He was suspended from the Phonak Team (Cycling) for annomalties in his blood.
No proof has emerged wether he has taken drugs or its a natural accurance.
I think until proven guilty he should remain with the team.

He will be sorely missed in cycling and I hope this matter is cleared up so he can return to the sport.

The b test was positive so how can this be wrong ?

I don`t see how this can occur natrually, has anyone been tested positive before but then not been found guilty.

Certainly sounds dodgy and yes if the b test is possitive then he has to go.

Dodgy it is.

The Olympic b test was not stored correctly and so the test deterioted before a good enough result could be retrieved. The Olympic committee then went on to say the a test was a true reflection of something strange going on.

If he has done anything wrong why can`t he just own up, he will always have this hanging over him if he is found guilty and does not admit what he did.

Why should he own up.
Its for the committee to prove he is guilty.
Owning up just makes it easier for them, as the result will still be the same.

If he owns up he gains respect.

Why would so many tests show up something if he is not guilty.

I don`t think it has anything to do with the committee proving his guilt, what about all those young cyclists that look up to him does not have a responsibility to them to tell them the truth.

All though it does look fishy, he may not have actually taken anything.
I am now thinking along the lines that he is guilty but they may not be a case to answer.
Cycling is full of drug abusers and it will never be stamped out but its not the end of the world for Hamilton, he will get a two year ban and come back to race again.
I do hope he is not guilty as he is a gentleman, and a superb athlete.
Fingers crossed eh.

I hope he is not a cheat. His performance in last years Tour de France was on of the most heroic things I've ever seen.

Why do Cyclists not get life bans?

the possible reasons that I can think of:

1) There are so many drug abusers not caught that the authorities believe it would be unfair to ban the unlucky ones for life
2) The authorities believe professional cycling would not survive if they were all banned for life

are there any other possible reasons?

Originally posted by Yodameister
Why do Cyclists not get life bans?

the possible reasons that I can think of:


2) The authorities believe professional cycling would not survive if they were all banned for life

are there any other possible reasons?

Why not go ask Lance Armstrong if cycling would survive without drugs!

Lance Armstrong's coach has just been found guilty of doping offences in Italy
http://sport.guardian.co.uk/cycling/story/0,10482,1318197,00.html

Lance's coach is Chris Carmicheal,not that Dr who is involved in the doping trial.
Lance has been through enough drug treatment to get better from cancer,i dont believe that he is taking any thing but hard work).

cheers
john t

have you read the artical?

yes i have read the article,and i stand by what i said,the only thing Armstrong is guilty of is hard work.If Lance was ever convicted of doping i think id pack it all in,and throw away my bike!!!

cheers
john t

Originally posted by carcrash
Lance Armstrong's coach has just been found guilty of doping offences in Italy
http://sport.guardian.co.uk/cycling/story/0,10482,1318197,00.html

The Simeoni incident in this year's tour had something to do with this, I believe. Armstrong chased Simeoni down when he made a break in one of the later stages. He was accused of bullying tactics. It had something to do with Simeoni making comments to the effect that Armstrong was on drugs because his coach had been found supplying drugs, or with a stash of drugs in the team car (or something like that). Whatever, Armstrong certainly took exception to Simeoni, denying him a potential stage win. He also 'advised' other riders in a similar break to drop back and leave Simeoni or his team (US Postal) would chase them down, so they immediately complied. Not everything in the tour is as friendly as it appears on tv.

The peloton has it's own do's and do'nts. I guess accusing the best rider in the world is a do'nt!

Although i am a massive fan of Armstrong,i dont think that he is the best rider in the world,certainly he is up amongst the greats. But he is with out dought the best tour rider ever,and i for one am backing him for win no7,as he says "should i ride the tour,i won't be aiming for any thing less than 1st".

cheers
john t