No exclusive interviews here.

That Chris Hoy exclusive - not.

It seems that cycling weekly's exclusive interview with the Mighty Robert Millar is actually not all it appears to be.
Robert agreed to answer a couple of questions via the medium (is that the right word?) of Brian Smith. The couple of questions was to promote the auction of some of Roberts old jerseys for the Braveheart fund (oh if only I had the spare cash).
Now I don't know about you, but I don't really think this constitutes an interview. If it does then I'll be posting the exclusive interview I have with Chris Hoy, you know the one at the Velodrome where I was carrying my bike into the track centre and Chris held the door open for me, it goes like this:
Me: 'Come on Chris'
CH: 'No come on you've got the bike'
ME: 'Cheers Chris'
CH: 'No problem, enjoy your ride'
Whilst it's far from an interview (the RM one, not the CH one), it certainly makes a good exclusive, I don't think anyone else outside grub street would attempt to pass of a couple of questions via a third party about three old cycling jerseys as an exclusive, so you have to hand it to Cycling Weekly. God I'm glad i canceled my subscription I really am.
For what it's worth (and that's not a lot) Robert can live his life as he want's whilst I'd love to hear from him (as any fan surely would)I totally respect his right to privacy and to do what he wants with his life. That he still supports cycling is brilliant.
The fact the Cycling Weekly seem to be using Roberts good nature / name and desire to help young cyclists further their careers as a tool to sell more copies is about as far from brilliant as it could be. In fact on a scale with Brilliant at one end and crappy old turd at the other CW would fall towards the end that smells.


Life, give em life. (the rant....)

What's wrong with two year bans for doping? I'll tell you whats wrong with two year bans for doping, the problem is that the twats come back to cycling. Not only does scum float back to the surface, but it floats up totally unrepentant and for pretty decent money I'd hazard. Next year will see a host of 'high profile names' or floaters as I like to call them, return to the peloton, Basso is back and the Chicken is talking of a return , God knows where it will all end, in tears I suspect.
What I don't want to see when I turn on and tune into a race is the massed ranks of unrepentant ex-dopers at the front of the peloton. I don't want to have my inelegance, my love of the sport, have cycling as a whole sullied by having to see those that have basically insulted every fan and club rider in the world, turn round and laugh in our faces as they ride past stuffing their pockets with Euros.
In addition to life bans I have always believed all contracts should have clauses in them allowing the team to claim back all monies paid (wages and bonuses) to a doped rider whilst they were with that team.
Along with the UCI drawing up a list of Doctors, trainers, managers, etc etc that riders are not allowed to work with under penalty of life bans. The UCI should also insist on anti doping programmes to be delivered by each national federation to it's young and amateur riders, under pain of exclusion from the worlds / Olympics for failure to do so.
Riders should have a maximum number of days that they are allowed to race, I mean if you've done 130 days from Feb to October what's gong to keep you going as the season winds down?
Of course this would require one thing that is unlikely to happen, the UCI getting tough on doping. I mean why worry about doping when you can have a stand-up row about TV rights and the money generated with the race organisers.

Failing all that, there is one solution to the doping problem, give me a baseball bat and a line of 2nd test failures and I'll sort the problem for you, it'll be hard to make a return when you've got no kneecaps.