"I think lance is clean and he would win by even more if the peloton was clean."



Haha now that's funny.

Just out of interest, do you think Lance's teammates are clean?

Gerard.

Until they test positive, or are proven otherwise to have taken banned substances, then as of this point, they are clean.

I'm so sick of this guilty until proven innocent shit. Anyone ever hear of due process?

S. Botero and Oscar Sevilla were studs a few years back when he was riding with the Kelme Team. It makes you wonder if all of the doping stories told by a former rider are true (Manzano). Once they left the team they went to s$%t.

read these if you haven't already... eye opener
http://www.velonews.com/news/fea/5763.0.html
http://www.velonews.com/news/fea/5759.0.html

Maybe they peaked at the wrong time?

---

-----------------------:)
SUPPORT OPERATION REBOUND:
http://www.operationreboundcalifornia.kintera.org/ejs3

Kestrel Syndicate
Macca Fan Club

That's exactly the point I was trying to make. He said Lance was clean and he would win by an even bigger margin if the rest of the peloton was. That is a bit of a non-sensical statement since the rest of the peloton includes Lance's teammates, his ex-teammates, just like some of his current teammates used to ride for other teams. So the whole concept of having this clean guy surrounded by dirty riders is silly. That's why I asked the question, just to see where his reasoning would lead him. Nobody on this forum knows what these riders do, so as you say one has to presume innocence.

And to answer your question, I am sure plenty people have heard of due proces, but it's obviously not nearly as popular as it once was (in sports or elsewhere).

Gerard

Gerard, I was attacking you, it was more of a statement to the greater forum. Sorry if you thought I was getting on your case.

I just really can't believe the accusations people are throwing out there without proof to back them up. Lemond, his behaviour is dispicable...

I've heard of due process. It's something we have in our American justice system.

It doesn't apply outside of the court. If the governing body wants to assume all riders are guilty until they test clean, then that's their right.

Which makes for a sad state of affairs.

Hey, I don't know you and I'm not privy to anything that goes on in your life, but I think YOU'RE using performance-enhancing drugs. I'm going to slander you all over slowtwitch.com and in the media even though I don't have one ounce of proof.

Seems fair, huh?

[reply]Which makes for a sad state of affairs.

Hey, I don't know you and I'm not privy to anything that goes on in your life, but I think YOU'RE using performance-enhancing drugs. I'm going to slander you all over slowtwitch.com and in the media even though I don't have one ounce of proof.

Seems fair, huh?[/reply]


Do you really not get it? Can you really not understand the difference? Or are you just wanting to argue for the sake of it?

It's their sport, and they can decide how they want to run it. If you don't like the rules, don't play.

Now if you just want to slander or libel me, then I have a legal recourse against you.

But if you want me to prove that I'm drug-free before working for you or competing in your sport, then you have that right.

I'm not stupid (and thanks for implying it) I get it just fine. However, I think you missed my point. I was NEVER talking about the Tour, UCI, USCF, etc. I was talking about the people on this board, the media and luminaries in the media (a la Greg Lemond). You're right, the sport's governing bodies can do whatever the hell they want without recourse. However, right now you've got everyone and their grandmother spewing baseless acusations, hence my "sad state of affairs" comment. Essentially you and I were arguing about two different things.

Gotcha. Sorry for implying you are stupid.