'Enough is Enough' - Lance Armstrong

Beasty

No

Kav0777 wrote: »

I believe he gives the reindeer PED's though, or "magic dust" as he calls it.....


Edited to Apologise to Mods for doping speculation..

Rudolph is clean - end of!!

mcgratheoin

No

Beasty wrote: »

Rudolph is clean - end of!!

Yeah, but he's benefiting from the assistance of an entire team suspected of snorting the magic dust - pulling sleighs is a team effort you know.

Hermy

No

"...Contador had his problems..."

"...Whatever mischief was going on then could never happen today...."

That's like in times past when someone with a profound psychological illness was described as suffering with their nerves. Cycling has some massive problems to deal with and trying to downplay them as Roche and others have done serves only to prolong the issue. There seems to be far too many involved in professional cycling who just want to sweep it all under the carpet and hope that the show goes on regardless. You begin to wonder do they really want a clean sport or are they happy with things the way they are!

EDIT: This from Niki Terpstra is more of the same.

Cienciano

No

wonderfullife wrote: »

Seriously, i know it's unlikely but if the UCI take USADA to the Court of Arbitration for Sport they all deserve to be dumped in a black sack and beaten with sticks for stupidity.

UCI will look even worse then. After the Landis allegations in 2010 McQuaid said Steve Johnson (CEO of United States Cycling) did the exact thing he should do by going to USADA who are an independent body and ask them to investigate these alligations.
McQuaid said "If they (USADA) come up with enough proof and enough evidence against any of these cyclists, UCI will support them 100%"

Kav0777

No

mcgratheoin wrote: »

Yeah, but he's benefiting from the assistance of an entire team suspected of snorting the magic dust - pulling sleighs is a team effort you know.

The "sleigh train" as oppose to the "Blue train"

Cienciano

No

So, if Lance makes a statement today, how long before he mentions cancer or charity? My money is on his second sentence (after he says it's a witch hunt and he's innocent)

paddyh117

No

buffalo wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/sport/other-sports/cycling-has-cleaned-up-its-act-now-claims-stephen-roche-3265071.html

Stand back everyone! Stephen Roche says it's okay!!

It's a sign of how far the pro-peloton has sunk when a rider is "suspected of being clean".

.....can't believe he used the word "mischief" when talking about this issue

they just want to play it down all the time and make it less serious than it was!

jimmy the car

No

SRAM latest to pull the plug now. Just chatting in work here, the two highest profile sponsors left Oakley and Nissan, what could they be waiting for at this stage? April 1st an d we all find out it was biggest hoax of all time!

Harrybelafonte

buffalo wrote: »

This is key. I think any LA fans who were still clinging on to their vision until recently were not at all into cycling. Surviving cancer, and coming back stronger than before (to win some big race in France)... that's a powerful thing. You don't see why that would inspire people?

Personally, no. I had a grandfather who lost an arm in his thirties, raised four kids on his own and lived an extremely healthy and full life until passing on in his mid-80s. I know of others on a personal level who have recovered from various traumas in their lives and continued on with their lifes, with maybe marginal sucess. People like that inspire me, if I really need it. I don't get in a fuss about a wealthy american with questionable morals who had an intriguing comeback after suffering from an illness lots of ordinary people suffer from.

Y'know, it's a belief. I'm not going to change it, you can call me an idiot as I have those who worshipped him, maybe one is as bad as the other, but I'll back it up.

When it comes down to it, even Lemond, who I have no great love for either, I'd admire way more by winning the TdF and World Champs two years after being shot in the ass and still carrying some lead in there.

buffalo

No

Harrybelafonte wrote: »

Personally, no. I had a grandfather who lost an arm in his thirties, raised four kids on his own and lived an extremely healthy and full life until passing on in his mid-80s. I know of others on a personal level who have recovered from various traumas in their lives and continued on with their lifes, with maybe marginal sucess. People like that inspire me, if I really need it. I don't get in a fuss about a wealthy american with questionable morals who had an intriguing comeback after suffering from an illness lots of ordinary people suffer from.

Y'know, it's a belief. I'm not going to change it, you can call me an idiot as I have those who worshipped him, maybe one is as bad as the other, but I'll back it up.

When it comes down to it, even Lemond, who I have no great love for either, I'd admire way more by winning the TdF and World Champs two years after being shot in the ass and still carrying some lead in there.

I'm not asking if you would admire it, I asked if you don't see why that would inspire other people? The story of someone who suffered and survived an illness to return to sport and win. If you can't see why some people would find that inspirational, well then I'll hush.

wonderfullife

No

The other way in which cycling (and particularly TdF) has suffered as a result of the mass doping era is in terms of the entertainment of the product. Some of the mountain stages in the 1999-2007 period were pure exhiliaration, attack after attack, pure excitement. Except this was on the back of doping and nowadays the tour looks dull, boring and mundane because the reality is nobody can legally sustain the power/watts, recovery etc they were sustaining in that era. So in place of breathtaking duels between Pantani, Ullrich, Armstrong etc we are left with Chris Froome towing Bradley up the mountain in an effective , boring, uninspiring way.

It is like winning a ferrari, driving it around for a few years, then having it confiscated as it was stolen property. You go back to the reliable old car but it just never feels the same, even though you get from A to B just as the Ferrari did.

ThisRegard

No

wonderfullife wrote: »

even though you get from A to B just as the Ferrari did.

But you're much better off without the Ferrari.

Remember, it's the Ferrari that caused a large part of this mess in the first place.

Harrybelafonte

buffalo wrote: »

I'm not asking if you would admire it, I asked if you don't see why that would inspire other people? The story of someone who suffered and survived an illness to return to sport and win. If you can't see why some people would find that inspirational, well then I'll hush.

Admiration comes before inspiration. I can see why they thought it inspirational, but... they were wrong. Plenty of fallacies in my logic, I know,like I said my view is tainted.

Anyway, considering the amount of supporters LA still has, either in power or ordinary people like ourselves and all those Americans, I don't see him being reduced to puaperism any time soon. Who knows, maybe he'll be an ESPN pundit in a few years like Virenque.

Hermy

No

wonderfullife wrote: »

The other way in which cycling (and particularly TdF) has suffered as a result of the mass doping era is in terms of the entertainment of the product. Some of the mountain stages in the 1999-2007 period were pure exhiliaration, attack after attack, pure excitement. Except this was on the back of doping and nowadays the tour looks dull, boring and mundane because the reality is nobody can legally sustain the power/watts, recovery etc they were sustaining in that era. So in place of breathtaking duels between Pantani, Ullrich, Armstrong etc we are left with Chris Froome towing Bradley up the mountain in an effective , boring, uninspiring way.

The 2011 Tour de France was one of the most exciting and unpredictable Tours I've ever watched and I think it was also one of the cleanest.

buffalo

No

Harrybelafonte wrote: »

Admiration comes before inspiration. I can see why they thought it inspirational, but... they were wrong. Plenty of fallacies in my logic, I know,like I said my view is tainted.

They were indeed wrong, but that doesn't mean you can fault their mistake at the time. You can call them ignorant, but based on what they knew at the time, his was an inspirational story. He was never a idol of mine, but I can understand those who did see him as a hero figure.
Obviously anyone still holding on to that view (or those who held the view despite having knowledge of widespread doping in pro-cycling) is severely delusional. second edit: Or those who claim that he's still great because he beat everyone else, who were also all doping. Or admire his cheating ability. gah, I'm getting angry now.

edit: I'm not sure why I care about this really. But there are surely people out there who feel lost and disappointed, who were duped by this bastard. I think those who know cycling benefited from "fool me once...". We'd been in this situation time and time again, but for people outside sport it was a fantastic feel-good story. Makes me despise Armstrong all the more.

mcgratheoin

No

Oakley statement :rolleyes:


"As guilty as the evidence shows, which we completely acknowledge, it is our promise and contractual obligation to stand by our athletes until proven guilty by the highest governing body of sport, or a court of law.

"We might be last off, but we are not going to jump on the bandwagon as it breaks our promise to all of our athletes. We will wait for the UCI's conclusion and act at that time."

Lumen

mcgratheoin wrote: »

Oakley statement :rolleyes:

I think you mean :cool:

petethedrummer

No

mcgratheoin wrote: »

Oakley statement :rolleyes:


"As guilty as the evidence shows, which we completely acknowledge, it is our promise and contractual obligation to stand by our athletes until proven guilty by the highest governing body of sport, or a court of law.

"We might be last off, but we are not going to jump on the bandwagon as it breaks our promise to all of our athletes. We will wait for the UCI's conclusion and act at that time."

I think this is an OK statement. The rest of his sponsors jumped ship when the mood turned, pretending they never knew about anything. Oakley knew what was going on and even participated in the McIlvain incident, so they should rightly go down with the ship. The rest are scurrying like rats.

Rabobank. They can't not have known what was going on in Cycling. They sponsored a team for years. Now they're getting all high and mighty. Save it.

I'll give the SKINS man a pass as he doesn't seem to have been a major player in cycling.

petethedrummer

No

Harrybelafonte wrote: »

Seriously? Comparing an honest LA to Santa Claus is spot on. We're adults, not seven year old children. I'll be telling my brat after this Christmas that the fat man doesn't exist, I'll lose plenty of respect for him if he turns a blind eye to the evidence and he's eight.

The Many stages of Santa denial:

1. Santa is real.
2. There is absolutely no evidence to say he doesn't exist.
3. The only evidence is hearsay from bitter people who don't get presents anymore.
4. He has brought too much happiness in to children's lives and that's what is important. His existence is not relevant.
5. Dancer, Prancer and Blitzen musn't exist either. Why not talk about them?
6. Maybe he doesn't exist but I'm going to keep on believing in him.
7. Why do you hate Christmas?
8. Well the Postman musn't exist either. You say you don't believe a man comes round once a year to deliver parcels to children. Yet your guy comes round with parcels everyday. Not Possible.

on_the_nickel

No

I'm a bit surprised at quite how much delight I'm taking in this arrogant, cheating, bullying liar getting found out and shown for what he is after all these years. Ditto Messrs Bruyneel, Ferrari etc.

I hope it doesn't make me a bad person.

dave_o_brien

No

petethedrummer wrote: »

The Many stages of Santa denial:

1. Santa is real.
2. There is absolutely no evidence to say he doesn't exist.
3. The only evidence is hearsay from bitter people who don't get presents anymore.
4. He has brought too much happiness in to children's lives and that's what is important. His existence is not relevant.
5. Dancer, Prancer and Blitzen musn't exist either. Why not talk about them?
6. Maybe he doesn't exist but I'm going to keep on believing in him.
7. Why do you hate Christmas?
8. Well the Postman musn't exist either. You say you don't believe a man comes round once a year to deliver parcels to children. Yet your guy comes round with parcels everyday. Not Possible.

So good I robbed it and posted it on facebook. Don't worry, you were quoted, but only with your boards name.

leftism

No

Harrybelafonte wrote: »

I, genuinely ask, apart from surviving cancer and doing something with his life, something which many other people, family members and friends have done, what made him such a special human being? Maybe I oversimplify it.

+1 on that! Even if we take all the doping out of it, Lance was never someone i would classify as a hero. From day 1, his attitude both on and off the bike was as far removed from heroic as it is possible to be. The word "hero" suggests someone inspirational who's actions and behaviour should be emulated by others. I certainly would not like my kids emulating Lance Armstrong, in a similar way that i would not like my kids emulating Christiano Ronaldo.

Again, taking all the doping and cheating out of it:

Lance was successful at beating cancer. He was very successful in professional cycling.

Success does not a hero make...

Lumen

leftism wrote: »

Lance was successful at beating cancer. He was very successful in professional cycling.

Actually it was Lance's doctors that were successful at beating his cancer, and...

oh.

on_the_nickel

No

Lumen wrote: »

Actually it was Lance's doctors that were successful at beating his cancer, and...

oh.

Well actually, it was the drugs prescribed by the doctors that were successful in him beating his cancer, and....

oh.


oh.


OH!

Hermy

No

leftism wrote: »

Lance was successful at beating cancer.

Nobody beats cancer. You just take your medicine and hope it goes away.:(

brandon_flowers

No

leftism wrote: »

Success does not a hero make...

Chalk that down... Hitler, Stalin etc were pretty successful too.

Probably insulting the dead now by mixing them in a conversation with L.A.

Lusk Doyle

No

petethedrummer wrote: »

I'll give the SKINS man a pass as he doesn't seem to have been a major player in cycling.

God, I'll bet he's breathing a huge sigh of relief at that news. Some guy who plays drums in Ireland is giving me a pass. Phew! I'll remember this day as the day I dodged a figurative bullet.

Hermy

No

UCI to announce decision on USADA's Armstrong findings on Monday

petethedrummer

No

Lusk Doyle wrote: »

God, I'll bet he's breathing a huge sigh of relief at that news. Some guy who plays drums in Ireland is giving me a pass. Phew! I'll remember this day as the day I dodged a figurative bullet.

Well I'll probably switch my from Nike to SKINS as my base layer of choice. So he's up approx 1 sale per year.

happytramp

No

Depressing.....

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Nike-Cycling-Livestrong-Gilet-New-XL-/321004927817?pt=UK_Cycling_Clothing&hash=item4abd627b49