President of the MPCC (Movement for Credible Cycling) -Making Cycling LESS Credible

This entry was posted in Comments about Cycling on by .

I hate writing about this two days in a row, but when it stinks like shit, it usually is. What I hate the most about these continual doping scandals is the lengths that the implicated will go to try to spin the situation the best for themselves.

Let’s just put in down in writing. 100% of the sport was polluted at one point. That is pretty much the consensus of everyone that is knowledgeable about the problem. So, the riders, the directors, the support, the UCI, everyone knew. This might be a very slight exaggeration, but it is very close. So, fact, nearly everyone was cognoscente of what was happening. So when the directors of the teams, state down the road, that they had no knowledge or involvement of the problem, then they are lying.

So, when the President of the MPCC, Roger Legeay, goes on record to make absurd claims, then he just screws up the sport more than it already is and he loses his credibility. And that is what Roger Legeay did in this article at

I don’t even know where to start. It is obvious that the guy is trying to protect his own ass. I count as many as 5 times that he states that Stuart, and other riders, acted alone, as an “individual”.

“..but it was the boy’s personal initiative.”
“….the riders took their own individual decisions.”
“…they did this things on an individual basis.”
“These were individual decisions…”
“ he went across the border alone…”

Who talks like that? I know, a man with an agenda. One that made his interview look like a complete fabrication. The guy managed a Pro Tour level team for 22 years and he is trying to distance himself from this whole thing by claiming ignorance of the situation? I very much doubt he was ignorant the situation the sport was in for many, many years. If he was, then he isn’t astute enough to be the president of the MPCC. It is that simple.

He states at one point that “No, I didn’t know anything at all and you can see that from what the riders are saying now – they did these things on an individual basis.”

Then he goes on to say, “He’s the one who is telling his story,” Legeay said. “I don’t have any opinion on that. He’s the one who knows how he took EPO, how he went across the border alone and looked for the products. That’s what he’s said.”

So he uses O’Grady’s statement as a fact to show that he had no knowledge of the doping, but the next minute says he has no idea if O’Grady is being truthful and credible. Pretty great logic there.

The MPCC really doesn’t have much power. But, in theory, it can, and might be a big part in the salvation of the sport in the terms of eradicating doping.

But, I very much doubt that will be the case when it’s fearless leader is not credible. And fearless leader is not an accurate description, because the guy is living with fear. Fear that he is going to be named by one of these guys that he was knowledgeable about the whole thing. He had to have been. Everyone was somewhat knoledgeable. He isn’t doing himself or the sport any good by making unbelievable statements now. The whole sport has ghosts in it’s closet. Let’s stop denying it.

Roger, back in 1981, when amphetamines were the drug of choice and EPO was just three letters.

Roger, back in 1981, when amphetamines were the drug of choice and EPO was just three letters.


9 thoughts on “President of the MPCC (Movement for Credible Cycling) -Making Cycling LESS Credible

  1. Rod


    Can you comment on today’s Velo News article about the “gap” in Tour
    de France victories? Since Lance was stripped of his seven titles, but Pantani,
    Ullrich and Riis won’t be, the standard is a bit out of whack.

    Interestingly, Indurain is also pictured in the graphic. Probably just a coincidence,
    but his ties to Manolo Saiz have to be a little suspect as do his five titles.

  2. davidh

    I generally regard Legeay as one of the “good guys” who, post-Festina, took a strong anti-doping line when most of the peloton was in its deep Fuentes/del Moral/Ferrari (etc) phase. And the MPCC seems like a genuine force for good. But agree that Roger’s comments about O’Grady strain credibility. And I’m not sure what the point is. Would anyone be surprised if Legeay admitted he was involved with team-sanctioned/organized doping before 1998, but then got religion? Or is he afraid someone will uncover evidence of team doping at Credit Agricole later on the timeline? If that’s the case, for the good of everyone, please just resign and go away!

  3. channel_zero

    Half the reason for blanking the top podium spot is Armstrong made no friends at ASO. He was instrumental in getting Patrice Clerc fired from running the TdF because Patrice really, actually, wanted a cleaner race and did something about it. That’s just one little story.

    Velonews still protects Armstrong and Co. sports fraud, so of course they are going to whine about it.

    The other half is Pantani, Ullrich, and Riis more or less let ASO and the UCI go unmentioned in their doping confessions. It’s hardly controversial that the UCI not only enables the doping, but is more or less picking winners with selective enforcement.

    The worn out “lone athlete dopes” story should be dead by now, but seemingly people are still buying it. Look at the strategic positives out of the IAAF and Armstrong’s hidden 2009 positives. As WADA keeps saying, the sports federations are involved in the doping.

  4. channel_zero

    So, the riders, the directors, the support, the UCI, everyone knew.

    Thom Wiesel. Paging Thom Wiesel. Steve Johnson. Paging Steve Johnson.

    If only doping was a crime in the U.S. and USADA could ban those two. Best case (fantasy) scenario is Thom and Steve get a lifetime ban. Both are still free to run USACDF as it is an independent organization that oversees USA Cycling. Read USACDF IRS reports. It’s all there.

    Let’s hope more comes from the Qui Tam than just a few quid from their wallets.

  5. Craig K

    I agree with “Riis” statement above. Enforcement is uneven concerning who is stripped of results compared to those who aren’t . It is, however, quite disingenous and laughable that anyone who is rightly sanctioned for doping and cheating, would then whine about an outcome as being unfair. Even sorrier, to point fingers at others (Indurain) and say “what about him?”

  6. Skippy

    When it stinks like shit , IT IS SHIT !

    Roger has been rolling in it since i first met him in 1998 !

    Stuey worked with Roger , then his best mate Matt , they joined the team that David Millar rode for , which they joined at Cofidis before he got busted ?

    Amazing how much these guys try to brush off their palmares ?

  7. John

    I love this part of the cyclingnews interview:

    “The management of the team had completely clear dialogues with the riders and with the sponsors too, and they were told in no uncertain terms that if they were positive they would be fired.”

    So as long as they where not found positive there was no problem, so they could dope as long as they dind`t get caught. And that was the general rule ever since the beginning. But know I`m carefully optimistic about cycling, lets hope they wont let us down (again).


Comments are closed.