The new improved Lance Armstrong discussion thread.*
- Thread starter mickle
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
mangaman
Guest
Why quit the womens? There not on drugs
Really?
Why not - http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/19116592
Andrew_P
In between here and there
Hope it is due to the poor performance of the business, using the drug as cover.
I just hope it is not the flood gate opening, all those baying for LA's blood should have been careful what they wished for.
I am not sure if I owned a multi million pound company I would want to take the risk of endorsing a rider, or sponsoring a team right now..
400bhp
Guru
I read between the lines of their statement that they wanted rid of the [current people in the?] UCI.
OP
OP
mickle
innit
- Location
- 53.933606, -1.076131
Eh? Baying? 'We' wished for a clean sport free of cheating and the rigorous enforcement of the rules by the governing authorities. Don't blame us for wrecking our beloved sport blame the farking cheats!
Exactly
just jim
Guest
At the start (page 8) of this thread there was a comparison made to the discussion being like a religious debate.
Now I never was going to fall for that, and in the light of the avaLance of doping evidence (copyright just jim) do folk still think this is in any way a discussion about belief?
post edited.
View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-T6ehcsN5Us&feature=relmfu
Now I never was going to fall for that, and in the light of the avaLance of doping evidence (copyright just jim) do folk still think this is in any way a discussion about belief?
post edited.
View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-T6ehcsN5Us&feature=relmfu
OP
OP
mickle
innit
- Location
- 53.933606, -1.076131
Yay!
I don't think it has been a discussion about belief. Its been a discussion about proper process and even Judge Sparks expressed serious concerns about both USADA's process and motives. However those who are delighted about Lance being done have sought to portray those with concerns about the way it was done as heretics and accorded them the usual treatment heretics get.
DogTired
Über Member
- Location
- Floating on a sea of vimto.
Painting a view of Lance believers as heretics being martyred would be true if they came up with any pro-lance evidence. Quite frankly the pro-lance stuff has got weaker and weaker to the point of being laughable so its got the correct treatment from all concerned.
Is it about belief? Only for the pro-Lancers as Tom Fordyce, BBC Chief Sports writer puts it:
"Armstrong's comeback from cancer to dominate the world's toughest bike race was such a wonderful story that people want to believe that it is true. So great a hero was he to so many that some are still reluctant not to."
Oh - and let's have a reference for the Judge Sparks "serious concerns" please - not some paraphrased interpretation - the ACTUAL quote.
MacB
Lover of things that come in 3's
- Location
- Farnborough, Hampshire
he made a few comments but I took them more in the vein of 'throwing a dog a bone' rather than anything else...that the dog supporters try to spin this into an invite to the banquet is to be expected.
philipbh
Spectral Cyclist
- Location
- Out the back
http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/armstrong.pdf
Full ruling here - courtesy of the WSJ
Footnote 15 talks about due process
Footnote 19 talks about the motive for the charges
Full ruling here - courtesy of the WSJ
Footnote 15 talks about due process
Footnote 19 talks about the motive for the charges
OP
OP
mickle
innit
- Location
- 53.933606, -1.076131
Motives? Read for yourself: http://www.usantidoping.org/ Their strap line; 'Preserving the Integrity of Competition' for example.
Some of Judge Sparks comments on USADA just to refresh your memory of his dog bones;
"USADA's conduct raises serious questions about whether its real interest in charging Armstrong is to combat doping, or if it is acting according to less noble motives"
"I’m not a fisher person, but I do know the smell of bad fish”
"Second, and more important, USADA's counsel represented to the Court that Armstrong will, in fact, receive detailed disclosures regarding USADA's claims against him at a time reasonably before arbitration, in accordance with routine procedure. The Court takes counsel at his word.......If it should come to pass that Armstrong does not actually receive adequate notice sufficiently in advance of the arbitration hearing and it is brought to this Court's attention in an appropriate manner, USADA is unlikely to appreciate the result"
