# Phil Liggett and his mate



## Noodley (11 Jan 2013)

Anyone know if he's still due to provide commentary for ITV4 for this year's Tour?

Or have he and his mate Nooky Bear Sherwen been binned in favour of the small but growing number of "home grown" commentators that have emerged in recent years during the tour of britain, revolution, vuelta coverage, etc?

I really hope they are never to be heard from again on British TV.


----------



## rich p (11 Jan 2013)

I'll happily pay through the nose to get Eurosport if only to avoid Ray Allen and Lord Charles spouting their garbled garbage
If they have any integrity though, ITV will dump the gruesome twosome. At least Sherwen has had the sense to shut the fark up during this fiasco, which sadly cannot be said of Liggett.


----------



## thom (11 Jan 2013)

We should order some cyclechat note-paper and start a writing campaign to ITV.

It would be nice to get some new commentators and now would be a good time - they say Liggett's ability to call a finish is unparalleled but getting it right for 2 mins a day is not good enough if you're wrong for the rest of it.


----------



## Boris Bajic (11 Jan 2013)

I quite like things as they are and the odd Colemanballs moment just adds a little smile.

Change is part of the television landscape, but I quite like the _'old geezers smoking pipes_' image that sometimes comes with Ligett and Sherwen, even if it is not an accurate image. I know the voices and know what to expect.

It's a very personal thing with sport commentary. I can't bear listening to Alan Green on the radio, but my boy loves him.

I never liked Murray Walker on F1, but many thought him a god. They were wrong, of course. Hunt was sublime.

I just adore Stavros Parrish on MotoGP. Charlie Cox justs sounds like a funny Aussie cliche generator. 

Anyone who thinks differently on any of the above is not only wrong but super-wrong.


----------



## thom (11 Jan 2013)

Boris Bajic said:


> I quite like things as they are and the odd Colemanballs moment just adds a little smile.
> 
> Change is part of the television landscape, but I quite like the _'old geezers smoking pipes_' image that sometimes comes with Ligett and Sherwen, even if it is not an accurate image. I know the voices and know what to expect.
> 
> ...


The counter-revolutionary spake thus.

It isn't about style so much as being a stinking Armstrong apologist.
We deserve better than to have these dim-witted dinosaurs lingering on. 
Give someone new a chance - long live the revolution !


----------



## Hont (11 Jan 2013)

I think they should be given the opportunity to right the wrongs of the past. For example they should be forced to shoe-horn references of "a certain Lance Armstrong" into the commentary with the flimsiest of excuses (just like they always did) but this time only when talking about doping, bans, being stripped of titles, sociopathic behaviour etc.

E.g.

"I think Cavendish was a bit out of order there, Paul."
"Yes Phil, just like a certain Lance Armstrong for all of his career."


----------



## just jim (11 Jan 2013)

"Well Phil the Peleton have just passed Château Marmosette, owned by the Brioche family since 1768, and restored in 2001 - round about the same time that Lance Armstrong tested positive for EPO during the Tour de Suisse."
"The Brioche family. what a lovely name."


----------



## johnr (12 Jan 2013)

The reason Liggett would have to go if he was working for an organisation with integrity is because,not only did he nail his colours to the pro-drugs caravan, but he was wlling to dissemble and fabricate stories on their behalf. Apart from one half-hearted, and self-centred, explanation/apology for his own shortcomings he has done nothing to try and make amends to the sport, honest cyclists, his employers, his colleagues, his fans or followers of cycling in general. Still, in a business run on matedom and nepotism, he'll still be there on his jollies round France with eyes firmly shut.

Are Ladbrokes giving odds on the voice of cycling regaining it once His Master has set out the new line on Oprah next week? I'm with the revolution.


----------



## rich p (12 Jan 2013)

...not to mention the revelation where he asserted that he'd been told by a leading scientific authority that Armstrong would be dead if he'd actually taken those drugs.
Well, not a leading scientist as such, but a fat bloke down the pub who's mate knew the cleaner of Armstrong's bikes or summink.


----------



## jdtate101 (12 Jan 2013)

Whilst Sherwen & Liggett have a dubious support for Lance, but I must say the sound of their voices (not talking about what they say, just the pitch and vocalisation) is much preferable to Sean Kelly on Eurosport, he might know his onions, but dear god he's boring and monotone.


----------



## shouldbeinbed (12 Jan 2013)

Even without the LA taint, they've become a parody of themselves with a daily stream of gaffes, misidentifications of riders and blather that Murray Walker would shy away from.



jdtate101 said:


> Whilst Sherwen & Liggett have a *dubious* support for Lance, but I must say the sound of their voices (not talking about what they say, just the pitch and vocalisation) is much preferable to Sean Kelly on Eurosport, he might know his onions, but dear god he's boring and monotone.


 

I don't think dubious comes close IMO particularly for PL, in either sense it could be taken here. If he is to have even a shred of credibility again he needs to, frankly, humiliate himself live on TV with the length and depth of his apology for the not only pro but utterly blind and deaf to reality fanboy sycophancy he has shown towards 'a certain Lance Armstrong'


----------



## BJH (12 Jan 2013)

I don't feel concerned either way about his commentary but PLs defence of LA was poorly judged and puts him as a pro commentator and claimed expert in a really bad position with almost zero credibility

On that basis he should just walk as it shows him to be tainted by the same omertà from the old days


----------



## frayBentos59 (12 Jan 2013)

I'd miss Liggett just for his utter stupidity.


----------



## Basil.B (12 Jan 2013)

Nothing wrong with Liggett and Sherwen in my book. Been watching the Tour on tv since the early 80's.
Steve Parrish and Charlie Cox are great on MotoGP too.
I must not also forget the great pairing of Murray Walker and James Hunt on F1.


----------



## Noodley (12 Jan 2013)

IMO, the best commentary/analysis on the 2012 Tour came when ITV covered the entire stage, with Boardman, Rendell and Imlach providing the voiceovers prior to Liggett and Sherwen going 'live'.

There is nothing to stop ITV having their own commentators - they have a good stable of them - and dropping the International feed provided by Liggett and Sherwen.

For the first time ever I am considering finding out the cheapest way of getting Eurosport on my TV - I cannot get live online feed due to shockingly poor broadband speeds - just so I do not have to listen to the simpering cockwombles.


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (12 Jan 2013)

Noodley said:


> IMO, the best commentary/analysis on the 2012 Tour came when ITV covered the entire stage, with Boardman, Rendell and Imlach providing the voiceovers prior to Liggett and Sherwen going 'live'.
> 
> There is nothing to stop ITV having their own commentators - they have a good stable of them - and dropping the International feed provided by Liggett and Sherwen.
> 
> For the first time ever I am considering finding out the cheapest way of getting Eurosport on my TV - I cannot get live online feed due to shockingly poor broadband speeds - just so I do not have to listen to the simpering cockwombles.


Available on Virgin Media packages and soon enough on BT Vision (which imo is superior) may be a cheaper option than SKY, I'm not 100%


----------



## Noodley (12 Jan 2013)

I don't get BT Vision either .  I'm sure Virgin media will be off limits as well if BT Vision is.


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (12 Jan 2013)

I forgot you live in the arrisole of nowhere


----------



## Crackle (12 Jan 2013)

Noodley said:


> I don't get BT Vision either .  I'm sure Virgin media will be off limits as well if BT Vision is.


The first pictures of the racing season are on the way to you now..


----------



## rich p (12 Jan 2013)

You just need a younger, fitter broadband provider, Noodles..


----------



## Hilldodger (12 Jan 2013)

I don't listen to any of them so can't comment, but just out of interest, have any of you tried to provide commentary? I have twice, once as co-commentator at a motorcycle race meeting and once during a cycling history parade at a major festival. It aint easy! And when you have an ear piece in with production staffl talking to you pretty much all the time - it's even harder!


----------



## Noodley (12 Jan 2013)

I could't give a toss if it's easy or not, it's the fact that he has no credibility


----------



## rich p (12 Jan 2013)

Hilldodger said:


> I don't listen to any of them so can't comment, but just out of interest, have any of you tried to provide commentary? I have twice, once as co-commentator at a motorcycle race meeting and once during a cycling history parade at a major festival. It aint easy! And when you have an ear piece in with production staffl talking to you pretty much all the time - it's even harder!


 Yeah, yeah but the twats are so far up Armstrong's arse it's embarrassing and the fact that Armstrong's an investor in Sherwen's mine is the issue here.


----------



## Rob3rt (12 Jan 2013)

Hilldodger said:


> I don't listen to any of them so can't comment, but just out of interest, have any of you tried to provide commentary? I have twice, once as co-commentator at a motorcycle race meeting and once during a cycling history parade at a major festival. It aint easy! And when you have an ear piece in with production staffl talking to you pretty much all the time - it's even harder!


 
Man, the plasterer did a shoot job of my living room wall, but it's okay, plastering isn't as easy as it looks!


----------



## Hilldodger (12 Jan 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> Man, the plasterer did a s*** job of my living room wall, but it's okay, tiling isn't as easy as it looks!


 
^^Totally irrelevant post^^

I WAS COMMENTING ON THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE COMPLAINING ABOUT MISTAKES AND POINTING OUT THAT IT'S A VERY DIFFICULT JOB TO DO.


----------



## Noodley (12 Jan 2013)

The easy part would be identifying that Lance was not Cancer Jesus.


----------



## Rob3rt (12 Jan 2013)

Hilldodger said:


> ^^Totally irrelevant post^^
> 
> I WAS COMMENTING ON THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE COMPLAINING ABOUT MISTAKES AND POINTING OUT THAT IT'S A VERY DIFFICULT JOB TO DO.


 
So what? If my plasterer leaves my living room wall a mess, does the fact that plastering is not as easy as it looks excuse the shoddy job and also forbid anyone from commenting on the state of it?

Point being (incase you are still not getting it), you hire someone with the skills to complete the job in question to the required standard. If they can't do so, then the job being difficult does not excuse their lack of adequacy.


----------



## rich p (12 Jan 2013)

Hilldodger said:


> ^^Totally irrelevant post^^
> 
> I WAS COMMENTING ON THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE COMPLAINING ABOUT MISTAKES AND POINTING OUT THAT IT'S A VERY DIFFICULT JOB TO DO.


 Pardon?


----------



## gavroche (12 Jan 2013)

Isn't s case that all commentators have to be " politicaly correct" nowadays otherwise their contract is not renewed. I am afraid it is the sad world we live in. All commentators are.controlled by their masters who decide their paycheque and their future.


----------



## lukesdad (12 Jan 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> So what? If my plasterer leaves my living room wall a mess, does the fact that plastering is not as easy as it looks excuse the shoddy job and also forbid anyone from commenting on the state of it?
> 
> Point being (incase you are still not getting it), you hire someone with the skills to complete the job in question to the required standard. If they can't do so, then the job being difficult does not excuse their lack of adequacy.


 In that case rob move to another plasterer, ive always hired the best


----------



## rich p (12 Jan 2013)

gavroche said:


> Isn't s case that all commentators have to be " politicaly correct" nowadays otherwise their contract is not renewed. I am afraid it is the sad world we live in. All commentators are.controlled by their masters who decide their paycheque and their future.


 I'm not sure what your point is. Do you mean that Ligget was forced into defending Armstrong despite all evidence to the contrary through contractual or "politicaly correct" obligations?


----------



## gavroche (12 Jan 2013)

not so much to defend but more not to offend. Sitting on the fence is an easy option.


----------



## Noodley (12 Jan 2013)

He did not sit on any fence. He openly supported and defended Armstrong.


----------



## rich p (12 Jan 2013)

Noodley said:


> He did not sit on any fence. He openly supported and defended Armstrong.


This^^^^
...and he was (is) a crap commentator.


----------



## StuAff (12 Jan 2013)

There are clear and unequivocal conflicts of interest in Liggett and Sherwen's links with Armstrong. They have both showed appalling judgement. 
And, as Rich said, they're crap. Hugh Porter ain't perfect, but he's a lot better than the terrible twosome. Let alone Anthony McCrossan, to name but one. On one stage of the Tour last year, the first part of the ITV4 coverage had commentary by the studio bods. It was massively better. Then, unfortunately, the Phil and Paul show resumed.


----------



## ceepeebee (12 Jan 2013)

Isn't part of the problem is that liggett and sherwen are actually employed by the outdoor network, a long term supporter of stretch Armstrong? Thus their commentary is v v US biased and they were always pro-US riders especially stretch? From what I remember ITV just buy their commentary.

And yes, I'd pay a premium to get bolting, boardman, imlach and rendell tag-teaming the commentary duties, they're all great.


----------



## totallyfixed (12 Jan 2013)

Noodley said:


> He did not sit on any fence. He openly supported and defended Armstrong.


No, but many years ago he sat on my bloody wheel for about 20 miles into a stinking headwind and refused to take a turn, never liked him ever since.


----------



## kedab (13 Jan 2013)

Boris Bajic said:


> I can't bear listening to Alan Green on the radio.
> I never liked Murray Walker on F1, but many thought him a god. They were wrong, of course. Hunt was sublime.
> 
> I just adore Stavros Parrish on MotoGP. Charlie Cox justs sounds like a funny Aussie cliche generator.
> ...


 
i too quite like parrish but cox...well that's just shot the fox who's having a nightmare in a bubble car


----------



## kedab (13 Jan 2013)

i often think that i'd quite like to have a bash at the commentary though i fear that my tendency to use bad language at critical moments, may hinder my chances...my vocabulary isn't all that bad but years standing in the park lane at spurs does leave its mark


----------



## ufkacbln (13 Jan 2013)

Hilldodger said:


> I don't listen to any of them so can't comment, but just out of interest, have any of you tried to provide commentary? I have twice, once as co-commentator at a motorcycle race meeting and once during a cycling history parade at a major festival. It aint easy! And when you have an ear piece in with production staffl talking to you pretty much all the time - it's even harder!


 
This is more about Liggett having failed to toe RichP and Noodley's line on Armstrong than the quality of the commentary.


----------



## johnr (13 Jan 2013)

Anyone wanting to pass on their best wishes to the ITV4 team can probably do so here : *viewerservices@itv.com*. They may also be willing to dismiss other views at the same address. Perhaps we should share.


----------



## rich p (13 Jan 2013)

Cunobelin said:


> This is more about Liggett having failed to toe RichP and Noodley's line on Armstrong than the quality of the commentary.


 Another unnecessary and spiteful ad hominem.
You fail to notice that most of the posters on here dislike Ligget and Sherwen because they are poor commentators and have shown bias and ill judgement.
What line is it that Ligget didn't toe? Belief that Armstrong was a serial doper?


----------



## ufkacbln (13 Jan 2013)

rich p said:


> Another unnecessary and spiteful ad hominem.
> You fail to notice that most of the posters on here dislike Ligget and Sherwen because they are poor commentators and have shown bias and ill judgement.
> What line is it that Ligget didn't toe? Belief that Armstrong was a serial doper?


----------



## oldroadman (13 Jan 2013)

A lot of the older generation of commentators started simply because they were the only people with enough knowledge to do the job when cycling made TV time in the past, and/or had contacts which helped them get the job. This genaration are now showing their afe a bit. For me David Harman is one of the best, I don't watch ITV4 coverage much so can't comment on L&S properly, though the little bits I have heard sound a bit dull, althogh PS does understand what is going on much like Sean Kelly on ES (but not quite so good). Not convinced by Mr McCrossan, find him a bit monotone, but Brian Smith is excellent at identifying riders, which is helpful to new viewers (and old ones as well!!).
It is a difficult job - imagine having a five hour stage where not much happens until the last hour or less - but even so a professional commentator is employed to keep the chat going and do their best with dull stimes. There are plenty of those in a long race. Constructive comment helps, just moaning about a few errors will achieve little, always thinking you don't know how good something was until it's not there!


----------



## rich p (13 Jan 2013)

Cunobelin said:


>


 Equally constructive.


----------



## Noodley (13 Jan 2013)

Cunobelin, you appear to be following rich and I across threads and be giving us special attention - I am flattered as I see this as being a result of me (and rich) calling you out as a "know nothing" with no interest in pro racing. It was not too difficult I admit, and many others have also done likewise but maybe not as repeatedly as they have decided you are not worth the effort.

The discussion at present relates to the lack of integrity which Liggett and Sherwen have as commentators, after many years of supporting and defending Armstrong (as well as shared financial interests). Now, this may very well be due to them being employed by a pro-Armstrong US company who then sell on their commentary to other broadcasters around the world; they provide the words for the pictures for millions, and their pro-Armstrong stance will have influenced millions of viewers. As an aside I also think Liggett is a crap commentator, Sherwen I can just about suffer when he is not reading out of the pictorial guide to the Tour handbook. But ITV have a good supply of much better commentators, which I think they need to deploy immediately or run the risk of people (like me) switching off and looking to other sources; I am in the unfortunate position of being severely limited in alternatives.

Armstong has fallen on his own sword, and it is only right that his squires Liggett and Sherwen are also slain.


----------



## ceepeebee (13 Jan 2013)

What I found myself doing last tour was watching itv whenever the good guys were on, then as soon as Waldorf and stadler appeared switching over to Eurosport to enjoy harmon and Kelly (the latter helping me perfect my Irish accent really well)


----------



## just jim (13 Jan 2013)

ceepeebee said:


> Isn't part of the problem is that liggett and sherwen are actually employed by the outdoor network, a long term supporter of stretch Armstrong? Thus their commentary is v v US biased and they were always pro-US riders especially stretch? From what I remember ITV just buy their commentary.
> 
> And yes, I'd pay a premium to get bolting, boardman, imlach and rendell tag-teaming the commentary duties, they're all great.


 
I'd add to the pot too. With cash money, mind.


----------



## festival (13 Jan 2013)

As the ITV coverage, generally has improved year on year, its commentary team have become more and more ridiculous.
Its time for them to go, but I feel the way the production company supplies to the English speaking world would prevent this.
While Liggett's views have made him look foolish at best, it has to be said that many long standing, well known print journalists have managed to duck the flak. Journalists who have chosen to only recount the romance,the heroic acts are just as bad. They either chose to ignore the dark side of the sport or were to stupid to see it (unlikely)


----------



## rich p (13 Jan 2013)

festival said:


> As the ITV coverage, generally has improved year on year, its commentary team have become more and more ridiculous.
> Its time for them to go, but I feel the way the production company supplies to the English speaking world would prevent this.
> While Liggett's views have made him look foolish at best, it has to be said that many long standing, well known print journalists have managed to duck the flak. Journalists who have chosen to only recount the romance,the heroic acts are just as bad. They either chose to ignore the dark side of the sport or were to stupid to see it (unlikely)


 They did, but at least they had the sense to shut up and stop defending him after the evidence was made clear. Sherwen at least has kept schtum too.


----------



## festival (13 Jan 2013)

rich p said:


> They did, but at least they had the sense to shut up and stop defending him after the evidence was made clear. Sherwen at least has kept schtum too.


 
That I am afraid has been the problem for far too long, too many journo's choose to say nothing as it will spoil the cosy relationship with the pro's while basking in the reflected glory.
But Liggett appears the biggest creep of the lot.


----------



## Herbie (13 Jan 2013)

Boris Bajic said:


> I quite like things as they are and the odd Colemanballs moment just adds a little smile.
> 
> Change is part of the television landscape, but I quite like the _'old geezers smoking pipes_' image that sometimes comes with Ligett and Sherwen, even if it is not an accurate image. I know the voices and know what to expect.
> 
> ...


 

aye i quite like Ligget too...Bill McClaren was the best commentator


----------



## Hont (14 Jan 2013)

Herbie said:


> aye i quite like Ligget too...Bill McClaren was the best commentator


McClaren was awful (IMHO) unless you are Scottish. Another commentator who turned into a self-parody with all the "they'll be dancing in the streets of [wherever] tonight".



ceepeebee said:


> Isn't part of the problem is that liggett and sherwen are actually employed by the outdoor network, a long term supporter of stretch Armstrong? Thus their commentary is v v US biased and they were always pro-US riders especially stretch? From what I remember ITV just buy their commentary.


 
I think that is part of the problem - they are far too conscious of the fact that many are only watching because of Armstrong. Sherwen, in particular, seems to be convinced that he's broadcasting to idiots who need to be told things like the fact that cyclists descending an alpine pass are going quite quickly. And they need reminding of these type of facts every 20 minutes or so because their brains are incapable of retaining this information.

At least, I guess that's his motivation because I can come up with no other rational explanation for his constant repetition of the bleeding obvious.


----------



## thom (14 Jan 2013)

Hont said:


> I think that is part of the problem - they are far too conscious of the fact that many are only watching because of Armstrong. Sherwen, in particular, seems to be convinced that he's broadcasting to idiots who need to be told things like the fact that cyclists descending an alpine pass are going quite quickly. And they need reminding of these type of facts every 20 minutes or so because their brains are incapable of retaining this information.
> 
> At least, I guess that's his motivation because I can come up with no other rational explanation for his constant repetition of the bleeding obvious.


Part of the issue is that they are doing dual commentary when they come on ITV, in that :
1) Liggett and Sherwen are not talking to the same stream at the same time
2) The commentary is taken by multiple broadcasters in different locations
That will inevitably lead to a head-scrambling sense of what is going on and what the current commentary narrative is. 
But now the UK broadcaster should have a go with a dedicated broadcast team and find some fresh talent - the audience has changed & dinsoaurs become extinct.


----------



## BJH (14 Jan 2013)

The problem with PL is a major credibility gap.

Having your tongue half way up certain peoples jacksies is one thing, but this guy went out on a limb when even the fan boys finally got the message and just kept on digging

He now looks very foolish indeed and therefore his expertise is questionable and athst being generous to him


----------



## Herbie (15 Jan 2013)

Hont said:


> McClaren was awful (IMHO) unless you are Scottish. Another commentator who turned into a self-parody with all the "they'll be dancing in the streets of [wherever] tonight".
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
If you ain't happy with the commentry i suggest you just press your mutr button and watch in silence...your eyes will tell you whats occuring


----------



## Herbie (15 Jan 2013)

Hont said:


> McClaren was awful (IMHO) unless you are Scottish. Another commentator who turned into a self-parody with all the "they'll be dancing in the streets of [wherever] tonight".
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
I think McClaren did say that occasionally about "dancing in the streets" but hes widely accepted in Rugby circles that he was the best....he was very unbiased...top bloke and much missed


----------



## Boris Bajic (15 Jan 2013)

thom said:


> The counter-revolutionary spake thus.
> 
> It isn't about style so much as being a stinking Armstrong apologist.
> *We deserve be*tter than to have these dim-witted dinosaurs lingering on.
> Give someone new a chance - long live the revolution !


 
It's odd that a sports broadcaster garners ill will for its choice of commentator or pundit on the grounds that said expert speaks or has spoken in favour of a proven cheat.

LA is certainly a cheat. Maybe one of the worst and most corrosive... Maybe we are yet to find worse.

I just don't see it in terms of the viewer (in this case) deserving better. What have the mass media to do with anyone deserving anything or getting what they deserve.

That people are jolly cross about LA is understandable. That there is a strong undercurrent of ill-will turned on LA is also understandable.

But I'm not sure I want broadcasters to choose commentators on the basis of what I or they think I deserve.

It's just a chap talking while they show moving pictures of bicycles. For all I care Liggett and Sherwen could be UKIP voters and I'd still watch them.

No... that might be a bold statement.


----------



## thom (15 Jan 2013)

Boris Bajic said:


> It's odd that a sports broadcaster garners ill will for its choice of commentator or pundit on the grounds that said expert speaks or has spoken in favour of a proven cheat.


 
Really ?

Boris, this isn't about the surface of the sport, how things appear and tradition.
This is about integrity. This is about journalists in denial, of beyond incompetence and lack of perception.

Do you trust what they say ? Do you trust Liggett's motive when he describes himself as the "voice of cycling" ?

I don't, I'm bored of him serving up the same reheated faux excitement and I'm tired of old stagers telling me that this is the way it has to be because this is the way it has always been. The memories of Lance climbing cols to his obsequious sound-track may be something your rose-tinted glasses still cherishes but to me and to many, enough is enough, a line must be drawn in the sand and the future embraced with passion.

Long live the revolution !


----------



## just jim (15 Jan 2013)

thom said:


> Really ?
> 
> Boris, this isn't about the surface of the sport, how things appear and tradition.
> This is about integrity. This is about journalists in denial, of beyond incompetence and lack of perception.
> ...



2001 Alpe D'Huez. Lance, Sherwin, Ligget. Lance really "knew" that climb by then.


----------



## Ghost Donkey (18 Jan 2013)

Noodley said:


> For the first time ever I am considering finding out the cheapest way of getting Eurosport on my TV - I cannot get live online feed due to shockingly poor broadband speeds - just so I do not have to listen to the simpering cockwombles.


 
Going off topic I'm pretty certain you can still point a satellite dish at the right tin can above the equator and get "European" as opposed to "British" eurosport on an unencrypted satellite feed.tu're interested. It would mean forking out a bit initially for the kit. Probably best to lurk around a satellite forum/resource for this info


----------



## BJH (18 Jan 2013)

Well where is Phil then ???

As an expert he said these allegations were all lies, so now the admission is out there is he going to retire on the basis that he is clearly out of touch and not the expert he's being paid to be


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (18 Jan 2013)

BJH said:


> Well where is Phil then ???
> 
> As an expert he said these allegations were all lies, so now the admission is out there is he going to retire on the basis that he is clearly out of touch and not the expert he's being paid to be





> From the Telegraph (looks like AC's his only friend)
> *Phil Liggett, Commentator and journalist *
> Liggett defended Armstrong for years over the doping claims. He was a regular speaker at charity functions organised by Armstrong, including events for his cancer charity Livestrong. In August he referred to the USADA's life ban on Armstrong as a "political conspiracy". He called the USADA a "nefarious local drugs agency". Earlier this week Liggett conceded that he felt duped after defending Armstrong's claims for so long although maintained he was still a "great athlete". He told a radio station:
> "I can't deny the pleasure he has brought many people including me and my commentary team from what we have seen from him in the past. But at the end of the day he has cheated his way through and he has taken a lot of people into his confidence and he has really let them down quite badly. He's still a great athlete. The drugs he has taken were to beat the very, very best at the very top and you could argue that those athletes he beat, many of them have already served time for taking drugs as well."


----------



## johnr (19 Jan 2013)

I got an article about PL on my Sky team news ap. I can't find an on-line version of it. In it the great man comments on the first interview that there are 'more revelations to come'. That's all folks.

He's not the self-styled voice of cycling for nothing.


----------



## thom (21 Jan 2013)

Phil speaks - he's still in the dark


----------



## Crackle (21 Jan 2013)

Is that the same incoherent Liggett who was defending him. Ooof, bit of a turnaround. He looked fairly defensive though and was lucky not to get asked some much harder questions. Perhaps he's realized his own credibility is at stake.


----------



## rich p (21 Jan 2013)

He was clearer in his condemnation than I expected, in fairness.


----------



## BJH (21 Jan 2013)

Self serving change of heart while still offering justification that others were also at it, so that makes it ok 

Yes Phil, forget all that nonsense in Spain (or the US hey !) this is real cycling !!


----------



## rich p (22 Jan 2013)

Bloody nora, I've just watched the first intermediate sprint won by Gerrans, with a camera pointing straight at him in perfect visibilty, misidentified as Goss and then O'Grady. Plus ca change...


----------



## kedab (22 Jan 2013)

aye, i found some highlights on the 'net and was a little dismayed to hear his familiar tones. i don't think i'd have any issues with the old man if he'd kept his day job separate from L.A but to become a paid up member of his clan and then to defend him to the hilt (and make some absurd accusations while doing so), means that he's lost all credibility and i think that, 'the voice of cycling', needs to be rested..


----------



## Noodley (22 Jan 2013)

Oh well, that's gona be a summer of me not watching any Tour coverage if that crinkly old nobber is still waffling over the pictures...I am due to be at the next Revolution track event in Glasgow so I may seek out the ITV crew and pester them to sack him. Or set him afloat on a wooden raft with no water.


----------



## beastie (22 Jan 2013)

Noodley said:


> Or set him afloat on a wooden raft with no water.


 
Zoolander hat on - But Noodles, how are you going to float the raft if there is no water??


----------



## Noodley (22 Jan 2013)

beastie said:


> Zoolander hat on - But Noodles, how are you going to float the raft if there is no water??


 
He'll float on his inflated ego.


----------



## endoman (23 Jan 2013)

can't stand him, not hard to get facts right, he doesn't. Harmon and Smith from Eurosport miles better, it was nice to hear Robbie McEwen give a more modern view though.


----------



## johnr (24 Jan 2013)

Noodley said:


> Oh well, that's gona be a summer of me not watching any Tour coverage if that crinkly old nobber is still waffling over the pictures...I am due to be at the next Revolution track event in Glasgow so I may seek out the ITV crew and pester them to sack him. Or set him afloat on a wooden raft with no water.


 Ask them what Liggett's response was when they confronted him with his allegations that (a) he had evidence that USADA was bribing people to dob Pharmstrong in, and (b) his unnamed medical source claiming it was impossible for LPh to take the amount of drugs alleged and live.

If they haven't bothered, then you're wasting your time.


----------



## johnr (25 Jan 2013)

And, by-the-by, I wonder whether the ventriloquist dummy of cycling will be making himself available to the UCI commission to share his intimate knowledge of wrongdoing and conspiracy in the higher reaches of the drugs testing organisations?


----------

