Friday, February 16, 2007

Who suffers

Yesterday, Oscar Perriero expressed his frustration with the lack of finality regarding whether Floyd Landis will keep his 2006 Tour win or whether he will be ruled to be the winner.

While maintaining that he is not bitter, Perreiro told velonews:



I couldn't and my team couldn't maximize the benefits of a Tour victory because of this slow and frustrating process. If Landis loses his case, we won't be able to enjoy the moment of celebration on the podium or take any economic benefits from such a victory.

On whether he is a contender for the 2007 Tour, Perreiro recognizes that he may end up working for Valverde and is surprisingly pragmatic:

With the likes of Basso and Vinokourov back at the Tour, I know I won't be a
favorite to win. I will be among that second tier of candidates, and that's fine
with me.


Can you blame Perreiro? If found to have been the winner, Perreiro would have been able to milk it... ads, endorsements, maybe even a new contract. Now, it looks like there may be no yellow jersey at the London prologue as Landis' US hearing is not until May. Surely, which ever side loses will appeal.

Perreiro isn't the only one. Landis hasn't been able to race, dumped by Phonak, left out to dry. He said he hasn't even ridden 800 miles since the Tour because of the amount of time he has spent on his defense. I guess some of that is also due to the hip surgery.

What about Ullrich? His name wasn't even directly mentioned in the Puerto papers, but he can't race. Shit, he can't even get a license.

While I'm at it, what about the other Puerto riders? Have any of them been charged... with anything? Yet they have had difficulty getting rides. All except Basso, who appears to have landed like Brer Rabbit landing in the Briar Patch.

I'm not defending dopers or doping, in fact, if you've read some of my other posts on the issue, I think their scum, but let's get to the truth.

This system is set up to screw the riders. How can a rider prove they have never doped? They can't. Proving a negative is near impossible. But their livlihoods can and are taken away from them without any due process.

What about someone like Patrick Lefevre? A journalist makes accusations, which if they were against a rider, probably would have cost that rider his ride. Against a Director, nothing.

Maybe in the end, there will be evidence that all these riders are guilty, but until then, I say let 'em ride until proven guilty.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

I hear ya, i keep wondering why Ullrich can't ride, its ridiculous. Like you said, his name wasnt even mentioned, there's no evidence, no proof, only conjencture, and yet a guy has the twilight years of his career taken away, essentially altering the course of the rest of his entire life.

Kro