Friendly Llama wrote:

Buds wrote: He lied so he obviously has something to hide.I doubt he will ever ride again

I'm sure he'll ride for the rest of his life. Professionally on the other hand, I don't like his chances...

I see theres been a lot of talk about life time bans for positive tests.

I think its a great idea, if you have screwed over the sport you don't deserve to race again.

Rasmussen speaks:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/road/2007/to ... sen_post07

which includes:

Exactly where Rasmussen was at the time is now hazy, with the rider refusing to comment on this key point. When repeatedly pressed on the topic, and confronted with a question of having documents such as passports to support his version of events, Rasmussen would only respond: "Well, what I am saying is that now we have to see what the [legal] case brings and we will take it from there."

I like one point he makes. That in 17 tests since June 30 there has been no evidence of doping.
I do understand the question-marks over the out-of-competetion missed tests, but he also points out that he only received 2 warnings on missed tests, and by the UCI's own rules they can only go public after the 3rd warning. He points out there are a number of other riders on 2 warnings, but nothing has gone public on them.
So, I can see his frustration, it looks like he was flying as close to the sun as his advisors felt was possible, but someone pushed the sun a bit closer when he wasnt expecting it.
I wouldnt be surprised if his legal team can fight to have him back cycling competitively within the year.

thekiwi wrote: Rasmussen speaks:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/road/2007/to ... sen_post07

which includes:

Exactly where Rasmussen was at the time is now hazy, with the rider refusing to comment on this key point. When repeatedly pressed on the topic, and confronted with a question of having documents such as passports to support his version of events, Rasmussen would only respond: "Well, what I am saying is that now we have to see what the [legal] case brings and we will take it from there."

so he isn't willing to explain why he lied to his team about where he was all he gets into is procedural issues around his right to be tested etc. a pretty stupid approach to take to the media.

Im picking his lawyers have said to take the 'No Comment' approach until they think up a convincing arguement.

JK2 wrote:

thekiwi wrote: Rasmussen speaks:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/road/2007/to ... sen_post07

which includes:

Exactly where Rasmussen was at the time is now hazy, with the rider refusing to comment on this key point. When repeatedly pressed on the topic, and confronted with a question of having documents such as passports to support his version of events, Rasmussen would only respond: "Well, what I am saying is that now we have to see what the [legal] case brings and we will take it from there."

so he isn't willing to explain why he lied to his team about where he was all he gets into is procedural issues around his right to be tested etc. a pretty stupid approach to take to the media.

ON the face of it, that may appear to be the case, but read the whole thing and you get potentially a different story.

His passport apparently shows evidence to support his own story. Thats pretty convincing in itself if true. From what Ive read, he hasnt publicly stated where he "actually was".
It was another Pro rider that provides the core evidence against him who supposedly "saw him out riding". Whilst we dont know the full story yet, maybe he has been the victim of a story based less on fact.

interesting to see where this ends up.

And in the meantime, the media reports about the "Tour de Farce" and "Tour de Pharmacy". I think the teams have just decided that if anyone looks like they have even stretched the rules then they can't afford to be associated. It's a fair call I think. It can't be too much fun fronting the sponsor and having to explain.

All of that aside, he's weedy and the blond 'tache is just wrong. He's one step away from being a ginger. Oh that's Floyd. I'm sensing a pattern.

Ski wrote: And in the meantime, the media reports about the "Tour de Farce" and "Tour de Pharmacy".

Kind of hypocritical that the same media channels have hailed Barry Bonds as possibly the "greatest ever" as he closes in on the all time home run record.

Mmm not really. Virtually every media report I've read suggests it's a disgrace to call him the record holder (assuming he gets there). It's only the San Franciscans that like him.

thekiwi wrote:

JK2 wrote:

thekiwi wrote: Rasmussen speaks:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/road/2007/to ... sen_post07

which includes:

Exactly where Rasmussen was at the time is now hazy, with the rider refusing to comment on this key point. When repeatedly pressed on the topic, and confronted with a question of having documents such as passports to support his version of events, Rasmussen would only respond: "Well, what I am saying is that now we have to see what the [legal] case brings and we will take it from there."

so he isn't willing to explain why he lied to his team about where he was all he gets into is procedural issues around his right to be tested etc. a pretty stupid approach to take to the media.

ON the face of it, that may appear to be the case, but read the whole thing and you get potentially a different story.

His passport apparently shows evidence to support his own story. Thats pretty convincing in itself if true. From what Ive read, he hasnt publicly stated where he "actually was".
It was another Pro rider that provides the core evidence against him who supposedly "saw him out riding". Whilst we dont know the full story yet, maybe he has been the victim of a story based less on fact.

that is fine but if you don't want to comment don't give interviews. and if the reporting is wrong say - i was in mexico and my passport proves it.

mob: Sounds like hes doing a 'Benson-Pope'

a benson pope involves: bullying and generally being s stupid twat, lying about it, being told to stop lying by your boss, changing your story, then getting sacked by your boss for lying.