# Freeman Found Guilty



## Rashadabd (Sep 17, 2011)

The thing I always wonder is what happens now and how much does this even matter in the grand scheme of things. I keep seeing lots of investigations and hearing lots of noise, but very few real consequences.









Dr Freeman found guilty of ordering testosterone 'knowing or believing' it was for a rider


Former Team Sky and British Cycling doctor guilty after drawn-out Medical Practitioners Tribunal




www.cyclingnews.com


----------



## Rashadabd (Sep 17, 2011)

Dave Brailsford should be suspended following Freeman verdict, says DCMS member


'Until this is cleared up, all those involved shouldn’t be anywhere near the sport'




www.cyclingnews.com


----------



## Rashadabd (Sep 17, 2011)

Ineos Grenadiers distance themselves from Freeman after guilty verdict


'Freeman fell short of the ethical standards required of him as a doctor' say his former team




www.cyclingnews.com


----------



## duriel (Oct 10, 2013)

So I guess throwing Shane Sutton under the bus didn't help? Probably everyone from the director on down to the riders themselves is suspect.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

The cheats are always a step or two ahead. At least we find out about them years later. No harsh punishment= continued cheating.


----------



## Rashadabd (Sep 17, 2011)

hummina shadeeba said:


> The cheats are always a step or two ahead. At least we find out about them years later. No harsh punishment= continued cheating.


I couldn't agree more.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

judging from my experience slacking off drinking and smoking for a year or two and then coming back stronger than ever...even a suspension isnt going to even the playing field. it seems a lost cause looking at the past. ever see the movie icarus? Icarus | Netflix Official Site


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

an all-doping league where freaks of cycling are developed pushing the frontier of performance enhancement sounds exciting, and then we can give up the pretense. anything goes as long as its not a motor. sign your life away on the line first. pump lance back up and put him out there.


----------



## Rashadabd (Sep 17, 2011)

Yeah...something like that.... or how about everyone just put on their big boy and big girl pants and ride clean???? I know it sounds crazy, but let's all give it a thought or two. I am also pretty sure we've all seen Icarus by this point. There's a thread or two about it somewhere around here from when it came out. We definitely talked it up.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

putting your big boy back into his girl pants would be getting money out of it and since thats impossible like with everything, its doomed.


----------



## Rashadabd (Sep 17, 2011)

hummina shadeeba said:


> putting your big boy back into his girl pants would be getting money out of it and since thats impossible like with everything, its doomed.


You're aware that top riders make pretty good money (3-5 million Euros a year) and that this is part of the temptation right? I agree that pay disparities, revenue allocation, and a weak union are part of pro cycling's issues.









How much money do pro cyclists make? | Cycling Today


Three weeks in a saddle for 200km per day in the blistering heat and pouring rain; riding up climbs too steep and long to be classified; crashes, falls and injuries – it’s hard life being a professional cyclist. The average rider will race over 10,000km in a year, in 80 days of racing, spending...




cycling.today




.


----------



## Rashadabd (Sep 17, 2011)

Team Sky's zero tolerance policy was a total joke, says former rider


Tiernan-Locke claims there were 'two speeds' of medical care at British team




www.cyclingnews.com


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

Rashadabd said:


> u're aware that top riders make pretty good money (3-5 million Euros a year) and that this is part of the temptation right?


I understand the temptation to cheat is for more money. It’s pretty universal and figured it out long ago.


----------



## Rashadabd (Sep 17, 2011)

hummina shadeeba said:


> I understand the temptation to cheat is for more money. It’s pretty universal and figured it out long ago.


No, I think the real question is, if you understand that, what point is it that you are trying to make????


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

Rashadabd said:


> No, I think the real question is, if you understand that, what point is it that you are trying to make????


I made it already and you already agreed:


> hummina shadeeba said:
> The cheats are always a step or two ahead. At least we find out about them years later. No harsh punishment= continued cheating.


I couldn't agree more.


----------



## Rashadabd (Sep 17, 2011)

hummina shadeeba said:


> putting your big boy back into his girl pants would be getting money out of it and since thats impossible like with everything, its doomed.


If you understand the financial realities present in pro cycling as you state, then I still have no idea what you really meant by this, but okay.... Bygones....


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

Money in sports causes corruption. That’s it.


----------



## Rashadabd (Sep 17, 2011)

hummina shadeeba said:


> Money in sports causes corruption. That’s it.


Gotcha. Money in anything can tempt some toward corruption I guess. You can't really have professional cycling without the money though right???? So, the solution has to be something other than get rid of all the money lol... Ultimately, you want to force and entice athletes and staff to make better decisions somehow. Sports that appear to do well with that seem to have both rigorous testing programs and good salaries for the average pro.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

Testing doesn’t work and never has and the punishments aren’t severe anyway.

Sky initially promoted themselves as the squeaky clean team. It’s the same story for like 30-40 years now. 

I’d rather have lowly amateur races with crap prizes and no enticement to cheat than over-paid cheaters every year. So no pro league. No desert either.


----------



## Rashadabd (Sep 17, 2011)

hummina shadeeba said:


> Testing doesn’t work and never has and the punishments aren’t severe anyway.
> 
> Sky initially promoted themselves as the squeaky clean team. It’s the same story for like 30-40 years now.
> 
> I’d rather have lowly amateur races with crap prizes and no enticement to cheat than over-paid cheaters every year. So no pro league. No desert either.


Fair enough lol. Like you said, to each their own.


----------



## bvber (Apr 23, 2011)

hummina shadeeba said:


> I’d rather have lowly amateur races with crap prizes and no enticement to cheat than over-paid cheaters every year. So no pro league.


You can watch them now.


----------



## Rashadabd (Sep 17, 2011)

bvber said:


> You can watch them now.


I thought it, but decided it wasn't worth sharing lol. They are happening in pretty much every locale every single year. No one is being forced to watch or comment on pro cycling if it upsets them that much lol.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

there’s amateur races but they’re rarely if ever on tv and not the top riders. The top riders moved on to the big extra corrupt game. You don’t have to like my opinion that money is the root of the problem and no one is forcing anyone here to comment. I write on here for entertainment. You can express however you feel about the cause of cheating in pro sports too. Enjoy.


----------



## Rashadabd (Sep 17, 2011)

Fine by me but.... and they will NEVER/RARELY be on tv without the money lol. Like, how are you not connecting that it is the salaries and money that make pro sports professional and allow us to watch them and get all of the back stories and interesting details, etc. Those two things go hand in hand. You don't have to like it (like you suggested to us), but it is what it is.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

Television shows make their money from advertisements which isn’t dependent to how much money the team and riders get. The reporting and how in-depth it is has to do with how much money the station has and what effort they feel like putting into it, whether the riders and team are making millions isn’t in their thoughts. Look at the olympics as an example of relatively minimal money for athletes while getting a lot of viewership on tv. They still cheat there but the incentive is not as direct or obvious and the athletes end up with later product endorsements or jobs and not a solved problem..or you have the motivation of the counties to cheat as in icarus.


----------



## bvber (Apr 23, 2011)

Television shows make their money from advertisers by showing the events that can attract the highest numbers of watchers. Does the term "rating" ring a bell?


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

bvber said:


> Television shows make their money from advertisers by showing the events that can attract the highest numbers of watchers. Does the term "rating" ring a bell?


Have you ever seen the ratings for the olympics? Compare them to the Tour de France ratings and see how the team pay has no relation.

viewers don’t give a thought to how much the riders are paid when they decide to watch any sport. Viewership and advertising isn’t contingent on athletes getting paid anything.


----------



## Rashadabd (Sep 17, 2011)

hummina shadeeba said:


> Television shows make their money from advertisements which isn’t dependent to how much money the team and riders get. The reporting and how in-depth it is has to do with how much money the station has and what effort they feel like putting into it, whether the riders and team are making millions isn’t in their thoughts. Look at the olympics as an example of relatively minimal money for athletes while getting a lot of viewership on tv. They still cheat there but the incentive is not as direct or obvious and the athletes end up with later product endorsements or jobs and not a solved problem..or you have the motivation of the counties to cheat as in icarus.


You are completely wrong about the Olympics as well. There are billions of dollars wrapped up in the Olympic games and many of the athletes make good money, which comes from their governments and professional sponsorships and endorsement gigs just like pro cycling. There literally isn't much of a difference. You couldn't be more wrong about the cheating in international sport as well. It is also very similar to pro cycling. See below for both.









How Olympic Athletes Make a Living - Sports Management Degree Hub


Share this infographic on your site! <a href=”https://www.sportsmanagementdegreehub.com/olympic-athletes-salaries/”><img src=”https://www.sportsmanagementdegreehub.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/OlympicSalaries.jpg” alt=”Olympic Salaries” width=”500″ border=”0″ /></a><br />Source: <a...




www.sportsmanagementdegreehub.com







http://www.kawasaki-m.ac.jp/soc/mw/journal/en/2006-e12-1/01_kremenik.pdf











Why Is It So Easy to Cheat at the Olympics?


Japanese speed skater Kei Saito was suspended from the 2018 Winter Olympics after failing a drug test. Chances are, more athletes will follow.




www.livescience.com













Money, money, money: what's at stake if Olympics fall victim to coronavirus


Concerns are swirling that Japan's dream of hosting the Tokyo 2020 Olympics could be a fatality of the spread of the new coronavirus, jolting organizers, sponsors, and media firms who have spent billions of dollars in the run-up to the event.




www.reuters.com


----------



## Rashadabd (Sep 17, 2011)

Now, one could argue that the Olympics does a better job of testing and punishing athletes and teams for positives than pro cycling does and I think I would agree with that for the most part.


----------



## Rashadabd (Sep 17, 2011)

Relocated and deleted.


----------



## Rashadabd (Sep 17, 2011)

Relocated and deleted


----------



## Rashadabd (Sep 17, 2011)

hummina shadeeba said:


> Have you ever seen the ratings for the olympics? Compare them to the Tour de France ratings and see how the team pay has no relation.
> 
> viewers don’t give a thought to how much the riders are paid when they decide to watch any sport. Viewership and advertising isn’t contingent on athletes getting paid anything.


People watch sports because it is on, it's available, it's competitive, it is well produced, it is heavily marketed, the performances inspire us, and it is interesting. A lot of that doesn't take place or exist without money. End of story.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

you’ve proven money isn’t an incentive for cheating. End of story. Nice job.


----------



## Rashadabd (Sep 17, 2011)

hummina shadeeba said:


> you’ve proven money isn’t an incentive for cheating. End of story. Nice job.


Ah.... the old conflating issues bait and switch technique.  You know darn well nobody on here has argued that money isn't an incentive to cheating. I said that very thing posts ago. You're just upset about us proving that your Olympics is pure and holy argument was a joke and that you don't get to just have all of the benefits of pro sports without lots of money being involved lol. That's okay too though man. Do you.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

Years ago, as I remember it and unfortunately it’s no longer the case, the olympics used to be without pros and without a lure for the athletes beside the medals. It was a contest thought to be without money. It was still watched with interest by many. Now the athletes in the olympics are very like other pro athletes with the same incentives and support. My point is money given to athletes isn’t the reason it was watched and you don’t need to give money to athletes to make it interesting for viewers or make it lucrative for the tv station. 
Without money as an incentive I believe there would be much less cheating.

It would drastically change the league if there was no money involved for the riders for sure. It would be a lot harder to be a pro if you didn’t come with your own bucks. It would be awkward and a big discouragement for the riders. A lot of blood would be lost. I believe in the end the viewers would become more interested.


----------



## bvber (Apr 23, 2011)

hummina shadeeba said:


> Years ago, as I remember it and unfortunately it’s no longer the case, the olympics used to be without pros and without a lure for the athletes beside the medals. It was a contest thought to be without money. It was still watched with interest by many.


When was that?


> My point is money given to athletes isn’t the reason it was watched and you don’t need to give money to athletes to make it interesting for viewers or make it lucrative for the tv station.


People watch sports for the high level performance they can only dream of doing, not because how much the athletes make.


> Without money as an incentive I believe there would be much less cheating.


And much less interesting to watch because there won't be as much effort by the athletes to do better.



> It would drastically change the league if there was no money involved for the riders for sure. It would be a lot harder to be a pro if you didn’t come with your own bucks. It would be awkward and a big discouragement for the riders. A lot of blood would be lost. I believe in the end the viewers would become more interested.


It's economics 101 but you are free to believe what you want.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

Not every motivation can be attributed to drive for money and explained by economics. utilizing those other motivations would make the sport cleaner I believe. testing is always years behind and throughout the last couple decades there’s likely a lot more cheats on the podium than clean riders and the testing isn’t working. The olympics also suffers from a huge amount of cheating too I believe due to the same influence of money that’s in it now a days.


----------



## Rashadabd (Sep 17, 2011)

hummina shadeeba said:


> Years ago, as I remember it and unfortunately it’s no longer the case, the olympics used to be without pros and without a lure for the athletes beside the medals. It was a contest thought to be without money. It was still watched with interest by many. Now the athletes in the olympics are very like other pro athletes with the same incentives and support. My point is money given to athletes isn’t the reason it was watched and you don’t need to give money to athletes to make it interesting for viewers or make it lucrative for the tv station.
> Without money as an incentive I believe there would be much less cheating.
> 
> It would drastically change the league if there was no money involved for the riders for sure. It would be a lot harder to be a pro if you didn’t come with your own bucks. It would be awkward and a big discouragement for the riders. A lot of blood would be lost. I believe in the end the viewers would become more interested.


You clearly didn't read this article. They started doping in the Olympics in the 1930s too bro.... There was cheating involved a long time ago my friend. Just let the dream go and embrace reality....or don't.



http://www.kawasaki-m.ac.jp/soc/mw/journal/en/2006-e12-1/01_kremenik.pdf


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

I didn’t read anything. Maybe I’m romanticizing the past olympics to some degree and of course there are other motivators besides cash that are good enough for someone to be willing to cheat. As the value of winning goes up makes sense cheating would go up..but I suspect of all what I’ll call high level sports throughout time, and I have no idea and a romantic hunch, I bet those events that don’t have cash for the prize and instead maybe anything else, I bet there’s more cheating with the cash prize. 
Maybe you can’t even find high level sports without money prizes throughout all time. So that is the root of what I’m saying. Money vs any other type of prize I think money is more likely to elicit corruption.


----------



## bvber (Apr 23, 2011)

hummina shadeeba said:


> Maybe I’m romanticizing the past olympics to some degree


How far past are you referring to?


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

bvber said:


> How far past are you referring to?


 When Olympic athletes weren’t being paid.


----------



## bvber (Apr 23, 2011)

hummina shadeeba said:


> When Olympic athletes weren’t being paid.


That would be before there was Olympics because the winning athletes get rewarded one way or another. By the way, TV didn't exist back then.


hummina shadeeba said:


> Have you ever seen the ratings for the olympics? Compare them to the Tour de France ratings and see how the team pay has no relation.
> 
> viewers don’t give a thought to how much the riders are paid when they decide to watch any sport. Viewership and advertising isn’t contingent on athletes getting paid anything.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

[/QUOTE]


bvber said:


> That would be before there was Olympics because the winning athletes get rewarded one way or another. By the way, TV didn't exist back then.


tv didn’t exist back then but that doesn’t relate to athletes being motivated to cheat by a money reward, which is my point.

an olive branch crown was the original Olympic reward for centuries and only replaced with metals at the beginning of last century. That’s not money either.

if you want to disagree keep it to the point. My point is I believe cash rewards are more likely to promote cheating. If u find evidence of cheating in sports where cash rewards aren’t given, that would be good evidence showing cash isn’t to be blamed.


----------



## bvber (Apr 23, 2011)

hummina shadeeba said:


> tv didn’t exist back then but that doesn’t relate to athletes being motivated to cheat by a *money* reward, which is my point.
> 
> an olive branch crown was the original Olympic reward for centuries and only replaced with metals at the beginning of last century. That’s not *money* either.
> 
> if you want to disagree keep it to the point. My point is I believe *cash* rewards are more likely to promote cheating. If u find evidence of cheating in sports where *cash* rewards aren’t given, that would be good evidence showing cash isn’t to be blamed.


I specifically wrote "get rewarded one way or another" but you keep mentioning money / cash. The lure of reward increases competition as well as corruption. It's a double edged sword that's been around even before money was invented. So you want to see high performance without competition. Good luck finding that in the real world.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

i keep mentioning money/cash as that's what im talking about. id rather see less than "high performance" competition if that's the downside to no cash prizes as I imagine it would have a lot less cheating.


----------



## bvber (Apr 23, 2011)

hummina shadeeba said:


> It would drastically change the league if there was no money involved for the riders for sure. It would be a lot harder to be a pro if you didn’t come with your own bucks. It would be awkward and a big discouragement for the riders. A lot of blood would be lost. *I believe in the end the viewers would become more interested*.





hummina shadeeba said:


> id rather see less than "high performance" competition if that's the downside to no cash prizes as I imagine it would have a lot less cheating.


The viewers would become less interested even if TV stations decide to show average Joe (less than high performance) doing what average people can do. Remember, TV programs like sports are entertainments. It has to be entertaining otherwise people lose interest.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

get rid of prize money= less cheating. that's my only point.

I dont care about viewership on tv but I do believe there's a lot of people out there who would be more interested in watching cycling if they felt they were watching a competition that wasnt riddled with drugs and cheating. When it gets into people's minds that the sport and it's athletes are cheaters that has consequences beyond...


----------



## bvber (Apr 23, 2011)

You are talking about perfect world. Such world only exists in people's mind.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

bvber said:


> You are talking about perfect world. Such world only exists in people's mind.


the world where people are motivated to cheat for cash?
....that's here. its not perfect


----------



## bvber (Apr 23, 2011)

hummina shadeeba said:


> the world where people are motivated to cheat for cash?
> ....that's here. its not perfect





hummina shadeeba said:


> i keep mentioning money/cash as that's what im talking about. id rather see less than "high performance" competition if that's the downside to no cash prizes as *I imagine* it would have a lot less cheating.


I pointed out what you were doing.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

yes i imagine with no cash prizes there would be a lot less cheating. you disagree?


----------



## bvber (Apr 23, 2011)

If no cash prizes but if rewards of one method or another exists, it won't make much of a difference.


----------



## KoroninK (Aug 9, 2010)

hummina shadeeba said:


> get rid of prize money= less cheating. that's my only point.
> 
> I dont care about viewership on tv but I do believe there's a lot of people out there who would be more interested in watching cycling if they felt they were watching a competition that wasnt riddled with drugs and cheating. When it gets into people's minds that the sport and it's athletes are cheaters that has consequences beyond...



Except there are people getting caught cheating/doping in amateur and masters racing pretty much on a yearly basis. Cheating happens at all levels.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

There’s cheating all over (and prize money all over) but I believe cheating happens more when the incentive is in the form of a large amount of money. I believe the only way to rid the sport of cheating would be to rid the sport of cash rewards.

fallout from the sport turning truly amateur and having no prize money.. doesn’t bother me and rather do it anyway.


----------



## bvber (Apr 23, 2011)

hummina shadeeba said:


> There’s cheating all over (and prize money all over) but I believe cheating happens more when the incentive is in the form of a large amount of money. I believe the only way to rid the sport of cheating would be to rid the sport of cash rewards.


It's not exclusive to cash. Any rewards of sufficient size will create cheating. It's the human nature in real world.


> fallout from the sport turning truly amateur and having no prize money.. doesn’t bother me and rather do it anyway.


Other people have different take on this. Apparently, there are more of other types out there than your type because what we see now is the results of supply & demand, also known as "market" which has been around for thousands of years.


----------



## KoroninK (Aug 9, 2010)

hummina shadeeba said:


> There’s cheating all over (and prize money all over) but I believe cheating happens more when the incentive is in the form of a large amount of money. I believe the only way to rid the sport of cheating would be to rid the sport of cash rewards.
> 
> fallout from the sport turning truly amateur and having no prize money.. doesn’t bother me and rather do it anyway.



There's tons of cheating in college sports all the time. There is zero prize money involved. TV contract money is split among all universities in the conference and is the same no matter how good or bad you do. For football bowl game appearance money is against split among all universities. Tons of cheating in high schools as well and there isn't even TV or tournament money there. There's this thing called being competitive and wanting the trophy. There is a reason that drivers in the top NASCAR division (Cup) race the two lower divisions (trucks and Xfinity) for no pay. They get no salary and no prize. They do it because they are trophy hunting. As a side note most college sports do not earn money for the universities and vast majority of players will never become pros. The vast majority are on scholarship to actually get an education and work in that field when they graduate.


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

_There’s cheating in elementary school dodgeball too but stands to reason that if the prize has a higher value there will be more cheating. Bigger cash prize= bigger incentive to cheat. _


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

_Yup. Umhum. _


----------



## bvber (Apr 23, 2011)

hummina shadeeba said:


> _There’s cheating in elementary school dodgeball too but stands to reason that if the prize has a higher value there will be more cheating. Bigger cash prize= bigger incentive to cheat. _


Did you copy / paste that from some site?


----------



## hummina shadeeba (Oct 15, 2009)

Why? Did you find what I typed somewhere else?


----------



## bvber (Apr 23, 2011)

I'm wondering why your font was changed to Italic.


----------

