|
The Contador Poll
|
| sam1196 |
Posted on 15-05-2011 17:01
|
Protected Rider
Posts: 1372
Joined: 11-10-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
The title says it all.
VINO VINO VINO VINO VINO VINO VINO VINO VINO
|
| |
|
|
| doddy13 |
Posted on 15-05-2011 17:08
|
Team Leader
Posts: 7104
Joined: 04-03-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
If he gets banned it should be for 2 years. Thats what they are serving up to everyone else. Why should he be any different?
There's no point slapping a schleck - Sean Kelly on "Who needs a slap"
|
| |
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 17-12-2025 23:43
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| Anonymer |
Posted on 15-05-2011 17:09
|
Domestique
Posts: 484
Joined: 20-07-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
Is there even a possibility of a 1 year ban ? |
| |
|
|
| doddy13 |
Posted on 15-05-2011 17:12
|
Team Leader
Posts: 7104
Joined: 04-03-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Anonymer wrote:
Is there even a possibility of a 1 year ban ?
yep.
There's no point slapping a schleck - Sean Kelly on "Who needs a slap"
|
| |
|
|
| CrueTrue |
Posted on 15-05-2011 17:19
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 27880
Joined: 20-10-2006
PCM$: 200.00
|
Anonymer wrote:
Is there even a possibility of a 1 year ban ?
Colo got a 1 year ban for clenbuterol. |
| |
|
|
| sam1196 |
Posted on 15-05-2011 17:34
|
Protected Rider
Posts: 1372
Joined: 11-10-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
doddy13 wrote:
If he gets banned it should be for 2 years. Thats what they are serving up to everyone else. Why should he be any different?
That's also my view of the case.
VINO VINO VINO VINO VINO VINO VINO VINO VINO
|
| |
|
|
| kumazan |
Posted on 15-05-2011 17:37
|
Team Leader
Posts: 6195
Joined: 02-07-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
He should get 2 years. I think he'll get 1, though. |
| |
|
|
| sam1196 |
Posted on 15-05-2011 17:39
|
Protected Rider
Posts: 1372
Joined: 11-10-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
kumazan wrote:
He should get 2 years. I think he'll get 1, though.
We should already be happy with 1 year, still 2 years would be justice.
VINO VINO VINO VINO VINO VINO VINO VINO VINO
|
| |
|
|
| Stijn_vranken |
Posted on 15-05-2011 17:59
|
Sprinter
Posts: 1543
Joined: 28-03-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
2 damn years just like anyone else
prevent hangovers --> stay drunk
pozzato, basically the most stupid cyclist around
RIP WW. Gone but not forgotten
|
| |
|
|
| cactus-jack |
Posted on 15-05-2011 18:13
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3648
Joined: 31-07-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
If he is guilty then a lifetime ban would be preferable, however since you can't get that we'll have to hope for 2 years. |
| |
|
|
| sam1196 |
Posted on 15-05-2011 18:25
|
Protected Rider
Posts: 1372
Joined: 11-10-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
cactus-jack wrote:
If he is guilty then a lifetime ban would be preferable, however since you can't get that we'll have to hope for 2 years.
You mean you prefer no 2nd chance for dopers?
VINO VINO VINO VINO VINO VINO VINO VINO VINO
|
| |
|
|
| owks |
Posted on 15-05-2011 18:38
|
Stagiare
Posts: 208
Joined: 24-07-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
Let Say he is ban for 2 years , will the X months of suspension he got from August to ??? (I don't really know when the ban stopped) counts in the 2 years ban ? Or in the 1 year ban ? If that the case the 1 year ban will not last long... |
| |
|
|
| Roman |
Posted on 15-05-2011 18:44
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 4279
Joined: 29-05-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Only option = 2 years. Everybody gets 2 years for doping. So why he should get only 1 year or nothing?
|
| |
|
|
| cactus-jack |
Posted on 15-05-2011 18:48
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3648
Joined: 31-07-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
sam1196 wrote:
cactus-jack wrote:
If he is guilty then a lifetime ban would be preferable, however since you can't get that we'll have to hope for 2 years.
You mean you prefer no 2nd chance for dopers?
Yes, I mean that if they've gone so far as to take dope then I see no reason why they should be given a second chance. What they basicly get is a 2 year training period where they don't have to take time out to compete. |
| |
|
|
| cactus-jack |
Posted on 15-05-2011 19:29
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3648
Joined: 31-07-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
superider2010 wrote:
let's be real
if cactus jack don't want doppers to have second chance
then why he don't scream at danilo di luca?he is a fresh returned doper
ricco it's the most stupid doper
armstrong the most doped rider(in 1999 a urine test show he was doped,ulrich doped 2 times and still couldn't beat armstrong)
but cactus jack it's just anti-contador
and to keep this note
i know contador it's sometimes doped,but andy schleck was the equal of contador on TdF 2010 montains
contador it's strong even when he don't dope,but to win TdF2010 being doped,that means andy schleck it's not innocent
you put both riders in the same problem
Okey, from what I could understand from what you wrote you accuse me of simply being against Contador and not caring about other former dopers. There are several key areas where you are way out of line.
First of all; This is a thread about Alberto Contador. It is not a thread about Di Luca, nor is it a thread about Armstrong, Ullrich or someone else for that matter. The other riders have no relevance here, you might aswell start talking about the weather.
Secondly; how come you insinuate that I have been defending riders such as Ullrich and Di Luca? Where are your facts to support this clame? I dare you to show me a single post on this forum where I have even vaguely defended a former doper. Since you mention it, I am not happy at all about Di Luca participating in the Giro, but when in Rome...
Finally; I feel that Armstrong is a heated debate since it's not exactly a clear cut case so I will refrain from mentioning him. However, your argument about Schleck being doped just because he was Contadors equal is just idiotic. That's the same as saying that if I took dope and tried riding against Gilbert he would still beat me, but then he would have had to have been doped. I know my argument here is a bit strecthed, but you catch my drift.
Also; if you are going to come on this forum and start throwing insults left, right and centre, atleast do it with some class instead of just randomly picking topics that have nothing to do with the subject. You are waisting everyones time. |
| |
|
|
| sam1196 |
Posted on 15-05-2011 19:34
|
Protected Rider
Posts: 1372
Joined: 11-10-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
for me it's like that: No Ban if you've taken nothing illegal. ( logic)
2 year ban even if they only found 0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 in your blood .
If you return after 2 years and you dope once again. A life-ban.
VINO VINO VINO VINO VINO VINO VINO VINO VINO
|
| |
|
|
| papi_25 |
Posted on 15-05-2011 20:06
|
Under 23
Posts: 94
Joined: 28-07-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
sam1196 wrote:
for me it's like that: No Ban if you've taken nothing illegal. ( logic)
2 year ban even if they only found 0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 in your blood .
If you return after 2 years and you dope once again. A life-ban.
+1 |
| |
|
|
| valverde321 |
Posted on 16-05-2011 03:58
|
World Champion
Posts: 12429
Joined: 20-05-2009
PCM$: 530.00
|
superider2010 wrote:
let's be real
if cactus jack don't want doppers to have second chance
then why he don't scream at danilo di luca?he is a fresh returned doper
ricco it's the most stupid doper
armstrong the most doped rider(in 1999 a urine test show he was doped,ulrich doped 2 times and still couldn't beat armstrong)
but cactus jack it's just anti-contador
and to keep this note
i know contador it's sometimes doped,but andy schleck was the equal of contador on TdF 2010 montains
contador it's strong even when he don't dope,but to win TdF2010 being doped,that means andy schleck it's not innocent
you put both riders in the same problem
He never said he had anything against Contador, so what are you trying to accomplish?
And while that theory that if Andy can follow Conta means Andy is doped too is highly possible its still a bit of an assumption, based purely on results.
i write about you just 2 lines.it is imposible to insult in right,left,center(or other positions) LOL
? I'm pretty sure thats the worst insult/joke I've ever heard, and I've heard myself talk before.
if cactus jack don't want doppers to have second chance
then why he don't scream at danilo di luca?he is a fresh returned doper
Take a look at the title of the topic. 
A bunch of words along with a weak AK47 joke.
I'm really not sure what you're trying to prove, with this, but its really pissed me off for some reason, and to share my view I think Conta should get 2 years.
Edited by valverde321 on 16-05-2011 04:34
|
| |
|
|
| DJP19 |
Posted on 16-05-2011 04:41
|
Breakaway Specialist
Posts: 993
Joined: 07-05-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
It doesn't make sense. If Ulrich can't beat armstrong and he doped then Armstrong must have doped. Same thing with Andy it doesn't
Make sense. That being said Contador should be treated like everyone else. I don't want him going free because it would damage the sport, but I also don't want him to be treated unjustly because he has preformed well in the past and now. Wether that be because of meat should be up to Wada and UCI. I'm pretty neutral in this matter and I need hard evidence but also need a fair and justified punishment. |
| |
|
|
| craig324 |
Posted on 16-05-2011 06:47
|
Free Agent
Posts: 104
Joined: 14-05-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
Like Sam1196 I think that 2 year ban, no matter how small the amount. Then riders who have doped should only be allowed back into the peleton when the show genuine change e.g David Millar. If a previously doped rider is caught again, lifetime ban. That's my opinion though.
|
| |
|
