Roar Rookie
Joined December 2013
3.7k
Views
3
Published
10
Comments
Published
Comments
Oh cycling, I love you, but I hate you. 2014 is one of the "new cycling" years, basically like 1998. The blood passport has…
Cycling safety rants, campaigns and petitions have dominated my social media feeds of late... except for Tumblr, of course, which is still cat memes…
A friend today said, "what's with people still writing stuff about Lance Armstrong, does anybody even care about him anymore?" At the time I…
Matt White is a whole different kettle of fish.
If you’re not convinced by a story I think that’s a pretty important thing to publish. Putting out only what an athlete wants “on record” and not attaching caveats in your articles of what is not explained, or what the athlete wouldn’t answer means that you are not giving readers the full story. If t
Dopey excuses are getting old
So the tone of your comments is sortof “I know the full story and you don’t”, ok you’ve talked to these people, but “off the record” discussions are pretty useless to the people reading these articles. You’re basically just asking me to trust you? Spanish news (on SBS) did a huge puff piece on Contador other day, there is kind of a precedent of reporters blindly rallying behind their dopey countrymen.
Secondly, if the evidence in these “off the record” discussions is so convincing, that it makes both of these guys stories so believable, why don’t they want the info “on the record”. I mean it’s got you on side?
Dopey excuses are getting old
Did you ask Hills teammate any further questions about why he was carrying a stimulant on tour? Also did you ask him why he lied to Hill? Did Hills teammate also take the substance on tour? Did Hills teammate also self report? I’m throwing down the gauntlet, let me interview one of these guys, I’ll write up an article and the internet can decide whether “(SBS)” is bringing taxpayers the goods in cycling news
Dopey excuses are getting old
Klaas, the numbers are in, the number of riders who have been the victim of poor statistical analysis is none , the number of riders who have rolled over and admitted am they were geared to the eyeballs is all of them. Just give these old mates a bit of time.
But this isn’t about statistics, I didn’t start this rubbish. Every rider wants to talk about “clean culture”, clean means bread and water, not just below the threshold of pingers to get you pinged at the piss-test. And you have to ask the question, if you’re willing to take a stimulant to win a race, are you also willing to take a steroid? And something to boost the haemacrit? Because the statistics on the nature of doped athletes says yes.
Basically you’re missing the point of clean sport.
Dopey excuses are getting old
Skippy, you’re attitude towards motorists is exactly the issue I’m alluding to.
Saying that motorists are always responsible to prevent accidents and labeling them as bullies is in no way constructive. I suggest that the hostility in your posts is why no-one has signed your petition.
I think possibly reign in the hysteria and gain some perspective on the issue. It’s road safety, it doesn’t require an international umbrella cycling safety organisation, just a bit of understanding and consideration between road users. Being hostile to motorists and apportioning all blame to them, whether that blame is warranted or not, is going to turn them off the dialogue that could go towards forming a positive relationship between road users.
Essentially, I think that the cyclists who is hysterically ranting about drivers bulling them is the lycra version of the motorist hysterically ranting about how they had to slow down to overtake a cyclist.
We need to talk about road safety and prepare to change
On a cycling path yes it’s probably just to talk On the road riding two abreast is often a lot safer (also legal, in all Australian states), in a dual or single lane it prevents cars squeezing past you which can be dangerous as the rider can be clipped by the car. It’s also legal for cyclists to be on the road/two abreast even if there is a bike lane and again, even with a bike lane two abreast is safer, or at least that is my experience, there have been studies which show that motorists make less effort to be aware of riders if there is a bike lane, and lack of awareness is really where accidents happen on the road, with cyclists/cars/pedestrians/any combination of these. Finally bike lanes are often full of debris, glass, gravel, rocks, storm drains, so a bike lane isn’t necessarily problem solved for cyclists. Three abreast isn’t legal on the road and is one of the things I think cyclists shouldn’t do.
We need to talk about road safety and prepare to change
Yeah i think that’s another example of poor behavior by cyclists. I hope riders appreciate that trucks often have issues with seeing cyclists, just because of where the driver is up in the cab etc.
Also for your sake as much as the riders, I hope you don’t run into anyone. I think that could cause multiple lives to be ruined.
We need to talk about road safety and prepare to change
Harry: yes it took me 30-40 lunch breaks but I did eventually get there.
Mr Truth: That’s your opinion, right or wrong. I’m not making the case for clean cycling, nor dirty cycling, I wasn’t really trying to talk about doping specifically. What I am trying to say is that doping is the symptom of the culture of silence, just like sub-prime mortgages were the symptom of a culture of risk taking and poor governance at banks like Bank of America in 2008.
The symptom of doping can and should be combated with testing, but the only way to break the culture of silence is to reveal it fully, take steps to prevent it happening again and then move forward. At the moment in cycling the fraud has been exposed (LA) but only partially, and now everyone seems to have just sortof moved on and many seem to argue that we shouldn’t fully investigate the culture surrounding this period in the sport.
Lance Armstrong, the omerta and truth in cycling
Sorry, half finished comment. The perils of the iphone. Anyway, basically I fully understand that you are in a sticky situation as a cycling reporter, particularly working for SBS. I mean part of your job is to promote Australian cycling, fair enough. I also get that if you put the hard questions to dodgy guys then the likelihood of getting future interviews is pretty low. But if you’re going to put up articles or comments that are not transparent and/or allude to “off the record” information which supposedly ties a very strange set of circumstances together, you can’t expect readers not to be skeptical and not to receive criticism.
I haven’t said anything is not true simply based on my own convictions, I have asked legitimate questions based on information in the initial SBS post as well as information you have provided.
Regarding the NRL/AFL, yeah those sports are dirty, but I don’t want cycling to be a clean sport in relation to those codes, I want cycling to be clean period, and I know I’m not the only one. Regarding Matt White, well he only ever finished way back in the field, bit like Tim Cameron, but his doping sure did make life difficult for the clean guys (Brad McGee?). I also don’t think that the general public opinion is that White’s punishment was fair.
Ok these guys self-reported. But do you honestly think we’d be having this back-and-forth today if Hill hadn’t been tested? What’s the scenario if Hill got a reduced ban for calling up ASADA after his test? A flood of dopers desperate to clear their conscience and stop living a lie? Or maybe just a bunch of juicers saying “it’s ok if you get tested, just ring up and you’ll only get 6 months”.
Dopey excuses are getting old