|
Re: Something I Posted to Usenet--Pro Cycling RIP
|
Walter Piovesan
|
Sep 26, 2006 12:49 PDT
|
Well said.
The joy is in the riding...
cheers
--
------- __@
----- _(\<;_
--- (*)/ (*)
- -------------
* blaff-@earthlink.net <blaff-@earthlink.net> [2006-09-26 08:54:11 -0700]:
| | It's time to simply ride the bike.
Bonne route,
Brian
"....The report into cycling comes as the UCI struggles in the sport's
constant fight against doping. A recent assessment of the 2005/2006 seasons
released by the UCI reports the increased structure, stability and
globalization the governing body has brought to the sport but neglects to
mention any progress in anti-doping - a promotional problem that has plagued
the sport's history......"
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2006/sep06/sep26news
Study the problem for another year, Pat and perhaps it will go away. And
keep attacking Dick Pound and WADA to distract attention away from the
abject failure of the UCI to address the problem in a significant manner
during Hein's tenure. Same old, same old.
Consider Fred Adam's (a freelance writer for Velo) comments in the current
issue of ProCycling:
"....Cycling will never be clean. We could stop all racing for weeks or
months; cycling is too anchored in bad, old habits to evolve in the right
direction. And I think that gradually it will die out. I'm talking about
cycling at the top level. Too bad for the journalists whose job it is to
relate the performances of the best riders in the world, but if that's
indeed where we're headed, cycling will have deserved to die.....All of
these liars have taken us for idiots. There are too few honest men in this
sport, and they foot the bill for their con-artist friends. The future of
cycling is in participation, nowhere else. Let's all go riding through the
countryside, in the sunshine,in the mountains, and let's breathe in the
aroma of our sport--the real one, the pure one, not this putrid stench that
the pro peloton has been wafting at us for as long as we can remember." p.42
And someone please tell Coggan to read Frederic Grappe's comment on pp.
53-54 of the same issue.
|
|
|
 |
|
