I’m a Collingwood man and I was pretty stoked we got Greenwood so I understand why you’d want to keep him. Bit disappointing that the Roos didn’t instill enough confidence in him to stick around the club.

Higgins may have been brought in to do that and he is a classy player…when he actually plays. Just not consistent enough.

Aaron Black’s a bit of a weird one because he had such a good rookie season but looks like he’s lacked a bit of leadership to see him develop enough over the past two years. It’d be a real waste if he was to be delisted and snapped up by another club and do well because the Roos didn’t put enough effort into him. However, not sure if this is the case, just a perception.

Daw has always promised a lot and I think is worth one last try but its a long shot.

As for delivery into the forward line, a lot of clubs struggle with that. I think it worked for the Roos last year because Petrie and Brown are very good contested marks. But when they aren’t playing well and Lindsay Thomas is being negated by a good defender, they don’t have many other avenues to goal. I think the onus needs to be a bit more on the midfield to kick goals – think Swallow, Dal Santo, Gibson, Bastinac.

Couldn’t agree more. I was a bit incredulous that the Roos picked up him and Shaun Higgins (a player very similar to Waite) as the pieces to complete the puzzle to contend for a premiership. Waite isn’t going to add enough to their forward line that Drew Petrie and Ben Brown don’t do already, likely going to get injured or suspended and, as you rightly said, you have no idea what he’s going to do each week.

Take big forwards like Riewoldt, Cloke, Roughead, Cameron, etc. The club knows they are going to get a contest from all of these guys and that’s all they want. If they take the mark, great, they kick the goal (or miss horribly in the case of Cloke). If they don’t, at least they provide a contest for the small forwards to mop up. Waite seems either unable or incapable to consistently come out and make a contest week-on-week. When he does, he’s as good as any big forward in the game but its few and far between.

As for Higgins, well he’s been too injured during his career to know exactly where he stands but is often in a similar situation to Waite. Can come out and play a blinder for a quarter, then disappears for the rest of the game.

I also had the Ducks hoisting the Cup by beating the Lightning in the Final but happy to see the Blackhawks go through (I reckon they’ll win it in 6 games).
I’m a Canucks fan and, normally, I should hate the Blackhawks. But if I could choose allegiances again, I’d pick the ‘Hawks. I love the way Toews, Kane, Sharp, Hossa, Seabrook and Keith all play. And they have the coolest jerseys in the league.
I also have the Hawks winning it in 6 – too experienced, too classy, too deep for the up and coming Lightning.

Also couldn’t agree more on the first part – we got treated to two epic series that had it all. Great offence and great goaltending, it was awesome to watch. Lundqvist single-handedly kept the Rangers in that series towards the end but the Bolts’ offence was just too much in the end.
As for the Ducks, not sure you could call them chokers for making it all the way to the Conference Finals and Game 7. But they certainly underperformed. With the quality of their roster at both ends of the ice and in net, they should be looking for their 13th to 16th wins of the playoffs, not missing out on their 12th.
Depressing to think that hockey will be over for the a while in a month. Lets hope this series is as good as the Conference Finals!

Not to sound like I’m defending it (I’m not a fan), but it’s better than we had prior (that’s to say nothing). At least it makes it more difficult for riders to pop up out of the blue and blow races away (e.g. Stefan Schumacher, Riccardo Ricco) just because they’re doped up to the eyeballs.
But I agree, it’s poor and unpolished in its current form. it was clearly rushed in by the WADA to make it look like they were doing something for cycling, without really thinking of the finer details that were required to make this system work properly. It’s far too expensive and inflexible to act as a significant policer of the peloton.

I hate to say it, because it’s such an archaic and desperate move, but the only way of really stamping it out is just to hand out longer bans for any sort of infringement. Make TUE’s much more difficult to get. I reckon if you need a TUE to take a banned substance, you shouldn’t be racing anytime soon anyway.
4 year bans are a good step, but I don’t quite think the “stick” is big enough to really discourage people from doping. It certainly takes the rider out for a good chunk of their career, but I’m not sure it’s a big enough discouragement. If you’re going to go down that route, 10 year bans or longer could be a significant enough deterrent to stop the guys “sitting on the fence” from taking the plunge.
But I still don’t think that always looking retrospectively is the way forward. I agree, it would cost millions more and is not the pharmaceutical companies’ responsibility to prevent anti-doping. But surely there is more preventative action that could be taken in this regard. Surely…
Hopefully, once the UCI gets the CIRC kinks worked out, this would provide enough of a “carrot” to break the omerta once and for all.

I agree. But as I said, I don’t think you can just let that be the best thing in the combat against doping. I’m an auditor by trade and we always love to see preventative controls, rather than detective. Otherwise you’re always dealing with problems in hindsight, rather than prospectively.

Yep, considering how quickly it sold out last year. Is Wiggins really passing up the Tour for the Giro this year? Has that been set in concrete?

Agree with you about the players. They are a disgrace. Like you said, it would have taken them less than 5 minutes to come up with three things, write them down and go stick them under Mickey Arthur’s door.

Disagree with you about the punishment. I think they’ve had this coming. After some insipid performances in the previous two tests, they need to draw a line in the sand. If you can’t be bothered doing your bit for the team, then frankly you don’t deserve to play for it. I think the only guy of the four who can legitimately say he doesn’t need to improve much is Patto, who, along with Pup, has been our best player so far this series.

Great article mate. I have to say, I expected things to happen sooner for Richie, given how he held the maglia rosa at the Giro for a few days a couple of years ago. I was rapt when I heard he was leaving Saxo Bank but dismayed that he went to Sky because I always knew he’d play second fiddle to Wiggins, Froome et al.
I think his Paris-Nice performance definitely announces his arrival as a genuine Grand Tour threat. I can’t see him winning the Tour this year but the Giro is certainly friendly enough. I also said I couldn’t see Wiggins winning the Tour last year and he walked it in so I’ve been wrong before.
However, I think while he’s at Sky, he’s always going to be their third leader behind Wiggins and Froome, at least until they get too old to challenge. Having two British riders leading a British team is going to be difficult to break. But I think Richie’s got it in him to make significant in-roads.
Imagine that, goes from being a Tour of Bright winner to a Grand Tour winner, now that would be something!

My mistake, you are absolutely right. He did however ride for Telekom which is nearly as bad.

Verbruggen is no longer in charge so he is of no concern, apart from his damaging comments on the sport. Even if McQuad pledges reform, he’s been doing that ever since he’s taken over from Verbruggen and, apart from the biological passport, which has only just started to take effect (Franco Pellizzotti was the first person to be banned using it), I don’t think they’ve made much in the way of reform. Hell, they’ve only just banned needles from pro cycling teams.

As mentioned in my post, Lamby, that would be the final nail in their corrupt coffin. If they don’t ban him, the cycling community will abandon ship in their droves.

Thanks for twisting my arm, Tristan. Its actually been good inciting a bit of conversation about it. I think the ideas have struck a chord with a lot of cycling fans.

As sittingbison mentioned above, doping was around in the ’80’s and earlier, but the drugs did not have anywhere near the effect that EPO had. You needed drugs merely to survive, so the great athletes were still winning all the races. Since the early-90’s though, there have been a lot of obscure results, guys who were once domestiques were winning big races (e.g. Riis). EPO had such a drastic effect, particularly on riders whose bodies responded well to it.

I can understand your scepticism behind Evans and Wiggins. However, this year’s Tour was not nearly as difficult as any Tour in the last 10 years. Bear in mind that they were missing Contador and Schleck for the whole race, which meant it didn’t break up anywhere near as much in the mountains and the race’s difficulty was much less than 2011. Cadel’s ride in 2011 was outstanding, but remember he was up against Contador, who’d just completed the most difficult Giro d’Italia in history, and the Schlecks, neither of whom can time trial.

As for Armstrong testing positive, as I explained, there are heaps of ways they got around it. Testers actually had to give riders 30 minutes notice before testing them. So riders could deploy saline, blood plasma and a number of different methods to mask the drugs in their system.

Finally, I don’t know much about Barry Bonds, but I understand a lot of it was down to criminal activity and trying to prove it. The burden of proof is much higher so it is very difficult to prove guilt, as it needs to be “beyond reasonable doubt”. However, in a doping case, the burden of proof is much lower, so that you only need to prove what a reasonable person would believe. Here, the evidence is overwhelmingly against LA. He will break out the “I’ve been test 600 times and never failed once” as many times as he likes but the evidence against him is so damning that no reasonable person would believe he didn’t dope.

You and me both, Bobo. You and me both.

Its not the UCI’s decision. USADA have banned and stripped him. The UCI now has a period of time before they must either accept the USADA findings or appeal them to the CAS.

The UCI and WADA would never be able to approve EPO. It would be highly irresponsible of them because, if abused, it is such a dangerous drug.

Thanks mate. I had to be pushed by the guys here at The Roar to write it but I’m glad I got it down on paper now. I think that the guys who did this to the sport need to realise how much they’ve damaged even the most hardcore of cycling fans.

Kev, you’re spot on. I tried using the argument for a while. But the more I thought about it, the more I was able to poke holes in it. Even if, hypothetically, it did level the playing field, it doesn’t make doping right. It is still against the rules.

Written completely from the heart, mate.

I think if you take out all those that have been linked to doping or have been busted over the last 15 years, Sastre would be a 5 time Tour winner. How about that?

Greg, thanks for the comment. I guess I don’t feel the same about Merckx’s actions because I didn’t witness them (I wasn’t born). Whereas I grew to love the sport because of Armstrong.

You are right though, it was not just Armstrong who is to blame. It’s all the dopers and all those who were complicit in it. Its just that Armstrong is the figurehead of this problem and the one I related it to the most.

As always, sittingbison, your reasoned arguments hit the nail on the head. Truth and reconciliation commission will help resolve this issue, but I don’t think the offer of no sanction will be incentive enough for the heavy hitters to come forward. I’m not sure what would be enough but they could just shrug their shoulders and keep to themselves. Maybe, if it is a limited timeframe of a year or something like that, then if there are any positives after that, hit them with a lifetime ban because they would have had their chance to come forward.

I agree that the UCI needs a complete overhaul. McQuaid needs to be kicked out, someone needs to jam a sock in Verbruggen’s mouth before he says something else laughable and they both need to be made an example of what is wrong with the sport of cycling. Both have been so complicit in the lying and cheating over the past 15 years that they should never be allowed to come near the sport again.

As for the doping controls, I honestly can’t understand why WADA doesn’t do all the testing and sanctioning themselves anyway. Giving the power to sanction to the cyclist’s national federation is such a blatant conflict of interest, its a joke.

Good point. I didn’t actually consider Jackson Paine. He’s got a bit of work to do yet but he could develop into a pretty good prospect in the next 2 years.

I’m not sure the argument of him needing to make more money for life after footy applies to Dawes. He’s doing Law at Monash University after all. To do that, you need to be pretty smart. Some valid points made by all above but I stick by my statements.

Also, Dubsanco, I wouldn’t count my chickens before they hatch. He may have requested a trade to Melbourne, but unless they get a deal done, he won’t be going anywhere. He’s still contracted to Collingwood for 2 years, and the Pies would have to de-list him and he’d need to nominate for the national draft if he wants to move somewhere.

Fair enough, a good view to have. I suppose I’m along a similar vein. I believe in their performance, unless it looks suspect (still can’t quite believe Wiggins’ performance this year). But I don’t believe anything that comes out of their mouths anymore when it comes to doping. They’ve lied and duped us for so long, the sceptic in me just refuses to take anything they say on face value.

Hein denying his “Lance never never never doped” seriously nearly made me wet myself with laughter. He is by far and away the biggest lunatic the world has ever seen. I could imagine him quite literally running around with fingers in his ears going BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH.

Sammy Sanchez has had a few shady dealings himself if my memory serves me correctly (wasn’t he investigated after winning Gold at the ’08 Olympics?). Frankly, it doesn’t surprise me he said that, no matter how ludicrous it may seem.

Whoa, with that level of scepticism, I’d be forgiven for thinking sittingbison was a pseudonym for Paul Kimmage! I haven’t completely lost faith in the sport of cycling but I have in the cyclists themselves. Which is such a shame because, as you said, those guys listed above were my heroes. And all of them are cheating scum.