'Enough is Enough' - Lance Armstrong

JM Skipton

MPFG wrote: »

I wonder how many TVs Kimmage has wrecked in his lifetime

I see he says its not about Bradley Wiggins but the went on to say everything Bradley Wiggins should be doing. ie standing up and talking to Kimmage, etc,etc

No mention of what Contador, or Schelck or Evans Or Gilbert or Cancellera or Cavandish should be doing...its a total bias against Wiggins in my book

And he says he 'doesn't know about Wiggins' and PED's...well if he doesn't know why is he constantly casting aspersions.....
He is casting an air of doubt that is unfair and biased

Wiggins has a duty as Tour De France champion to come out clearly and without ambiguity against Armstrong and what he has done to the sport.Wiggins interview on Sky this week where he indirectly had a go at Kimmage did not inspire confidence.By the end of the interview you would have thought that Kimmage was the bad guy.

elguapo

No

Cienciano wrote: »

I've checked 5 online dictionary's to confirm what everyone is thinking - that lances definition that the word "cheat" doesn't exist and Lance just threw in the "on a rival or foe" to make himself look a bit better.

cheat

/tʃit/ Show Spelled [cheet] Show IPA
verb (used with object) 1. to defraud; swindle: He cheated her out of her inheritance.

2. to deceive; influence by fraud: He cheated us into believing him a hero.

3. to elude; deprive of something expected: He cheated the law by suicide.


verb (used without object)
4. to practice fraud or deceit: She cheats without regrets.

5. to violate rules or regulations: He cheats at cards.

6. to take an examination or test in a dishonest way, as by improper access to answers.

cheat (cht)
v. cheat·ed, cheat·ing, cheats
v.tr. 1. To deceive by trickery; swindle: cheated customers by overcharging them for purchases.
2. To deprive by trickery; defraud: cheated them of their land.
3. To mislead; fool: illusions that cheat the eye.
4. To elude; escape: cheat death.

v.intr. 1. To act dishonestly; practice fraud.
2. To violate rules deliberately, as in a game: was accused of cheating at cards.
3. Informal To be sexually unfaithful: cheat on a spouse.
4. Baseball To position oneself closer to a certain area than is normal or expected: The shortstop cheated toward second base.

n. 1. An act of cheating; a fraud or swindle.
2. One who cheats; a swindler.
3. A computer application, password, or disallowed technique used to advance to a higher skill level in a computer video game.
4. Law Fraudulent acquisition of another's property.
5. Botany An annual European species of brome grass (Bromus secalinus) widely naturalized in temperate regions

1cheat

verb \ˈchēt\



Definition of CHEAT

transitive verb
1
: to deprive of something valuable by the use of deceit or fraud

2
: to influence or lead by deceit, trick, or artifice

3
: to elude or thwart by or as if by outwitting <cheat death>

intransitive verb
1
a : to practice fraud or trickery
b : to violate rules dishonestly <cheat at cards> <cheating on a test>

2
: to be sexually unfaithful —usually used with on <was cheating on his wife>

3
: to position oneself defensively near a particular area in anticipation of a play in that area <the shortstop was cheating toward second base>


I think we can safely say, Lance is a cheat and still a liar.

And a sociopath.

hoodwinked

No

im watching the oprah interview there now,


did any of you notice him fidgeting with his hands when answering some of the questions, touching his hair, rubbing his hands together,


when he was admitting he didn't feel like he was cheating nothing! or when he's admitting to doping - nothing.


its weird, almost like he still believes the lies but he is saying what he was told to.

corny

No

JM Skipton wrote: »

Wiggins has a duty as Tour De France champion to come out clearly and without ambiguity against Armstrong and what he has done to the sport.Wiggins interview on Sky this week where he indirectly had a go at Kimmage did not inspire confidence.By the end of the interview you would have thought that Kimmage was the bad guy.

I think he's on record with his opinion on Armstrong. In fact wasn't he one of the first to come out publicly and state he thought Armstrong was guilty. All while a cadre of Spanish riders were shouting injustice.

furiousox

No

Anyone know what happened with Walsh and the bbc interview?
Also what's jimmy Magee got to say for himself now?

Hermy

No

corny wrote: »

I think he's on record with his opinion on Armstrong. In fact wasn't he one of the first to come out publicly and state he thought Armstrong was guilty. All while a cadre of Spanish riders were shouting injustice.

He also said he never rode the Tour with Lance...

Mcofferon

Mcofferon wrote: »

UCI Statement http://www.uci.ch/Modules/ENews/ENewsDetails2011.asp?id=ODk4OQ&MenuId=MTYzMDQ&LangId=1&BackLink=%2Ftemplates%2FUCI%2FUCI8%2Flayout%2Easp%3FMenuId%3DMTYzMDQ%26LangId%3D1

“Finally, we note that Lance Armstrong expressed a wish to participate in a truth and reconciliation process, which we would welcome.”

Glad to see everyone is still singing off the old hymn sheets. Just a little confused over this new 'truth and reconciliation' number - will Floyd and Tyler be allowed to play too or can we still call them "scumbags"??

Hilarious stuff altogether. I was hoping Armstrong would take the lot down with him but someone must've reached out.

Hermy

No

furiousox wrote: »

Also what's jimmy Magee got to say for himself now?

Caught the tale-end of an interview with him on Newstalk and apparently the people who told the truth about Armstrong are the bad guys.

marketty

Kind of sums up everything after the first 5 minutes

thebourke

RobFowl wrote: »

Yeah that too

(He even dropped that line last night !!)

Wow...i just read the link that he wasn't tested 500 times...how was he able to say all along that he was and people were not saying in public that he wasn't tested anywhere near that?

Dempsey

No

The problem with LA is that he's convinced himself that the whole sport is doping so in his mind its not really cheating if you "play the game" and do it better than everyone else.

ooPabsoo

No

"Why did you make that donation to the UCI?"

"Because they asked me to" .....what an absolute load of tripe.

RobFowl

No

Hermy wrote: »

Caught the tale-end of an interview with him on Newstalk and apparently the people who told the truth about Armstrong are the bad guys.

WTF, will somebody just leave Jimmy alone and stop wheeling him out of the home for the terminally bewildered every time they need a daft quote !!!

Beasty

No

ooPabsoo wrote: »

"Why did you make that donation to the UCI?"

"Because they asked me to" .....what an absolute load of tripe.

May be factually correct - if so I'd like to know what the other side of the "bargain" was though

Max_Charger

No

I'll give him one thing, if your code word for EPO is "Edgar Allan Poe", then it was far from a sophisticated doping system...

velo.2010

Anyone got a link to the full interview, not a few clips? Cheers.

Leroy42

LA says that he gave the money to UCI after he retired in 2005, but I thought he had given them money in 2001

letape

No

RobFowl wrote: »

WTF, will somebody just leave Jimmy alone and stop wheeling him out of the home for the terminally bewildered every time they need a daft quote !!!

Jimmy also still believes in cycling and what he sees when he watches it, believes Wiggins won clean last year and that Cav won the green jesrsey clean. He also believes that everyone, including Lance deserves a second chance!

mcgratheoin

No

letape wrote: »

Jimmy also still believes in cycling and what he sees when he watches it, believes Wiggins won clean last year and that Cav won the green jesrsey clean. He also believes that everyone, including Lance deserves a second chance!

and Michelle Smith never tested positive....

ooPabsoo

No

Full interview on Youtube

Beasty

No

Leroy42 wrote: »

LA says that he gave the money to UCI after he retired in 2005, but I thought he had given them money in 2001

There were 2 donations - 2002 and 2007 - it's not absolutely clear to me whether his comments related to both of them ...

Edit:

This is what was said

You made a donation to the UCI and said that donation was about helping anti-doping efforts. Obviously it was not. Why did you make that donation?

"It was not in exchange for help. They called and said they didn't have a lot of money - I did. They asked if I would make a donation so I did."

As I implied above it could easily be argued that this statement applies to only one of the 2 donations made (and equally could apply to both)

2 Wheels Good

No

velo.2010 wrote: »

Anyone got a link to the full interview, not a few clips? Cheers.

Should all be here
http://www.youtube.com/user/NewsPoliticsNow3/videos?flow=list&view=0&sort=dd

greenmat

No

ooPabsoo wrote: »

Full interview on Youtube

I lasted 3 mins 55 secs before turning off, a lying cheating b**tard. Why believe what he has to say now?

Cienciano

No

Hermy wrote: »

Caught the tale-end of an interview with him on Newstalk and apparently the people who told the truth about Armstrong are the bad guys.

Same stance as the UCI then. Landis and Hamilton are "scumbags" for coming out, but they "welcome Lance's decision" for admitting it.

Hermy

No

thebourke wrote: »

Wow...i just read the link that he wasn't tested 500 times...how was he able to say all along that he was and people were not saying in public that he wasn't tested anywhere near that?

Because people are idiots! And by times they are queueing up to be hoodwinked.

Cienciano

No

I know it's been posted before, but Oprah should have read this to Lance when he said it was a level playing field and everyone had access to the same drugs as a reason to dope:
http://inrng.com/2012/10/level-playing-field-doping-myth/

RyanAndrew

No

This from Pat McQuaids press release

“Lance Armstrong has confirmed there was no collusion or conspiracy between the UCI and Lance Armstrong. There were no positive tests which were covered up and he has confirmed that the donations made to the UCI were to assist in the fight against doping. "

I didn't hear any of that. I did hear LA say that the money he paid wasn't to cover up a positive test. Fair enough. He didn't say "I didn't collude or conspire with the UCI".
He didn't say that the donations were to assist in the fight against doping . He said ""It was not in exchange for help. They called and said they didn't have a lot of money - I did. They asked if I would make a donation so I did." His words were general not specific.

He didn't say thre were no positve tests (plural) covered up, what he did say was in relation to the Tour de Suisse [in 2001] only.

"That story isn't true. There was no positive test. No paying off of the lab. The UCI did not make that go away. "

And he did say that there was nothing shady about THAT arrangement. Which clearly implies some arrangement was shady. All of which is a far cry from the ringing endorsement the UCI seem to have heard.

RobFowl

No

letape wrote: »

Jimmy also still believes in cycling and what he sees when he watches it, believes Wiggins won clean last year and that Cav won the green jesrsey clean. He also believes that everyone, including Lance deserves a second chance! the tooth fairy

FYP there

MisterAnarchy

RyanAndrew wrote: »

This from Pat McQuaids press release

“Lance Armstrong has confirmed there was no collusion or conspiracy between the UCI and Lance Armstrong. There were no positive tests which were covered up and he has confirmed that the donations made to the UCI were to assist in the fight against doping. "

As if anyone would believe a word out of Armstrongs mouth at this stage ,the man is a pathological liar .
Why would people believe someone who has lied through his teeth for over 15 years and sued/ruin anyone who cast suspicion on him ?
If the UCI aided and abetted him ,he wont admit that .

The whole interview was choreographed by Armstrongs legal team ,it was completely insincere and stage managed.

Are we expected to believe that Armstrong is genuinely sorry for his actions ,he says he is a different man now than he was last year .
He said he was a jerk but then arrogantly went on to say if he hadnt made his comeback in 2009 that he would never have been caught.
He hasnt changed a bit.

He should never have comeback ,he was a fool to do so but his ego was so big that he thought he could get away with further cheating .

He deserves no sympathy ,he is the biggest cheat in the history of sport ,and tried to rub it in the face of his detractors for over 15 years .

RobFowl

No

letape wrote: »

Jimmy also still believes in cycling and what he sees when he watches it, believes Wiggins won clean last year and that Cav won the green jesrsey clean. He also believes that everyone, including Lance deserves a second chance!

In all seriousness I stopped taking Jimmy seriously a long long time ago. Even back in the 80's he was notoriously clueless commentating on cycle races.
He still views Michelles Smiths medals and un-tainted and is not exactly hard on even proven drug cheats.
He loves sport and that does come across in his commentary but does he have an opinion on doping which stand up to scrutiny and the answer has to be a resounding no....