Originally Posted by
Rowan
..It's now at the point where the general public who was so mesmerised by Armstrong's exploits are now so disillusioned with the outcome that they look at any cyclist -- road racer, track rider, commuter! -- and think "doper". I can see people hanging out truck windows and instead of shouting "Lance!" like they used to, or "Cadel" as they have to me in Australia, now shouting "Doper!", and with a large degree of spite attached.
..
Possibly, and possibly to deflect attention away from their own mainstream sports. If pro football, baseball, basketball, and hockey in North America, or pro soccer internationally, were subject to the same degree of drug testing as pro cycling, we might be seeing LA as some small fry. In North America, at any rate, with a very few big-name exceptions, owners and fans just want to turn a blind eye. Even when the perps are found, it usually just ends there, as if they are exceptions. But when steroids are used at the high school level, and easily obtainable at most gyms, you have to start wondering about the pro's. What does their "level playing field" look like, with all the big bucks at stake?
As for O2 vector doping, what about cross-country skiing? Distance running? Maybe cycling is just the tip of the iceberg. If a method can be used to evade detection in highly-tested cycling, then it should be pretty darned easy to evade detection in any other relatively low-test sport.
I don't think cycling should get all the blame. I think that if anyone accuses cyclists of being "dirty," we should fire back by questioning the amount of testing done in THEIR sport.
Luis