Who's on the naughty step?

Who's a naughty boy then?

Cycling has always been renown for the paternalistic relationship that race organisers and managers have for their teams.
So it's no surprise that the latest manifestation of fatherly feeling towards teams is happening at the Giro. RCS clearly feel that certain teams have been playing up by refusing to go to bed at the proper time and as a result they have told them to go and sit on the the naughty step for a while.

So who are the naughty children and who been well behaved?
Well Fuji-Servetto have clearly been wicked to a level that would test the patients of a saint. Last year they played up throughout the whole of their holiday in France, staying up late and shouting and screaming when asked to go to the doctors. So now they have to stick their bizarrely clad backsides on the naughty step for a few months, in-fact their banishment to the naughty step is a lengthy one, they get to miss Milan-Sanremo, Tirreno-Adriatico and of course the Giro, huuummmm, Mummy wasn't pleased was she. CSF Navigare have been banished to the step as well, last year they were very naughty, with little Emanuele Sella pooing in his pants on at least four occasions.

Of course not all the children have been sent to the naughty step. Cofidis, who in the past have been naughty, seem to have grown up a little, but as they didn't want to come out and play are staying at home, as are their French cousins Française des Jeux. The Spanish kids, Euskaltel-Euskadi get very travel sick and with the thought of driving across two mountain ranges Mummy and Daddy have decided to keep the family at home this May.

Which leaves us with Barloworld, who despite having three well behaved kids in Thomas, Cummings and Froom also had the naughty Moises Duenas who threw his dinner across the restaurant during last years French holiday and we all know naughty behavior is not tolerated nowadays. Still RCS have said if Barloworld are good for the next few weeks they might just be allowed to come out and play.

And so that leaves us with Flaminia Bossini Docce, the team of current National Champion Filippo Simeoni. Now as far as I know Filippo has been well behaved over the last few years. He may have a tendency to talk back to his perceived 'elders and betters', but that's only youthful exuberance. So why has he got to sit on the step come May? Maybe RCS are afraid that he might upset the posh kids that are coming from across the street, or Kazakhstan as it's known. And as we all know there's nothing parents hate more than being embarrassed in front the neighbors.

Getting the big guns out.

David 'BIG DAVE' Brailsford isn't happy. Oh no, at the paralympics GB may well have won 13 out of 14 gold medals available on the track, but for BIG DAVE, that's not enough.
'Not only did we miss out on on one gold medal', said BIG DAVE, 'But there were silver and bronze one's that we didn't win, it's outrageous and come 2012 we want to win every medal there is in the velodrome' he may have said.
With this in mind BIG DAVE has drafted in the Jason Queally (Gold at Sydney) as well as ex World Champion and 'other big Scots fells' Craig MacLean to pilot the team GB tandems. So will Jason be the first athlete to win Gold at both versions of the O's? You just kind of have that feeling don't you.

Meanwhile.

The bikes are cleaned, the riders are on their way and this weekend sees the cross worlds. I won't be there, but will be watching multiple live feeds via the web, even cutting short Sunday training to get back in time, good excuse eh?. Can't wait.


.

When is a comeback not a comeback.

Comeback my love....

Everyone is talking comebacks, but what is a comeback? The Cambridge definition of a comeback is as follows:

1) it becomes popular again after being unpopular for a period of time.
Or:
2) a successful attempt to get power, importance or fame again after a period of having lost it

Whilst at Dictionary.com they offer:

3) a return to a former higher rank, popularity, position, prosperity
And:
4) Informal. a basis or cause of complaint: If you insist on buying these pointed shoes, you'll have no comeback when your toes start to hurt

So lets look at the three most high profile comebacks in cycling:

Lance Armstrong:
Well he was both popular and unpopular at the same time, often with the same people and if anything, his fame grew whilst he was away from cycling, glamorous partners, a global campaigner and so on. So for the Cambridge definition Lance is simply not making a comeback, he never lost his fame or indeed his popularity. And for Dictionary.com? Er, nope, Lancey boy was already in a position of high rank, popularity and prosperity, so that one's out. Now I've had a good look at his shoes and those Nikes seem more rounded then ever.
So I think we can say that with a score of 0 out of 4 Lance is not making a comeback.

Operation Puerto:
Unpopular? Only within certain dark and dank recesses of the cycling world, loved as the new hope by many, Puerto was never truly unpopular. Lets be honest here, after a brief flirtation with fame Puerto failed badly, it was never likely to have that much power and importance, there were too many vested interests and too many lawyers involved for that to happen. So it's a no comeback from the Cambridge.
Prosperity? Well Puerto never made the rich list, all it had in it's property portfolio was an old fridge with someone else's blood in it, not the mark or untold riches if you ask me. Nowadays Puerto rubs by on handouts from a friend in Luxembourg, so no riches there. High fashion? I've read the Puerto report and let me tell you, it was boring, so in order to alleviate the boredom I tried it as a hat, not so good, it fell off, so I tried it as a pair of shoes, rally, really uncomfortable and it didn't keep my feet dry. So on the come back from it's a score of 1 out of 4 for Puerto, no comeback here either I'm afraid.

Floyd Landis.
Well today's the day that former ginger biscuit makes his 'return' but is it a comeback? Floyd says it's not, but is he right?
Becoming popular after a period of unpopularity, don't make me laugh, as far as I can see there is zero chance of the Ginger one ever becoming popular again. Successful? Successful? You don't need a crystal ball to predict that whilst Floyd may get to the finish, or indeed even do a few reasonable rides 'success' will be a visitor that never bothers to call.
A return to popularity, prosperity and position? Oh how my sides ache. (that'll be a no then?). Which leaves Pointy shoes? Maybe Floyd should have changed careers and gone to work in the local shoe shop.
Comeback score 0 out of 4.

So there we have it, proof positive, indeed dictionary proof positive that Armstrong, Landis and Puerto are all definitely not making a comeback. After all, have they been out of the news over the last three years?



.

The UCI, where would we be without them?

It's another fine mess you've gotten me into!

Whilst I make no bones about my dislike of dopers, sorry, that should read my hatred and utter contempt for dopers, sorry that should read, my wish that when ever satellites drop to earth they land on the heads of you local B test failure. I make no bones about the entertainment value that is to be had from their activities.

Now take Mr Schumacher (and in the words of that old music hall gag, 'I wish someone would') I'm sure you like me thought that when he was caught bang to rights that was it, end of story.
A little social dalliance with speed in Germany was followed by victory in two Tour TTs, beating the favorites and specialists in the process. He then managed a storming ride in the mountains and made us all nod knowingly, and say 'how long before he's caught?'. Well apparently not too long and pretty soon he was getting his marching orders. With two samples coming up positive for CERA we all assumed it would only be a matter of time before the hangman was sharpening his noose, or what ever it is that hangmen do.

So you can imagine my confusion when it transpires that sample B has yet to be investigated and until that is done Schumacher is in a state of limbo.
Meanwhile Patrick Lefevere is threatening to get the lawyers to go round to AFLD (the French anti-scum agency) and give them what your local gangster would term 'a slap'. To be honest you can't blame him can you? If that's what it takes to get AFLD to pull the proverbial out and get the B sample tested then 'let it be so'.

Have a look at the AFLD web site and the only mention os Schumacher is the original release saying he was found positive at two tests and that the UCI, WADA and the German federation have been notified. Since then, October 8th 2008, nothing, zilch. So where are we? Why the delay? Why no testing of the B samples? Have they been lost? Contaminated? Drunk? Smeared all over a chicken in some sort of pagan sacrifice ritual? God alone knows, because clearly the UCI, Quick Step, WADA and the German Fed clearly don't.
So we have Schumacher threatening to sue everyone on the planet, Lefevere not wanting to be associated with damaged goods (he's got enough on his plate with Tommy boy), the UCI, Tour and WADA looking like idiots again (sorry that should read, as usual) and the fans not knowing if they should start hording rotten eggs for when Schumacher next rides past.

You'd have thought that the idiots that run our sport would have to go a long way to match their previous hapless attempts at ridding us of dope cheating scum. But just when you start to believe they can't be anymore inept, they manage to pull of a stunt of such mind boggling stupidity and ineptitude that the only thing you can do is stand back and admire it, (after you throw up that is).

Blood passport, where the hell are we?
So when will the names be named? First there are statements on the web slagging the UCI for not getting the blood passport bandwagon running sooner and next the UCI are coming over all sheepish and saying that there are at lest 30 riders with questionable values and that amongst their number is one 'top rider'.

Who this top rider is, is anyone's guess. Indeed judging by the tabloid source that started these rumors that could include anyone who's ever thrown their leg over a bike. Top rider, could like, top doctor or top scientist, just be euphemism for 'some bloke we met down the pub'.

So on present form we can look forward to the UCI naming names in about twenty years.

Well you asked the question.....
Lancey boys return to the sport has seen him ask many a question, amongst one of the more interesting was the one that managed to link David Millar, Ginger Floyd and dope. It went something like, 'how come the fans are prepared to give Millar an easy ride when they aren't for Landis, Landis has served his time and should be allowed to ride'. I know full well they weren't the exact words, but to be honest I can't be ased to open up the RSS fee where I have it stored. But it was a valid question, so how come?

Well as one fan who isn't prepared to give Landis an easy ride, or indeed Millar, or to be honest any ex-doper. My view is this, simply Millar did at least confess (eventually) to doping and has since his 'dark days' at least been speaking out against doping and attempting to something about it. Landis on the other hand seems to have air-brushed two years from his existence and appears still to be claiming his elevated levels of ginger were caused by drinking too much water in a hotel and that the water in question had been discolourd by rusty French taps.
I'm not naive to believe that doping (in one form or another) will ever be eradicated from cycling but I sure as hell long for the day when it's associated whinging and complaining about unfair treatment are a thing of the past.
Maybe it's not the action on it's own that really pisses people off, maybe it's the associated protestations of innocence that finally tips the balance? Just a thought like.....



.

Happy Burns day.

A clear victory to the Scots fellas!

Now then, now then, I have finally got to grips with Cycling.TV. And today have been carrying out a scientific experiment that involved comparing the comtatoary (is comentatory a word?) offerings to be had.

Downunder we had the old stagers Phil n Paul and in the sun of Milan we had a young pretender by the name of McCrossan. The young pretender was, sadly, on his own, with the King over the water, Brian Smith, doubtlessly getting the miles in. (Brian, Milan looks a whole lot sunnier than the UK, what gives?). Well IMHO it was a clear Hoy like victory to the young pretender.
Not that there's anything wrong with the P n P show, in fact when compared to other sports they continue to trade at the gold standard. But, times move on, and personally I find the slightly more relaxed tone of McCrossan doesn't distract from the action. Generally at a bike race I know exactly what's going on and I get excited enough on my own. So the measured pace of McCrossan coupled with the insight of Smith is a winner every time for me.

The other thing that impresses me about the M and S show, is they seem to make fewer mistakes about riders names than anyone else in the business. There is of course no scientific proof in this, it's just gut feeling, which could of course be way off the mark. But I would like to see some figures here, maybe there's a well funded PHd in watching bike races and spotting the deliberate errors?

So apart from Phil n Paul, M and S who else is there? Well for starters there's Harmon and Kelly, Porter and whoever he finds hanging about in the bar the previous evening, (this is normally Gary Sutton) and of course the man who made commentating on bikes races an art form, David Duffield (normally accompanied by his invisible friend). When you compare this to other sports (which I'm informed apparently do exist) we pretty well stocked with talent.

Burns, sores and boils.

Here's a dilemma. I have developed a saddle sore, it's painful and having just examined it in the mirror, bloody huge. I had one last year and it took about a week to clear up. So, no cycling for a week then? Fraid so, the track is given over to badminton all week, so that leaves the road.
Now do I ensure it heals before I ride again or do I just give it a couple of days, wack on a reskin patch and a bucket full of Asso botty butter and see how it goes?
If I don't ride next weekend I can watch the cross worlds live in the discomfort of my own back bedroom. Hummm, maybe I should let nature take it's course. This would of course ensuring that the cross is watched in the full company of some of Mr Duvals finest.

Whatever I do I will wish you a happy Burns night, may your hangover not impair you cycling.


.

Cadel Evans, my part in his success.

It's 1988, I'm in Katherine, a small town in Australia's Northern Territory, I'd gone there to paddle a boat down the Katherine gorge. I spent a few days there, bobbing down the gorge, watching the world go by, each night I'd spend in the local pizza place, eating pizza and getting wasted on the local brews. Now this happen to coincide with the Tour stage win by a certain Sean Yates and each night would see me holding forth with a great passion about the wonders of cycling and how the locals should embrace their true sporting heroes. Forget Alan Border and Wally Lewis, no Phil Anderson, Alan Piper, Hubert Opperman, Danny Clark and Dunc Gray where the men their kids should look up to. I like to think that my polemic encouraged a certain Cadel Evans to take up the sport seriously and whilst I have no proof of this I think it's far too much of a coincidence to ignore.


.

Those Schumacher questions in full.

The life and times of the three stooges.

Bernhard Kohl may, or may not be going to train as a chimney sweep as has been claimed in some quarters, which is a shame, I fight for the front of the queue in an effort to brick the bastard up in one if the chance became available.
Still we have had the odd pearl of wisdom from the 'man':
"My attorney found part of the justification of the suspension incomprehensible" He is reported as saying. Now 'call me old fashioned, call me straight laced....' but how is this possible? Unless the attorney in question is as deranged as his client. It's very simple it really is, you take CERA, you get caught, you fail to give up the name of the dealer, you get a two year ban. There are vegetables in our house that can grasp that.

Hey now, I'm glad to see Kohl's suffering financial difficulties and whilst I have no wish to see a man suffer unduly there's no unduly in this case, so as far as I'm concerned I hope he enojys the suffering.
His statement as to why he refused to go into details about his suppliers is quite something though isn't it? He claims that naming a supplier 'would neither have uncovered a doping ring nor uncovered the doping of another athlete' Well, as you're never going to name names, we can but guess, but I for one don't believe that Kohl was the only athlete that was supplied by Mr X. So naming him I'm sure would have prevented doping products going to other athletes.

And then of course we had : "I know, of course, that I didn't help cycling any with my behavior, but I am also not responsible for the general situation in cycling."
Who's a clever boy then? As Basil Fawlty would say 'Stating the bleeding obvious' are we? No, on your own you are not solely responsible for the current mess, but you sure as hell contributed to it and worst of all it's your mentality and the mentality of scum like you that dropped us in the deep end that we currently find ourselves in.

But on the bright side he has admitted that he is not currently considering a comeback, which is good news and sadly more than can said for Schumacher.
The German federation, has, apparently, a list of questions for Kohl's best friend. We may, or may not, have had a sneak preview of those questions and even if we haven't we'll take a guess at exactly what they are:
Question 1) Are you a cheating scumbag?
Question 2) Are you a cheating scumbag?
Question 3) Are you a cheating scumbag?
And so on for another 200 pages.

Exactly what is the problem here? Schumacher tested positive for CERA on both his samples, but has some how got the anti doping authorities running scared by threatening to sue them and indeed the entire French nation. WTF! Just ban the tosser for the maximum period allowable and be done with it, don't surcome to his playground bully tactics, for God sake.

Why the inaction on the Schumacher case? From what I can understand the UCI can take no steps until they have a full notification from the French Anti Doping authorities, who where the ones that did the original tests. What's the issue here? Afraid? Lost the results? Have some pathetic political point to make? Whilst the authorities drag their heals there is precious little to stop Schumacher applying for a license.

Now whilst I for one would quite enjoy the prospect of seeing Schumacher sitting in tears by the roadside as the peloton road past and he was left with no team, I don't actually want to take the risk of that actually happening. Even in the supposeed current climate of zeroish tollerance I'm sure there is some fool out there who would offer him a jersey, maybe a green and black one with a skull and the initials RR?

It has been confirmed that a certain Mr Chicken really is banned, but this hasn't stopped him training with a view to making a return.
Quite which continent he's training on is anyone's guess, hopefully Antarctica.


Tie me Kangaroo down sport.

I know as far as the worlds media goes the Tour de Downunder is the only show in town, but for God sake do we really need newsflashes every time Lancey boy takes a drink from his bottle? In fact the whole thing has got so out of hand that any rider in the race is under a microscope they normally never see until July. Today someone (not Mr Armstrong) got into a break for a whole 1k and it made it to the news wires (or should that be the news RSS feeds?)

Now I'm all for a bike race getting talked up, I'm all for the media reporting on our sport, riders being interviewed and sprint finishes making the evening bulletins, so I'm actually rather pleased with it all, but surely there needs to be a little perspective here? Ah well, maybe not. So it looks like that cool million, or whatever it was, is perhaps one of the shrewdest race marketing moves ever seen. What's it gonna be like come July is anyone's guess.

To be honest I'm watching the stages and feeling a little jealousy, not so much for watching the racing, but just for sitting somewhere warm, sipping the local wines and putting the world to rights, South Australia is a wonderful place, it's been a long time, too long.



.

SRM - so much to answer for, apparently.

There's life in the old dog yet.

In a shock move today Ivan Basso has admitted that he has blood in his body. The former dog owner, who has recently returned to bike racing after serving a ban for taking his dog to the 'Vets' once too often has admitted on-line that following tests by 'Top Docs' his vains have been found to contain blood.

'I was totally shocked by the result' Basso may well have said. He may well have gone on to say,
'I was as surprised as the next man to have found blood in my system, but in the spirit of transparency and openness that we have all willingly signed up to in an effort to keep our jobs, sorry, I mean rid the sport of cheats, I have decided to make these result available to everyone.'

The UCI, via an anonymous spokesman, has called on other riders to be as open a Basso.
'I call on other riders to be as open as Basso' Said the anonymous person.
'It is only by publishing totally irrelevant numbers, that are incomprehensible, confusing, bare no relationship to power output and are possibly made up that the sport can advance to a bright new tomorrow.'
When asked about power output and why there has been no demand for it to be published the response was,
'No one understands power charts, and so publishing more information that no one can make head or tail of is a pointless activity, it would just cause confusion, encourage time wasting and could well be used as a smokescreen for other activities.'
When asked what other activities could be hidden behind a smokescreen of power graphs the response was,
'Well for a start Art theft, forgery of currency, prostitution and the take over of small Latin American countries by armed militias. All of these can by hidden behind power output charts, SRM has a lot to answer for!'

Armstrong or Operation Puerto, who's made the most comebacks?

Lance Armstrong may be good, he may well be very good and he maybe having a comeback, but lest face it he's still got a long way to go to have made as many comebacks as Operation Puerto.

Puerto is now on it's tenth comeback and with each comeback there is a collective tightening of the buttocks in certain sections of the peloton.

With each comeback the number of riders heading for the hills, looking to retire or combine both and race in Portugal increases.
Throw a net over a race in Portugal and the chances are you'll catch at least a couple of riders riding under assumed names, riders who have recently paid a visit to the animal sanctuary and traded in their dog for a cat.

So whilst I applaud the return of Puerto, I question whether anything will come of it. Well actually I don't as I firmly believe that despite the regular comebacks Puerto will never deliver the results many (all?) of us had hoper for, that is the arrest and trial of not just cyclist, but footballers, tennis players and anyone else who was named in the initial investigation.
Still, I fully expect WADA to be making a statement soon, oh wait, here it is.
'Let's have dinner, hell, lets have a bottle of wine as well.'
And that's about as far as they'll go, isn't it. Why rock the boat when you can have a nice expense account meal and a little afternoon nap at your desk.


.