'Enough is Enough' - Lance Armstrong

redzerredzer

No

Is the oprah interview going to be shown on tv in Ireland?

Chips Lovell

No

It's going to be on Discovery. That's assuming that the UK Discovery is the same as the Irish one?

Fender76

I hope he has evidence that implicates McQuaid and Verbruggen.. and I hope that as a resullt of all this, regardless of LA's fate that the UCI is completely rejuvenated, rehabilitated, reassimilated and reinvigorated.

purplegeko

No

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

It's going to be on Discovery. That's assuming that the UK Discovery is the same as the Irish one?

Its being broadcast as the same time as the US - 2am irish time friday morning

lennymc

No

purplegeko wrote: »

Its being broadcast as the same time as the US - 2am irish time friday morning

and 8 pm friday evening (posted earlier in this thread i think). Good prime time soap viewing time.

el tel

No

If Lance Armstrong dosen't end up in jail, or sleeping on a park bench or end up the way of Pantani then the message to aspiring cylists is clear: dope hard, dope smart, deny everything, sully everyone and you'll become a very weathly man.

GeorgeBailey

ThisRegard wrote: »

As has been pointed out several times, there is/was a big difference between a rider doping and how Armstrong behaved. Roche and Indurain didn't set out systematically to destroy all those around them that didn't proscribe to their ways.

Were Roche and Indurain as heavily investigated as Armstrong though. Maybe if they were they'd have acted similarly.

average_runner

Diarmuid wrote: »

Yes. And $1.2m from the Sunday Times. I'd imagine there could be a few more in the $1m range but after that I don't know how you'd get to 90m.

Lawyers cost, sponsors getting paid back, people taking him to court over what he said about them. It might not be 90m but he will make another fortune out it

Rovi

No

Oprah is now (allegedly!) saying that the interview extends to 2.5 hours and is too good to truncate, so will be broadcast over 2 nights.
(Just heard on Newstalk)

Discovery haven't changed their schedule to reflect this yet.

Synode

No

Rovi wrote: »

Oprah is now (allegedly!) saying that the interview extends to 2.5 hours and is too good to truncate, so will be broadcast over 2 nights.
(Just heard on Newstalk)

Discovery haven't changed their schedule to reflect this yet.

You'd have to wonder if LA is getting a cut of the advertising Revenue. He knows it's going to draw a huge viewership

hardCopy

No

This would answer one of David Walsh's questions anyway: http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/cycling/2013/01/14/oprah-winfrey-lance-armstrong-doping/1834487/

Shamelessly lifted from the triathlon forum.

Tombo2001

Whats interesting is that Lance's isnt the only one whose reputation is at stake here (ok his reputation is f*cked but he's trying to salvage it)....

.....but there's a fair chance Oprah must be wondering what she's gotten herself into. The coverage has gone way beyond cycling circles and has hit all the major US media outlets and most of the serious commentators are very critical of Lance. A perception that she is facilitating a cheat's rehabilitation could be damaging for her, especially given what the NY Times is saying today about the meeting between Tygart and Armstrong.

detones

No

Good peice on BBC 5 Live podcast about the upcoming Interview. Mark Chapman is joined by The Times' (English Times) cycling correspondent Jeremy Whittle as they discuss Lance Armstrong's upcoming interview with Oprah Winfrey.

For me I found the Interview at the end with Nicole Cook very insightful into the affects Lance has had on the Sport. She was a gold medalist at the Bejing Olympics. She speaks about a friend of hers, a young American under 23chap and up and coming rider. He got a place on one of the Best U23 teams at the time around 2003. He was told that there was Black, White and Grey. He was asked how far was he willing to go into the Grey to succeed in the sport. He said he wouldn’t cheat and was kicked off the team. He ended up riding for another much smaller team and in the end didn’t make it as a rider. Nicole points out that the drugs culture Lance helped create in cycling, did not only help him Beat other dopers but it robbed clean and talented riders of their Dreams and Careers in the sport. All their hard work was for nothing because they would not dope like Lance.

C3PO

Incredible coverage on mainstream news channels! Really getting up a head of steam now ..... will it be worth the hype?

McTigs

No

Tombo2001 wrote: »

Whats interesting is that Lance's isnt the only one whose reputation is at stake here (ok his reputation is f*cked but he's trying to salvage it)....

.....but there's a fair chance Oprah must be wondering what she's gotten herself into. The coverage has gone way beyond cycling circles and has hit all the major US media outlets and most of the serious commentators are very critical of Lance. A perception that she is facilitating a cheat's rehabilitation could be damaging for her, especially given what the NY Times is saying today about the meeting between Tygart and Armstrong.

i was thinking the same. Interest in this interview is snowballing by the hour. I reckon she's under just as much pressure as he is. She fluffs it she'll get crucified.

Lusk Doyle

No

I really hope that this guy is proved right / justified.

Hermy

No

Could you elaborate Lusk? I don't know Conor McGrane.

petethedrummer

No

GeorgeBailey wrote: »

Were Roche and Indurain as heavily investigated as Armstrong though. Maybe if they were they'd have acted similarly.

So you're defending Armstrong's behaviour on how 2 other guys may possibly act in your hypothetical scenario!

You are also forgetting that Roche was subject to media and judicial investigations.....

Roche was taken to task on the late late show by David Walsh. There were newspaper articles in many different countries.

A judge deemed him to have taken EPO in an investigation into Conconi.

This official judicial investigation unequivocally found that Roche was administered EPO in 1993, his last year in the peloton.[8] Files part of the investigation allegedly detail a number of aliases for Roche including Rocchi, Rossi, Rocca, Roncati, Righi and Rossini.[12] In 2004 Judge Oliva unambiguously found that Roche had taken EPO during 1993 but due to the statute of limitations, neither Roche nor his team-mates at Carrera would be prosecuted

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Roche

But despite all that (and I may be wrong) he never called anyone a whore in the media, never forced a detractor out of business, didn't sue anyone, didn't try to buy the authorities, didn't hide behind a cancer veil, didn't run shirtless with Mathew McCaunaghey.... do I have to list all these things AGAIN.

As for Indurain acting like Armstrong. Not a chance.

robs1

detones wrote: »

Good peice on BBC 5 Live podcast about the upcoming Interview. Mark Chapman is joined by The Times' (English Times) cycling correspondent Jeremy Whittle as they discuss Lance Armstrong's upcoming interview with Oprah Winfrey.

For me I found the Interview at the end with Nicole Cook very insightful into the affects Lance has had on the Sport. She was a gold medalist at the Bejing Olympics. She speaks about a friend of hers, a young American under 23chap and up and coming rider. He got a place on one of the Best U23 teams at the time around 2003. He was told that there was Black, White and Grey. He was asked how far was he willing to go into the Grey to succeed in the sport. He said he wouldn’t cheat and was kicked off the team. He ended up riding for another much smaller team and in the end didn’t make it as a rider. Nicole points out that the drugs culture Lance helped create in cycling, did not only help him Beat other dopers but it robbed clean and talented riders of their Dreams and Careers in the sport. All their hard work was for nothing because they would not dope like Lance.

there was a doping culture in cycling even before Armstrong was born. he did not create this culture its been there for about 50 years. I not defending him but it didn't start with Armstrong and now that he has been caught its not going to stop all of a sudden

BQQ

No

Oprah has commented on the interview.
I guess I'll put it in spoiler tags, for those that want to watch.

http://www.sportinglife.com/other-sports/news/article/678/8398508/oprah-surprised-by-armstrong-interview

Oprah Winfrey has revealed Lance Armstrong did not come clean in the way she had expected him to in her interview with the disgraced cyclist.

Colonialboy

Yes, but he's still great

I think some of the attacks on Lance are becoming a bit irrational.
It appears some people are venting ALL their anger against doping on Lance.
He just happens to have been the numero uno, top of the pile, the worst of the dopers the most manuipulative etc. etc... but it required alot of direct and some indirect ('dont ask dont tell') support from more people , riders, doctors, sponsors, cycling administrators for doping and cycling to become so intertwined for many decades.

Lance seems to have become the only focus for all of this, thats enabling alot of people, companies, federations to scurry off into the corner and wait it all out until LA is totally destroyed and then they will come back out into the limlight with clean hands. LA might very well deserve to be destroyed but if he does then theres others that should go down with him.
Theres plenty blame to go around, Id like to see it spread around a bit. Maybe then we will see some change.

Lusk Doyle

No

Hermy wrote: »

Could you elaborate Lusk? I don't know Conor McGrane.

He called for a motion of no confidence in Pat McQuaid at the CI AGM.

retalivity

robs1 wrote: »

there was a doping culture in cycling even before Armstrong was born. he did not create this culture its been there for about 50 years. I not defending him but it didn't start with Armstrong and now that he has been caught its not going to stop all of a sudden

He took it to a whole new level though, systematically instilling it into his team and teammates, and ruining careers of others who didn't share his 'vision'.

He was like the mafia don in charge of bootlegging during prohibition in the states: He didn't invent alcohol, or was the only one doing it. But he profited most from it by being a ruthless b*stard and destroying the lives of anyone who didn't go along with him.

ThisRegard

No

Colonialboy wrote: »

I think some of the attacks on Lance are becoming a bit irrational.
It appears some people are venting ALL their anger against doping on Lance.
He just happens to have been the numero uno, top of the pile, the worst of

You must be glossing over all the posts, threads and articles about the UCI for one ?

velo.2010

Oprah did her homework on the subject, though she still may have soft-soaped him. Skip to 2.30 and follow beyond. Appears that Armstrong spoke at length and in some detail that surprised the crew. We may get some answers!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5862Um6VWpw

detones

No

robs1 wrote: »

there was a doping culture in cycling even before Armstrong was born. he did not create this culture its been there for about 50 years. I not defending him but it didn't start with Armstrong and now that he has been caught its not going to stop all of a sudden

That’s a fair point Robs, I can appreciate cycling had a problem well before Lance but I feel Lance took doping to a new level. When accused of any wrong doing he fought back and really damaged the accusers. He had the weight of the persona he created the Cancer survivor behind him. He had an element in the Media and the public at Large who did not want to believe Lance was a cheater. It is only when he has absolutely no alternative he has (as we think he will ) owned up.

I for one think i can nearly predict how this interview with Oprah will go. Lots of tears, lots of Cleenex. Poor lance had no choice but to cheat. Poor lance got caught up in the lie. It will probably start with a montage of all the good he has done, with his charity Livestrong, few pics of sick Kids hugging lance, coldplay playing in the background. Then bring on Lance, Tiger Woods Style, with a face like a bold school boy to tell us all how sorry he is without really admitting anything and leaving us short of the important details everybody wants.

GeorgeBailey

petethedrummer wrote: »

So you're defending Armstrong's behaviour on how 2 other guys may possibly act in your hypothetical scenario!

Not defending. Just asking a question I don't know the answer to. Thanks.

Tombo2001

detones wrote: »

That’s a fair point Robs, I can appreciate cycling had a problem well before Lance but I feel Lance took doping to a new level. When accused of any wrong doing he fought back and really damaged the accusers. He had the weight of the persona he created the Cancer survivor behind him. He had an element in the Media and the public at Large who did not want to believe Lance was a cheater. It is only when he has absolutely no alternative he has (as we think he will ) owned up.

I for one think i can nearly predict how this interview with Oprah will go. Lots of tears, lots of Cleenex. Poor lance had no choice but to cheat. Poor lance got caught up in the lie. It will probably start with a montage of all the good he has done, with his charity Livestrong, few pics of sick Kids hugging lance, coldplay playing in the background. Then bring on Lance, Tiger Woods Style, with a face like a bold school boy to tell us all how sorry he is without really admitting anything and leaving us short of the important details everybody wants.

I think ultimately the point is a fair one though. If Lance is disgraced, exposed and loses everything, and in 2015, 2016 and 1017 the TdeF is caught for doping.....then what was gained......

godtabh

indo wrote:

LANCE Armstrong "did not come clean in the way I expected," talk show host Oprah Winfrey said on Tuesday

Says it all really. Dont expect much on Thursday.

Something along the lines of the made me do it and/or I had no choice

ThisRegard

No

velo.2010 wrote: »

Oprah did her homework on the subject,

It does sound like she did doesn't it. Only time will tell, and as they say, it's knowing what to ask as a follow-up is probably more important than the initial question itself.

godtabh wrote: »

Says it all really. Dont expect much on Thursday.

Something along the lines of the made me do it and/or I had no choice

The impression I got is that he went further than they expected ?