I covered the Etixx-Quick Step fiasco very briefly here earlier in the week on CP, but here Stannard’s win and Lefevre’s failure get a proper outing.
Spot The Clash reference if you can, there was also one in last week’s article too.
Click the image below to head to PEZ, cheers!
Lee, great article and nice insight into what can only be a monumental cock up by EQS….. Saved only slightly by Cav’s win the next day. But again ( made same comments on your previous posting to Pezcyclingnews) why oh why do you post on Pezcyclingnews…. Look at the historical LA articles on the site and you find some of the most sycophantic articles on LA and his crew, even post USADA… I find it hard to believe that you choose to be associated with them.
Thanks for the comment Dean. In all honesty I read nothing on PEZ apart from my own stuff and hadn’t seen any cycling nor read much during the years prior to 2007 or so, certainly not on PEZ. You raise a valid point and I’ll go check them out. I do know PEZ has a dearth of doping news however I have free license on there, which is very unusual (a couple of the ‘big’ sites asked me to write for them but to steer clear of certain ‘issues’ which I said no to), and I mention doping when it pertains to the topic, as a couple of weeks ago with the ego article.
Pez certainly don’t pay me enough to leave me open to claims they’ve bought me, trust me! And after a Lowdown my site gets a large number of clicks from Pez as a result, so this has been the main reason I write there.
It’s not as if one article that mentions doping every three weeks or so will bring down the establishment, but if ten people stick with crankpunk and think a bit more about some stuff as a result of seeing comments like your and those of others, to see the opposite take, I think that is worth something.
Hope that explains the reason I am on there a little.
I understand your view Lee, it just irks me that these guys perpetuated the whole ‘LA Myth’ , like many, many others. They saw capital out of siding with the dopers and in my opinion were no different to Trek, Giro, Nike et al. Which is a shame because I enjoyed there early articles…. maybe I should give them a break, but we could say the same about other issues surrounding doping.
I think you’re right to hold firm on that. l will check out their old stuff and have a poke about. Cheers!
I don’t know if you could find a cycling news site that didn’t perpetuate the LA Myth. The thing about PEZ that make’s me uncomfortable is the entire gallery devoted to podium girls and such. I’ve got two teenage daughters and I guess I’ve evolved to a point where I find that kind of dedication to “ogling” creepy.
Lost in the supermarket…
got it John 😉 will try something more imaginative next time…!
I saw a picture of Stannard posting-up, so I knew he won even before I watched the clip of the last 20k of the race. The video starts and here’s Stannard with three EQS cobble-eaters and I figure, well they must get caught and then Ian jumps away with another group. So I watch and I wait and I listen facinated to the rapid dutch commentary that I have no comprehension of and nothing. The chase never links up. I think, maybe there’s a crash or a mechanical to even the numbers a bit. I’m wondering why all three EQS guys are riding. Seriously, put Tom on Ian’s wheel and keep him fresh. Finally, around 5 to go they try a little shake and bake and somehow Stannard ends up with Terpstra who goes on to royally f**k-up the sprint. I can’t imagine the ranting and raging in high-speed, incomprehensible dutch that must have been heard throughout Flanders, coming from the bus. I can’t decide if these guys can’t race without radios or if EQS should start an in-house “dope” testing program because all three looked like dopes at the end of that race.
haha yeah i couldn’t believe the finish either as I also missed it live. crazy stuff! and why would Terpstra lead the sprint when Stannard was so strong? Stannard might be a bet for P-R if he is riding like this..