Lance Armstrong

Discussion in 'Sports' started by Green Stainz, Sep 6, 2005.

  1. ]I)Money

    ]I)Money D NOT I

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2006
    Oddometer:
    3,890
    Location:
    Central central.
  2. cogitate

    cogitate What Marcellus Wallace Looks Like

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2007
    Oddometer:
    5,507
    Location:
    North of the Border, CA
  3. Schlug

    Schlug JockeyfullofBourbon

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2006
    Oddometer:
    7,498
    Location:
    put something on and stay in that position.
    I think Phil actually makes few salient points. He claims there is another, hidden reason behind these charges. But really it is mere speculation on his part and he's unable to name it. This is the exact sort of thing many of contributors to this thread have railed against. There's something else behind all this. I don't have any details and I can't say what it is, but trust me.

    Also, he drops a bollock when he claims that Merckx and Hinault are both laughing at these charges. Because that's not true. Merckx is sure that Lance is subject to an 'unjust process' which he cannot win. Hinault, on the other hand, clearly stated, "I couldn't give a damn.' Lets keep in mind that Hinault was never shadowed by a hint of doping and Merckx was expelled from the Giro d'Italia after he tested positive for a stimulant. But the way that was handled was shoddy and he was never able to prove is innocence (nor have it disproved) by means of a third party. And the results were released to the media before Merckx himself was told. He was slain by public opinion before he could respond. You can see why he might feel for Lance. He was also caught using nasal spray (norephedine) which was then a banned substance and finally caught using a real, honest stimulant in 1977.

    Phil claims that an unnamed cyclist was offered money from some unnamed government agency to testify against Lance. No, I have that incorrect. He, unable to be named, was offered money from a government agency, also unable to be named, to say that Lance was dirty.

    Some want to say that Lance is innocent and all this circumstantial evidence, dirty samples uncovered after the fact, 465,000 USD payments to the dirtiest doctor in all of cycling, and eyewitness testimony is meaningless because A) Lance never doped and all this is hog anus or B) that Lance doped but he passed the tests required at the time of the doping and is, therefore, above charges. Well, then, you can't wave your hand and dismiss this investigation based on the tales of an anonymous rider and an anonymous government agency, can you?

    (Funny that we don't find the same argument as pleasing when it comes to other crimes. You'd never say of a criminal "he's innocent because there were no DNA tests back then, and when compared with the testing of the day, there is no proof.")

    He also questions the USADA's interest in the matter because these events took place in a foreign land. Geography doesn't play into it, does it?

    Phil is certainly a fan of Lance and has always been. And he's delivered his polemic clearly. I think it is very hollow, prima facie. But I really, really like Phil Ligget.

    I do think Lance has been witch hunted here. But I think he brought this on himself. The arrogance, the hubris, and the chest pounding has come back to haunt him. (oh, and the doping)

    I said it in post 202 and I'll say it again, I think his legacy, such that it is, should be left for the real cycling fans and riders to decide. The general public, all enamoured with his Livestrong.org and all will have theirs.

    I'll also remind you of this, it has been said that it was the American professional cycling community which pushed, pressured and insisted that Lance continue to be investigated having either heard from what they considered reliable sources or witnessed themselves what Lance was up to. And Phil might just as well find that is the reason for the continued investigation as some other Byzantine reason.

    If I'm not mistaken (and please do correct me) doesn't the USADA's ruling have to be reviewed by the WADA with all evidence disclosed at that time? I think the UCI could also ask for this full disclosure. I think that might be quite a show or a trainwreck, either one.

    By the way, Lance isn't worthy to clean Merckx's chain or polish Hinault's kangaroo cycling shoes.

    Merckx: 5 Tours de France, 5 Giros d'Italia, and a Vuelta de Espana victory and all the Monuments. Basically he won every major road race during his time at least once. 525 professional wins. Essentially Merckx won a race a week for the whole of his professional racing career.

    Hinault: 5 Tours de France, 3 Giros d'Italia, 2 Vueltas. All the Monuments and countless other victories.

    Lance: 7 Tours. Raced the Giro once, half-heartedly at the end of his career. Won a world championship and one La Fleche Wallone.

    There is no comparison. And while Merckx was easy to like, even adore, Hinault was not always that way, especially in the peleton where threats were made and contol was taken. But he was a fantastic racer and great for cycling.

    Lance, not so much in my book, anyhow.
  4. Gummee!

    Gummee! That's MR. Toothless

    Joined:
    May 13, 2004
    Oddometer:
    28,878
    Location:
    NoVA for now...
    So tell us what you really think...

    :D

    I didn't watch the PL interview, but if some of what the FL interview with Klimmage suggests, the UCI is in on it up to its eyeballs and USAC is in on it just about as far.

    AFA Klimmage: he's got a hard-on for LA. If he was really as anti-doping as he says, there'd be a lot more coming out of his mouth... ...about a lot more riders!

    For now, we'll have to see how the Bruyneel et al sagas play out. Then we'll have to see what happens at the WADA/UCI/CAS on the LA thing

    M
  5. RTLover

    RTLover Long timer

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2009
    Oddometer:
    3,543
    Location:
    West-central France
    ...and again. :lol3
  6. Schnickelfritz

    Schnickelfritz pick, grin, repeat

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2009
    Oddometer:
    2,272
    Location:
    Edge of the glacier
  7. Schlug

    Schlug JockeyfullofBourbon

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2006
    Oddometer:
    7,498
    Location:
    put something on and stay in that position.
  8. Schlug

    Schlug JockeyfullofBourbon

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2006
    Oddometer:
    7,498
    Location:
    put something on and stay in that position.
    I think this fellow said a lot of what I said, only better. Nicely put.
  9. PoundSand

    PoundSand Long timer

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2009
    Oddometer:
    7,002
    Location:
    socal
    This fellow is under the misunderstanding that Ligget is a journalist. He's a sports commentator / color man. Like when curt shilling or some other dumbass is calling a red Sox game or on ESPN. Just because they're on TV talking and sometimes asking questions doesn't make them a journalist.
  10. Mercury264

    Mercury264 Once you go Triple...

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2005
    Oddometer:
    22,351
    Location:
    Masshole
    I guess you have no idea who Phil Liggett is.
  11. Schlug

    Schlug JockeyfullofBourbon

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2006
    Oddometer:
    7,498
    Location:
    put something on and stay in that position.
    Perhaps the issue isn't quite as black and white as we'd like it to be. He's certainly got journalist in him, but I think that's really been overwhelmed by the effort to sell cycling to the masses.

    He certainly didn't have anything approaching journalistic objectivity in that interview.

    He didn't even try.
  12. PoundSand

    PoundSand Long timer

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2009
    Oddometer:
    7,002
    Location:
    socal
    I know who he is. And I know his wiki page says journalist. I am, however, unfamiliar with anything he's done that would actually warrant that title vs commentator.
  13. Schnickelfritz

    Schnickelfritz pick, grin, repeat

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2009
    Oddometer:
    2,272
    Location:
    Edge of the glacier
    Phil is watching the biggest thing to ever happen to the spectator sport of cycling go down in flames. Cycling has been his (Liggett's) life and he's seen it from every angle. Up close. So IMO he's one of the people who knows everything there is to know. So I think he's taking a lot of flak because people see him insisting there's no evidence (even though there is) of something which he damn well knows is going on, which many of Lance's closest teammates appear to have testified is going on (testimony flatly contradicting Liggett and Armstrong and McQuaid and which is now going to remain sealed), and which has been going on for more than the 50-odd years Liggett has been in the sport.

    This line stuck with me from the comments: "Liggett is from the Old Old Generation – the generation where riders went on strike to complain about doping being banned. Perhaps it’s inevitable that he’s not quite as determined to deal with doping as some of his younger audience."

    Liggett brought cycling to English speakers all over, even before Lance, but Lance brought cycling to the masses--and to the markets--in the U.S. Phil will count on this fact, on Lance's cancer fights, and on the silence of the sealed documents to preserve his own legacy and Armstrong's, and to give him the political space to make statements like these.
  14. Steve in ATL

    Steve in ATL How ya like me now?

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2010
    Oddometer:
    1,032
    Location:
    Location, Location.
  15. cogitate

    cogitate What Marcellus Wallace Looks Like

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2007
    Oddometer:
    5,507
    Location:
    North of the Border, CA
  16. RTLover

    RTLover Long timer

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2009
    Oddometer:
    3,543
    Location:
    West-central France
    Insight as one person conveys it. More 'not sure', 'I think', 'he said she said' and character portraits. Quite obvious that this is more a popularity, or more accurately a non-popularity, contest than a straight forward investigation.. So he is an asshole. WTF does that have with proof of doping?
  17. Schlug

    Schlug JockeyfullofBourbon

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2006
    Oddometer:
    7,498
    Location:
    put something on and stay in that position.

    As much as I don't care for Lance for the some of the exact reasons described in that article, the author comes off as a knob with a serious axe to grind.

    Dostoevsky couldn't have written a more unreliable narrator.
  18. Steve in ATL

    Steve in ATL How ya like me now?

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2010
    Oddometer:
    1,032
    Location:
    Location, Location.
    Well, yeah. Note the use of the word "some." I didn't feel the need to state the obvious.
  19. erinbomber

    erinbomber in awe

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2007
    Oddometer:
    973
    Location:
    going nowhere
    Outside magazine has actually been doing a pretty good job of covering all of this. There have been at least 3 articles over the past year in the magazine proper, and who knows how many snippets in the online version. You can find an article supporting pretty much any opinion on the subject in there...

    There was an interesting one about Livestrong, what they actually do, and how that relates to him and his "issues"
    http://www.outsideonline.com/outdoo...rong/Its-Not-About-the-Lab-Rats.html?page=all


    Although all this drama certainly helps them sell magazines...
  20. Fe Man

    Fe Man I am Iron Moran!

    Joined:
    May 29, 2008
    Oddometer:
    8,563
    Location:
    Moran Nation, N. Atlanta Outpost
    Lance is going to come out of this smelling like a rose; this is all a precursor to his future career in politics!

    The lynch mob will get their pee-pees slapped, Tygart will be crucified for his Spanish Inquisition, UASDA will be douched thoroughly and Lance ends up as the Governor of Texas.

    It may take ten years but watch!