cycling world is convinced that he’s clean, whereas there have been rampant suspicions surrounding quite a few other champion riders in the recent past.
July 19th 2012 @ 1:21pm
HardcorePrawn said | July 19th 2012 @ 1:21pm | Report comment
I’m rather skeptical about the discovery of Frank Schleck’s doping, isn’t there something rather suspect about the elder Schleck being caught, especially as it was his brother who benefited most from Contador’s guilt?
Schleck is claiming that he’s been poisoned and a large part of me is inclined to take him at his word. I’m always rather suspicious of the fans at the side of the road that offer cyclists bottles of water during mountain stages, if one were to have a grudge against a particular cyclist (or in the case of the Schleck brothers, a fan of Contador perhaps?) what’s to stop them slipping something into a bottle and presenting it to them as they struggle up a mountain on a hot day? Interestingly, the drug that Frank tested positive for, Xipamide, is readily available on prescription, and therefore pretty easy to get hold of, throughout Europe.
Also, given his team’s links to Lance Armstrong, and the amount of suspicion now falling on the now-retired American rider, you’d think that RadioShack-Nissan would be doing their utmost to ensure that their riders were cleaner than clean. Or am I being naive?
July 19th 2012 @ 1:36pm
Jay said | July 19th 2012 @ 1:36pm | Report comment
Given the amount of official support they receive, why would a professional cyclist take water from a random fan at the side of the road?
July 19th 2012 @ 2:08pm
HardcorePrawn said | July 19th 2012 @ 2:08pm | Report comment
If they’re going up a mountain, a fair distance from their team car, the Vittel motorbikes, or any other support vehicles, with temperatures in the 30s, and sweat dripping off them, they’ll take a bottle from anyone that’ll offer. Admittedly these usually get used to douse heads and necks rather than for drinking, but still get drunk occasionally when needs must. If you’re watching the tour you’ll see it happen quite often.
July 19th 2012 @ 2:31pm
SamClench said | July 19th 2012 @ 2:31pm | Report comment
There’s no way of knowing for sure how this happened to Frank. At least not yet. If he got this stuff in his system on purpose though, he is officially an idiot.
July 19th 2012 @ 6:58pm
WobbliesFan said | July 19th 2012 @ 6:58pm | Report comment
oh, an illegal substance just “found” its way into his system
Up there with Warnies pill from mum.
come up guys, stop dancing around it ALL the friggin time.
It got into his system because he put it there…because he wanted an advanage….because he wanted to win…..WAKE UP!
July 19th 2012 @ 1:33pm
Aware said | July 19th 2012 @ 1:33pm | Report comment
The only one not under suspicion for doping is Gabriel Gate. Actually, his cooking segment (and the mountain scenery) is the best part of the tour.
July 19th 2012 @ 2:33pm
Sean Lee said | July 19th 2012 @ 2:33pm | Report comment
“Luxembourgish rider Frank Schleck has left the race after testing positive for Xipamide, a banned substance…”
Xipamide, the substance found in Schleck’s urine, is not specifically mentioned on WADA’s prohibited substance list.
July 19th 2012 @ 2:42pm
SamClench said | July 19th 2012 @ 2:42pm | Report comment
True, but we’re getting pretty technical here. It is a “specified substance”, so it is not as serious as say, steroids. There is more likely to be an innocent explanation. But it is still serious enough to warrant his departure from the race.
July 19th 2012 @ 5:34pm
Justin Curran said | July 19th 2012 @ 5:34pm | Report comment
I just wish that the articles written on this website about what’s happening in the races generated as much comment and discussion as the ones about doping.
July 19th 2012 @ 7:14pm
zacbrygel said | July 19th 2012 @ 7:14pm | Report comment
The article is spot on mate. I couldn’t agree more with what you said – great job man!
July 19th 2012 @ 8:18pm
Rhys said | July 19th 2012 @ 8:18pm | Report comment
If I’d have had to bet on someone from Radiosmack getting done, it would have been Horner or Klodden. Both are Bruneel boys from way back. Also, given the mess surrounding Johan Bruneel, and the widely known rift he had with the Schleck boys, there is likely more to this story than meets the eye.
I love the Tour more than ever, but always watch it with the realisation that not every feat of endurance, strength, and gritty determination is necessarily squeaky clean. If Frank Schleck is ultimately found guilty of using a banned substance then he will serve his time as those before him have done. His guilt isn’t my concern, it’s the guilt of some of the ‘old guard’ who are still peddling their tainted trade along Tour roads.