Phil, Paul, Bobke. I love you guys. But please take your heads out of your asses

Triathlon Forum
1

First off let me say that I always have and still do love all 3 of these guys. (I can’t stand Trautwig, but that’s another thread). I still love to watch cycling even after all of the crap, and these guys are a big part of it. Bobke cracks the hell out of me. And Paul and Phil have made cycling great to watch for as long as I can remember.

Having said that, I can’t believe what hypocrites these guys have become the last couple of years when it comes to doping allegations.

All of the years Lance was winning and there were allegations against him, they constantly defended him. It was all hearsay, they said. Guilt by association, etc. They even defended his working with Ferrari, saying that until something was proven, it was so unfair that all of these allegations were out there. They practically seemed to be members of his whole propaganda squad.

It seems the day Lance retired they changed their tune. Last year they continually criticized T-Mobile for letting Gonchar ride in the tour when there were “whispers” around that he was involved in the Puerto affair. Practically convicted him on the air. They commented how sad it was when he won the first Time Trial because of this. On several occasions they said that anyone known to have associated with Ferrari should have not been allowed to race either.

This year it is more of the same. They’re damn near saying anyone even suspected should get the boot. Phil just said this morning how good it was that Rasmussen was booted out. He must be a cheat and he hoped he was gone for good. No proof he ever cheated, just circumstancial.

For the record, I don’t doubt for a second Rasmussen was doping. Gonchar probably was too. So was most likely every GC contender for many, many years. Of course there is about 1% of the solid evidence against all of these guys that there is against Lance, but they still defended the guy for years. I don’t know if they were under orders from OLN (VS) to soft pedal on this stuff, or Lance’s lawyers threatened them like everyone else, or maybe they just wanted to play to the American audience, or what the deal was.

Now if you want to flame on me, flame away. This isn’t meant to start the whole Lance debate again - that has been done to death. Just wondering if anyone else has noticed this.

Like I said, I still love these guys, but I find myself yelling at them
on the TV the last couple of years at all of the ridiculous things they
are saying about doping after kissing Lance’s ass all of those years.

2 
I don't think they read the board.
3

I guess Lance was the reason they had (and still have) a job commenting cycling for an american channel.

4

Havig worked in the media for many years myself, I can somewhat sympahtize with the situation commentators such as Bobke, Phil and Paul are in. First and foremost they are HUGE enthusiasts of the sport. It’s be obvious to me that over the years their coverage has been American and Anglo biasd to a certain degree - notice how much more often they spend time talking about the english speaking riders vs. the other riders, and the Americans in particular. I am not sure if they are under orders to do this or it’s just something that they do naturally.

Indeed, this morning all three were very outspoken in their disgust for Rasmussen despite their being no positive test against him.

All that being said, I do enjoy listening to them and their banter back and forth.

5

I think Diablo is spot on. Something tells me that if you could talk to Phil and Paul, off-line and off the record, they would not be so defensive of Lance. They seem like sharp guys, and I can’t imagine that they don’t see the parallels with Lance. They do however know who pays the bills, and that their bill is payed because Americans watch the Tour. Start talking bad about Lance, no more viewers, and no more paycheck.

Paul

6

They don’t just comment on the tour for US tv. In fact they have been commenting for UK tv for the lat 15 years to my knowledge. Sure the Lance era brought more interest (and therefor money) to the gig for them but it’s not their only source nor the original source.

7

I totally agree – it seems to me that they look at Postal/DC riders through rose-colored glasses. Phil posted this on versus this morning:

“The new leader of the race will be young Spaniard, Alberto Contador by 1:53 ahead of Cadel Evans and Levi Leipheimer who is +56 seconds in third. Thank heavens none of these three riders have ever been remotely suspected in dealing with drugs and could now turn out to be the race’s saviors.”

Haven’t I read on ST that Contador was involved in the whole Puerto circus?

8

I know the schools in England have fallen badly behind the last thirty years, but if you are British you are not necessarily English however if you are English you are definitely British.

9

Yeah I believe Contador was mentioned in the Puerto stuff, although I have lost track of who was and wasn’t at this point - who can keep up any more?

Seems kind of silly for Phil to say that these guys are the race’s saviors. I think they were saying that about Basso a couple years back. I hate to say it, but I suspect pretty much everyone at this point. Not saying any of those top 3 are doping, but it sure as hell wouldn’t surprise me if I learned they all were.

That’s another thing about Bob, Phil and Paul. It seems a little
disingenous to me how much shock they have all expressed at Vino and
now Rasmussen (even without any proof for the latter). Come on
guys - you’ve been around the sport far longer than I. You guys
know what’s up. I don’t believe for a second any of them could
possibly be surprised that people are still doping.

10

Ok as much as I love watching STers spew the “facts” they know about doping etc. I think you might be off base when you say there is 1% of the evedence against “these guys” vs. Lance I have to call bullshit. Let’s review the solid evidence: 4 missed out of comp tests, 2 posistve tests for Vino, 2 positive testosterone tests so far at the tour.

I know you think lance just eveded the tests but come on… This isn’t exactly 1%

11

They defended Lance because he never tested positive, never skipped a test and was likely tested more then any other TdF rider in history. To compare him to people who have tested positive or skipped blood tests and then turned around and lied to his own team about where he was is being short sided.

Babe & Hank are not guilty of doing steriods simple because Bonds and McGuire did.

12

Ah Shit. I didn’t want to get into this, but you had to start spreading this crap. First of all, Lance DID test positive in the first stage of 1999. He lied it about then, he continues to state all of the time that he has never tested positive. As for lying to his team, not really true either. He was working with Ferrari for years behind their back.

And what about your last statement??? “…because Bonds and McGuire did.” Those guys never tested positive for anything!!! Of course they used, but how do you defend Lance in one sentence because you say (incorrectly) that he never tested positive, and then convict Bonds and McGuire in the next when they didn’t either???

13

Any cyclist in the world working with Dr. Ferrari is always assumed to be doping by pretty much anyone who knows cycling…However, Lance escapes this fact…how weird eh?!

14

First of all, Lance DID test positive in the first stage of 1999. He lied it about then, he continues to state all of the time that he has never tested positive.

Got anything to back that up?

15

“convict Bonds and McGuire in the next when they didn’t either” I believe under oath they both admitted to it. You are correct that they did not test positive during a test, due to taking “Clear” drugs. I give a lot of credit to Robabank for firing the Chicken under ethics and sportsmanship. Versus legal technicalities keeping Bonds in the game.

I did not know Lance tested positive, why was he not thrown out of the '99 tour?

16

Haven’t I read on ST that Contador was involved in the whole Puerto circus?

You must have missed the “proof positive” of his cleanliness, as Paul noted how “tired” he looked at the end of the last stage, which, in his opinion, only happens when you’re riding clean.

Today’s pre-race show was embarrassing.

17

convict Bonds and McGuire in the next when they didn’t either" I believe under oath they both admitted to it. You are correct that they did not test positive during a test, due to taking “Clear” drugs. I give a lot of credit to Robabank for firing the Chicken under ethics and sportsmanship. Versus legal technicalities keeping Bonds in the game.

McGuire did not admit to anything. Bonds admitted, during sworn Grand Jury testimony, that it was possible that he unkowningly used PEDs in the form of the ‘‘Cream’’ and the ‘‘Clear’’ but he doesn’t know for sure because he never failed a drug test.

18

Only what I have read and what has been reported. Did I see the test results myself? No.

This has been widely reported and written on. His medical form was filled out saying he was not using any corticosteroids or any other medications before the tour. After it was reported that he had tested positive, he continued to deny it. Eventually when he was told that there was an official positive against him, several people on his team (I can’t recall who) have said that they were present in a meeting where it was discussed and they got the team doctor to backdate a prescription for a steroid cream for a saddle sore, which they then claimed was the culprit.

Of course I wasn’t there, so all I know is what I have read. I don’t see any reason for the people who confirmed the story to make it up. And given that Lance sues anyone who so much rankles his feathers, I’m confident he would have sued the people who said this if it wasn’t true. To my knowledge, (correct me if I am wrong) no such suit was ever filed.

19

You have a valid argument, but I would suggest it is not a case of hypocrasy, but a well-founded case of fear.

Armstrong’s aggressive defense of his spotless drug test record is well documented and continues to this day. Any even remotely visible- and I mean pretty darn remotely visible- including casual internet bloggers and armchair columnists- person who casts an aspersion on Armstrong’s well-documented pristine record is subject to scrutiny and possible litigation. No matter how small or insignificant you are.

Make no mistake: Armstrong **never **tested positive for banned performance enhancing drugs. He is the most tested athlete in history.

To say anything else is to indulge in hearsay and risk possible scrutiny and even litigation.

Now, repeat after me- everyone: “Armstrong never tested positive. Armstrong never tested positive. Armstrong never tested positive…”

Be darn tootin sure you got that straight partner, otherwise you might get a 55 gallon drum of Texas legal whoop-ass unleashed on you.

And for the record, I do believe Armstrong is clean. Honest, I really do. Really.

20

“convict Bonds and McGuire in the next when they didn’t either” I believe under oath they both admitted to it.
That is NOT true.