'Enough is Enough' - Lance Armstrong

ThisRegard

No

scrawnybawny wrote: »

jesus christ
did i hear right there on newstalk;

of all the people begging to interview him who actually might have relevant questions, Pat McQuaid has agreed to do an interview with the doyen of cycling journalism that is pat kenny.
c'mon.
i'd love to see walsh and kimmage double-teaming him

To be fair, Kenny is quite well versed in the topic and if he keeps his current stance I don't think McQuaid will be in for an easy ride, pardon the pun.

hardCopy

No

nipper67 wrote: »

if everyone is so clean who is getting his titles

Nobody, there are too many doubts about the people he beat.

Should I assume that you've only stumbled on this story tonight, or are you on a windup? Because the story has been covered in detail on every news outlet in the world in recent weeks.

Waitsian

No

Is there any footage of when Armstrong had his "chats" with Bassons and/or Simeoni? I've seen still photos of his chasing down and talking to Simeoni but none of he and Bassons. I've also seen footage of the '99 stage to L'Alpe d'Huez but the Bassons incident isn't mentioned.

Captain Havoc

scrawnybawny wrote: »

jesus christ
did i hear right there on newstalk;

of all the people begging to interview him who actually might have relevant questions, Pat McQuaid has agreed to do an interview with the doyen of cycling journalism that is pat kenny.
c'mon.
i'd love to see walsh and kimmage double-teaming him

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzXxjWeMS2g

petethedrummer

No

nipper67 wrote: »

if everyone is so clean who is getting his titles

The Many Stages of Armstrong Denial
1. He never cheated. Heart of a moose, lungs of a hippo.
2. He never tested positive.
3. European Conspiracy.
4. The USADA case is a witchhunt.
5. It's all hearsay.
6. Waste of taxpayers money. Why aren't they catching the real criminals?
7. Ok, maybe he cheated but everyone else was cheating.
8. It's too late now to change the results.
9. Greg Lemond must have cheated too.


Is this a new approach we're seeing here? You jumped from stage 2 to stage 7/8 very quickly. Anywaysm, as we counter each argument you can pick from any of the others and we can counter them too.

Or you could just turn your computer off and save everyone a bit of hassle.

hardCopy

No

petethedrummer wrote: »

The Many Stages of Armstrong Denial
1. He never cheated. Heart of a moose, lungs of a hippo.
2. He never tested positive.
3. European Conspiracy.
4. The USADA case is a witchhunt.
5. It's all hearsay.
6. Waste of taxpayers money. Why aren't they catching the real criminals?
7. Ok, maybe he cheated but everyone else was cheating.
8. It's too late now to change the results.
9. Greg Lemond must have cheated too.


Is this a new approach we're seeing here? You jumped from stage 2 to stage 7/8 very quickly. Anywaysm, as we counter each argument you can pick from any of the others and we can counter them too.

Or you could just turn your computer off and save everyone a bit of hassle.

You've missed out on the "Big Government Washington Democrat Bureaucracy Justifying Their Washington Wages"

Flandria

No

nipper67 wrote: »

if everyone is so clean who is getting his titles

If you want them, they are yours

Zyzz

No

From the YLYL thread..

on_the_nickel

No

mod9maple wrote: »

Is there any footage of when Armstrong had his "chats" with Bassons and/or Simeoni? I've seen still photos of his chasing down and talking to Simeoni but none of he and Bassons. I've also seen footage of the '99 stage to L'Alpe d'Huez but the Bassons incident isn't mentioned.

Simeoni footage here, was appeneded in the USADA report. http://www.ina.fr/sport/cyclisme/video/2617040001030/resume-de-la-18eme-etape-annemasse-lons-le-saunier.fr.html

Spokes of Glory

scrawnybawny wrote: »

jesus christ
did i hear right there on newstalk;

of all the people begging to interview him who actually might have relevant questions, Pat McQuaid has agreed to do an interview with the doyen of cycling journalism that is pat kenny.
c'mon.
i'd love to see walsh and kimmage double-teaming him

I think this is better. Walsh and Kimmage (especially) have been on a mission against Armstrong and doping for many years, and can sometimes come across on the airwaves as slightly obsessed, albeit in pursuit of a good cause. Kenny is a serious news journalist and doesn't have any baggage to carry from either camp. His more dispassionate and reasoned approach might actually give PMcQ nowhere to hide.

A P

No

David Millar will be on BBC 5 Live shortly.

petethedrummer

No

Spokes of Glory wrote: »

Kenny is a serious news journalist and doesn't have any baggage to carry from either camp. His more dispassionate and reasoned approach might actually give PMcQ nowhere to hide.

Yeah, much as I dislike Pat on TV, he's good on radio. He should be able to put other Pat on the spot.

robs1

It says on the rte website that WADA or Armstrong can still take the case to CAS. Im not sure if that is right though. can anyone shed a little light on that

scrawnybawny

Spokes of Glory wrote: »

I think this is better. Walsh and Kimmage (especially) have been on a mission against Armstrong and doping for many years, and can sometimes come across on the airwaves as slightly obsessed, albeit in pursuit of a good cause. Kenny is a serious news journalist and doesn't have any baggage to carry from either camp. His more dispassionate and reasoned approach might actually give PMcQ nowhere to hide.

yeah i hear what you're saying but walsh and kimmage (thanx to their obsession with this subject) and knowledge of the minutiae of every facet of this story would be able to poke holes in any defence he submits
- not sure if kenny, as an armchair fan like the rest of us, has the in-depth knowledge to really crucify him, or if he will let him off the hook a little too easy as he is prone to do(he's no Paxman;) -sometimes ya need to ask a question 12 times to get the answer!:D)

Capt'n Midnight

No

Lance Armstrong: "The accusations make my blood boil .."

". . but luckily I've someone else's in my fridge." :pac:

Flandria

No

Link to tonight's Kimmage interview - http://soundcloud.com/off-the-ball/paul-kimmage-on-tonights-off

manwithaplan

No

petethedrummer wrote: »

Yeah, much as I dislike Pat on TV, he's good on radio.

Yes. Radio Norwich would be much the poorer without him.

le petit braquet

David Walsh on Off the Ball is now on the listen back page

http://www.newstalk.ie/programmes/all/offtheball/listen-back/

There is audio of McQuaid answering questions on the Armstrong "donation" at about 39.15 in part 2 for 22nd October and its followed by the Walsh interview

MPFG

No

Good point by Kimmage as to why UCI are not suing Armstrong for slander and not Kimmage as it is Armstrong who is saying UCI took bribes

I hope Kimmage gets another job but he needs to lighten up a little ...while he is very honest he needs to remember that journalism is about getting other people to talk and also getting articles published......I say this as I want him to be successful when this dies down

...I though it was telling at the UCI conference today when McQuiad said he did not want to become a pro in the 70's ( he was a good amateur) because he knew he would have to dope to succeed...Howeve he also contended that he knew nothing while at the UCI about Armstrong and others systematic doping in cycling......talking about shootign yourelf in the foot..
The thing with McQuiad and people like him is they are (become) the system and will not change things unless made to do so kicking and screaming because the system suits their ends...I honestly don't think McQuaid is a corrupt man and he believes that he is doing good in cycling...However what he doesn't (chooses not to ) see is that he is ineffectual, inefficient, archacic and ridiculous ( kimmage court case a point in question). The UCI are not fit for purpose and McQuaid and Vein should step down and let people with some acumen sort out that failing organistion

I think individual coutries cycling bodies need to get together and force their hand .....otherwsie cycling is going to lose out big time

kerash

No

His twitter profile no longer lists 7 TDF Titles btw.

Raising my 5 kids. Fighting Cancer. Swim, bike, run and golf whenever I can.

alfalad

No

With all these lawsuits going to come I reckon he will be declaring bankruptcy pretty soon.

spokesman

No

I'd imagine their will be even more scandal coming down the tracks in relation to the nineties, eighties and so on. Their definitely people out there with some stories to tell.It was rife before Armstrong came along.

wonderfullife

No

alfalad wrote: »

With all these lawsuits going to come I reckon he will be declaring bankruptcy pretty soon.

According to Forbes (and they are as reliable as it gets when guessing) Lance Armstrong has an estimated net worth of $125 million. So far he is being sued for $7 million by the insurers and the TdF want their $3.6 million ish back. That's 10% of his income gone. Beyond that i could see what, maybe another $5 million in prize money going back, $20 million from insurers, libel re-payouts, the big question then is the appetite of the sponsors to go after him for breach of contract or fraud. Trust me if Nike go after him their legal team will make mince meat of him. It all depends on the rumour mill - if it's true Nike paid money to Verbruggen then he's safe as Nike can't risk that getting dragged up.

Effectively if Lance has any dirt of anyone they are safe. So that rules out the UCI going after him for a penny :cool:

wonderfullife

No

In reality, it is not USADA's hard work that will ultimately completely destroy the myth of Lance. As of right now he still has global support, albeit surely a fraction of his previous support. But let's say the hundreds of thousands left thinking he's a legend are in doubt, that will soon be blown away.

Reason being - if he is sued for fraud based on drug use, and settles those claims out of court, that's an outright implied admission of guilt. I'd love to see the insurers get their day in court with him because that would give Lance an opportunity to try defend himself. Hard to do that when guilty as sin. So as soon as he starts paying out, any sane person cannot be left in any doubt of complete guilt.

Of course he'll trot out something to do with focusing on defeating cancer and not wasting time on trials..... yawn

retalivity

Winning the Tour de France not once, not twice, but 7 times takes a crapload of hard work and dedication. I don't care who you are...doping or not. And if the titles cannot be given to other cyclists because doping was so prevalent during that time among cyclists, didn't that level the playing field anyways?

An american friend of mine just posted this on facebook.
some people....

Capt'n Midnight

No

retalivity wrote: »

An american friend of mine just posted this on facebook.
some people....

you'll have to post Heart of a moose, lungs of a hippo. now

alfalad

No

wonderfullife wrote: »

According to Forbes (and they are as reliable as it gets when guessing) Lance Armstrong has an estimated net worth of $125 million. So far he is being sued for $7 million by the insurers and the TdF want their $3.6 million ish back. That's 10% of his income gone. Beyond that i could see what, maybe another $5 million in prize money going back, $20 million from insurers, libel re-payouts, the big question then is the appetite of the sponsors to go after him for breach of contract or fraud. Trust me if Nike go after him their legal team will make mince meat of him. It all depends on the rumour mill - if it's true Nike paid money to Verbruggen then he's safe as Nike can't risk that getting dragged up.

Effectively if Lance has any dirt of anyone they are safe. So that rules out the UCI going after him for a penny :cool:

Ah i didn't know but didn't think he had near that much cash. Thought he would only have half it or less. He's pretty safe so.

petethedrummer

No

How does he sleep at night?



On a big pile of money, with many beautiful ladies.

corny

No

kerash wrote: »

His twitter profile no longer lists 7 TDF Titles btw.

Tweets have dried up too. 1,2,3 a day and then on the 12th bang, not a peep.

I'm disappointed he's trying to disappear. I was expecting the impudent fecker to throw up some fireworks. Bit of an anti climax now.:(

davyjose

wonderfullife wrote: »

According to Forbes (and they are as reliable as it gets when guessing) Lance Armstrong has an estimated net worth of $125 million. So far he is being sued for $7 million by the insurers and the TdF want their $3.6 million ish back. That's 10% of his income gone. Beyond that i could see what, maybe another $5 million in prize money going back, $20 million from insurers, libel re-payouts, the big question then is the appetite of the sponsors to go after him for breach of contract or fraud. Trust me if Nike go after him their legal team will make mince meat of him. It all depends on the rumour mill - if it's true Nike paid money to Verbruggen then he's safe as Nike can't risk that getting dragged up.

Effectively if Lance has any dirt of anyone they are safe. So that rules out the UCI going after him for a penny :cool:

No way Nike sue him; they really, really don't want to get embroiled in this. Any hint of their name being involved in doping would cost them more than anything they'd get off LA. As for the UCI seeing him? That would open a fcuking warehouse of cans of worms. They wouldn't survive it.

Nope, Lance will still be much, much richer than if he'd never doped and remained a former world champion and a domestique with a strong TT.