Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Which of these men making the news this week is more deluded?

  • 20-10-2012 12:56am
    #1
    Brussels Sprout
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,486 ✭✭✭


    Sean Quinn, his family and his local supporters for trying to make out that his empire's collapse is all a huge conspiracy against him.

    OR

    Lance Armstrong for trying to claim that the USADA's findings against him, which included testimony from up to 30 different cyclists (including ex team-mates), is a huge witch hunt designed to discredit him based on no real evidence.

    Who's got the bigger brass neck? 34 votes

    Sean Quinn
    0% 0 votes
    Lance Armstrong
    100% 34 votes


Comments

  • #2
    SafeSurfer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,672 ✭✭✭SafeSurfer


    Enda Kenny

    Multo autem ad rem magis pertinet quallis tibi vide aris quam allis



  • #3
    El Weirdo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,647 ✭✭✭✭El Weirdo


    Is there a prize for getting the correct answer?


  • #4
    Max Power
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,072 ✭✭✭Max Power


    Lance Armstrong as never tested positive for a banned substance, so until proven otherwise he is still the best cyclist the world has seen.


  • #5
    Max Power
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,072 ✭✭✭Max Power


    El Weirdo wrote: »
    Is there a prize for getting the correct answer?
    Yes, one brussel sprout.


  • #6
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,611 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Brussels Sprout wrote: »
    Sean Quinn, his family and his local supporters for trying to make out that his empire's collapse is all a huge conspiracy against him.

    OR

    Lance Armstrong for trying to claim that the USADA's findings against him, which included testimony from up to 30 different cyclists (including ex team-mates), is a huge witch hunt designed to discredit him based on no real evidence.

    Quinn probably. The pure scapegoating of Armstrong at this point is laughable. While I don't doubt he doped the way they're going on now and the way the other cyclists are stringing him up is like when the Mafia blamed Bart for getting rid of Principal Skinner.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Plazaman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,012 ✭✭✭Plazaman


    Is Lance the lad that lost a ball?


  • #8
    Max Power
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,072 ✭✭✭Max Power


    Plazaman wrote: »
    Is Lance the lad that lost a ball?
    Yes and he set up a charity called LiveStrong which has raised hundreds of millions of dollars for cancer research.


  • #9
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,611 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    FionnMcCool87 wrote: »
    Yes and he set up a charity called LiveStrong which has raised hundreds of millions of dollars for cancer research.

    And he made a few million off the brand for himself.


  • #10
    DEFTLEFTHAND
    Registered Users Posts: 16,500 ✭✭✭✭DEFTLEFTHAND


    What was it 7 tour de France titles now vacated? Lance has to go and take his place with the likes of Floyd Landis and Stephen Roche. Although Roche holds on to his title on the legal technicality of the statute of limitations.


  • #11
    Max Power
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,072 ✭✭✭Max Power


    DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »
    Stephen Roche. Although Roche holds on to his title on the legal technicality of the statute of limitations.
    That's quite the accusation there.


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    DEFTLEFTHAND
    Registered Users Posts: 16,500 ✭✭✭✭DEFTLEFTHAND


    FionnMcCool87 wrote: »
    That's quite the accusation there.

    An official judicial investigation in an Italian court in 2004 found Roche and his team all guilty of doping offences in the year 1993, if he was doing it then he was doing it when he won the tour. The team doctor at the time of Roche's win came out years later and admitted that he had administered performance enhancing drugs. Due to the the time that had passed (statute of limitations) Roche could not be stripped of the title.


  • #13
    vicwatson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,404 ✭✭✭✭vicwatson


    Is there no "both" on the poll no ??


  • #14
    Greentopia
    Registered Users Posts: 3,221 ✭✭✭Greentopia


    I'm a bit sad about LA, I know he was never the most popular cyclist with a lot of people but I admired him (ok I think he's hot too :pac:) , especially after coming back and winning all those titles after nearly losing his life to cancer.


  • #15
    Galwayguy35
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,677 ✭✭✭✭Galwayguy35


    Greentopia wrote: »
    I'm a bit sad about LA, I know he was never the most popular cyclist with a lot of people but I admired him (ok I think he's hot too :pac:) , especially after coming back and winning all those titles after nearly losing his life to cancer.

    Someone who wins titles without any help from drugs is the person to admire IMO.


  • #16
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,611 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Galwayguy35 wrote: »
    Someone who wins titles without any help from drugs is the person to admire IMO.

    That doesn't leave many admirable sportspeople in the last 30 years alas.


  • #17
    Greentopia
    Registered Users Posts: 3,221 ✭✭✭Greentopia


    Galwayguy35 wrote: »
    Someone who wins titles without any help from drugs is the person to admire IMO.

    I agree, that's why I said admired him. Not any more.


  • #18
    Greentopia
    Registered Users Posts: 3,221 ✭✭✭Greentopia


    Deleted User wrote: »
    That doesn't leave many admirable sportspeople in the last 30 years alas.

    It leaves lots of admirable clean sports people, just fewer cyclists.


  • #19
    4zn76tysfajdxp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,944 ✭✭✭✭4zn76tysfajdxp


    Brussels Sprout wrote: »
    Sean Quinn, his family and his local supporters for trying to make out that his empire's collapse is all a huge conspiracy against him.

    OR

    Lance Armstrong for trying to claim that the USADA's findings against him, which included testimony from up to 30 different cyclists (including ex team-mates), is a huge witch hunt designed to discredit him based on no real evidence.

    They're not deluded, they know exactly what they're doing.

    Their fans, on the other hand...


  • #20
    TimeToShine
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,881 ✭✭✭TimeToShine


    Greentopia wrote: »
    It leaves lots of admirable clean sports people, just fewer cyclists.

    a lot of olympians use steroids.


  • #21
    Son Of A Vidic
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,370 ✭✭✭✭Son Of A Vidic


    Brussels Sprout wrote: »
    Lance Armstrong for trying to claim that the USADA's findings against him, which included testimony from up to 30 different cyclists (including ex team-mates), is a huge witch hunt designed to discredit him based on no real evidence.

    While not condoning what Armstrong did, I find the hype around him to be quite laughable. But if ever there was a sport infested with drug cheats, it's professional cycling. I've lost count of which guy who got banned for what and for how long. These guy are years ahead of other sports for doping.

    Right back to the Pélissier brothers at the 1924 Tour De France, who at the time listed out a catalogue of drugs they took to keep going. I grew up idolising Kelly and Roche, but now all I see is a discredited sport. Which makes the stance taken toward Armstrong all the more hypocritical in my eyes.


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    the_syco
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,306 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    El Weirdo wrote: »
    Is there a prize for getting the correct answer?
    An all expenses paid trip to After Hours where you'll...

    Oh, wait :pac:


  • #23
    Mickey H
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,822 ✭✭✭Mickey H


    the_syco wrote: »
    An all expenses paid trip to After Hours where you'll...

    Oh, wait :pac:

    Have the craic, lively debate, get insulted, insult people back, take the piss, all in the name of humour. AH has it all. :D


  • #24
    Greentopia
    Registered Users Posts: 3,221 ✭✭✭Greentopia


    TimeToShine wrote: »
    a lot of olympians use steroids.

    Of course! that's doesn't falsify what I said though-that there are still lots of clean sports people.


  • #25
    Piliger
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,741 ✭✭✭Piliger


    Brussels Sprout wrote: »
    Sean Quinn, his family and his local supporters for trying to make out that his empire's collapse is all a huge conspiracy against him.

    OR

    Lance Armstrong for trying to claim that the USADA's findings against him, which included testimony from up to 30 different cyclists (including ex team-mates), is a huge witch hunt designed to discredit him based on no real evidence.

    Quinn faced a court of law, with direct evidence. Armstrong has no direct evidence against him.

    He has a bunch of self confessed cheats who were caught in flagrante and who immediately all turned, in unison, and pointed the finger at the closest and most convenient scapegoat ... saying "It was 'im guv. Honest injun'". And so, he was pronounced guilty.


  • #26
    Knockmealdown Shepherd
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23 ✭Knockmealdown Shepherd


    Piliger wrote: »
    Quinn faced a court of law, with direct evidence. Armstrong has no direct evidence against him.

    He has a bunch of self confessed cheats who were caught in flagrante and who immediately all turned, in unison, and pointed the finger at the closest and most convenient scapegoat ... saying "It was 'im guv. Honest injun'". And so, he was pronounced guilty.

    "Armstrong has no direct evidence against him"

    Tee Hee! You can not be serious....He has the world of direct evidence against him. He just chose not to face it


  • #27
    Seaneh
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 18,300 ✭✭✭✭Seaneh


    FionnMcCool87 wrote: »
    Lance Armstrong as never tested positive for a banned substance, so until proven otherwise he is still the best cyclist the world has seen.

    Incorrect.

    He has testeted positive several times.

    Next.


  • #28
    Seaneh
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 18,300 ✭✭✭✭Seaneh


    Piliger wrote: »
    Quinn faced a court of law, with direct evidence. Armstrong has no direct evidence against him.

    He has a bunch of self confessed cheats who were caught in flagrante and who immediately all turned, in unison, and pointed the finger at the closest and most convenient scapegoat ... saying "It was 'im guv. Honest injun'". And so, he was pronounced guilty.

    No, he has several blood tests that have proof of EPO and other PED's being used.

    His b sample from the 1999 TDF failed a test for EPO 2 years after the tour.


  • #29
    davyjose
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,287 ✭✭✭davyjose


    Seaneh wrote: »
    No, he has several blood tests that have proof of EPO and other PED's being used.

    His b sample from the 1998 TDF failed a test for EPO 2 years after the tour.

    He didn't ride in the 1998 TDF, he had cancer.


  • #30
    Seaneh
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 18,300 ✭✭✭✭Seaneh


    davyjose wrote: »
    He didn't ride in the 1998 TDF, he had cancer.

    Typo, 1999.

    And by the time of the 1998 tour, he was a fulltime professional cyclist again and riding for US Postal, he finished 4th in the Vuelta.

    He was declared cancer free in 1997 and had been in remission since mid 1996.


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    Benny_Cake
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,205 ✭✭✭Benny_Cake


    Piliger wrote: »
    Quinn faced a court of law, with direct evidence. Armstrong has no direct evidence against him.

    He has a bunch of self confessed cheats who were caught in flagrante and who immediately all turned, in unison, and pointed the finger at the closest and most convenient scapegoat ... saying "It was 'im guv. Honest injun'". And so, he was pronounced guilty.

    Many of those cited in the USADA report had no allegations against them. Lance Armstrong could have contested the allegations against him but chose not to. I can understand that people would rather see him as a hero who overcame illness, but frankly, the likes of Terry Fox are the true heroes.


Advertisement