Tosh Posted June 29, 2006 Posted June 29, 2006 was talking to a friend of mine yesterday about this in the context of the Tour de France Why not give them carte blanche to drug themselves like crazy? If the athlete dies at 40, so what? To which he replied... sponsors. None of them want to be openly associated with drugs and as it costs ?40m a year to run a major cycling team, the sponsors are needed and so is the (in cycling) very thin veneer of respectability and being "clean". But if it were "legalised" wouldn't the sponsors have fewer objections? Generally no, as they'd be on the moral low ground, somewhere no corporate wants to be. It all comes back to money...sposnors pay for winners, yet don't want to be associated with the drugs it sometimes takes to create winners. Oh and btw, NOTHING has ever stuck to Lance on the drugs front, unlike the other names mentioned in this thread - although he is court at the moment over it.
adayinthelife Posted June 29, 2006 Posted June 29, 2006 This post is not viewable to guests. You can sign in to your account at the login page here If you do not have an account then you can register here
Maldini Posted June 29, 2006 Posted June 29, 2006 This post is not viewable to guests. You can sign in to your account at the login page here If you do not have an account then you can register here
£440,000 Posted June 29, 2006 Posted June 29, 2006 This post is not viewable to guests. You can sign in to your account at the login page here If you do not have an account then you can register here
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now