LOL! McQuack Calls Lemond "Arrogant" - Page 2 - CyclingNews Forum

Go Back   CyclingNews Forum > Road > The Clinic

The Clinic The Clinic is the only place on Cyclingnews where you can discuss doping-related issues. Ask questions, discuss positives or improvements to procedures.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 12-17-12, 15:37
mountainrman mountainrman is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 375
Default

The worst aspect of that interview is how McQuaid insults all the rest of us as cycling fans.

In this version - http://www1.skysports.com/cycling/ne...esidency-claim

In this version he says...


"Asked if he had been hurt by calls for his resignation, McQuaid said: "Personally? No. Most of the people who were calling for my resignation had nothing to do with cycling and I think they were wrong to do so."

Since I have yet to meet a cycling fan who is NOT calling for MQuaids resignation he is basically saying none of the millons of fans have "anything to do with cycling"

He tries to distance himself from the Armstrong fiasco - yet has backed the actions and reputation of his predecessor on every occasion throughout Armstrongs entire TDF career.

The ONLY thing he got right in that interview is that cycling in London was a great event. He failed to say that it had nothing to do with him, despite his trying to claim credit for it.

Last edited by mountainrman; 12-17-12 at 15:39.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 12-17-12, 16:34
BillytheKid's Avatar
BillytheKid BillytheKid is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Left of the Duke City
Posts: 2,408
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by red_flanders View Post
What makes you say this? Is Lemond in some financial difficulty that you're aware of?
Truely a speculative statement, but based on the fact the sports careers end, and with that a paycheck. Sports stars run on endoresments and post career slots. Baseball great Mickey Mantle died with about $50,000 left to his name signing and selling baseballs. Lemond did lose big to the Texan. It would not be an unlikely motive to strike at the one who stole your thunder. Lemond was promoting bike tours during the 1999 tour. When ask then about Armstrong, he seem a little of the mark in his praise as I recall. Lemond Inc. was going south in a hurry. I remember the markdowns on his bikes. He's back in the business selling his trainers, but I bet the manufacturer is getting the most of it. The career posts are long term employment...something long term or regular job is what you want. People are posting down Chris Horner as dumb while Lemond does not even know that you never nominate yourself for a post. You gain support and have someone else do it for you, but I doubt if he's really that dumb. It makes headlines and keeps the name alive. We all have to work for a living or face the grim tiller. Those who achieve fame often are challenge when the star fades, especially in sports, but your right, I have no specifics on Greg, but his actions make you wonder.
__________________
I tell ya, it's not the water.

Last edited by BillytheKid; 12-17-12 at 16:42.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 12-17-12, 17:03
D-Queued D-Queued is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 4,221
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BillytheKid View Post
Truely a speculative statement... but your right, I have no specifics on Greg, but his actions make you wonder.
Ignorance is bliss.

I am wondering. What is the intent of your actions?

Dave.
__________________

Lance says he will cooperate with Landis Investigation


"I've done too many good things for too many people"
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 12-17-12, 18:16
Velodude Velodude is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,210
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by D-Queued View Post
Ignorance is bliss.

I am wondering. What is the intent of your actions?

Dave.
Billy must be on the research. He lays claim to be an investigative journalist.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 12-17-12, 19:21
The_Z_man's Avatar
The_Z_man The_Z_man is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: The Manayunk Wall
Posts: 293
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stingray34 View Post
Pat and the UCI are peddlers, not pedallers.

What's Greg done for cycling over the past 25 years? Gave it esteem and principles, and tried his darndest to clean it up.

What's Pat done? Shat all over the enterprise and anyone else that tries to call him and his drunk, corrupt buddies on it.
I, for one, have never called Pat a drunk.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BillytheKid View Post
Lemond is looking for cash in wake of his victory over the Texan. Regain the throne sort of mentality I would say. Lemond looks to be as deluded as the Texas wonderkid who took it from him using better doping than he had available. It's like a two-year old ranting "I want my fame and fortune back." Your avitar had much to say about the "little helpers" of his generation. I have no proof that Greg did, but I also have little doubt Fignon had reason to lie about what was going on in the sport then. Was Greg so much better than those those who used? In Dubious Battle? What's what and who's who?
Billy,

Greg LeMond is in such dire straits that he took the settlement from Trek and donated it. Yeah, he's really in it for the cash.

What a load. He was a great champion, and is now trying to return the credibility of the sport. He's not in the fight against doping because he wants a pay day.
__________________
June 5, 1988 The Day the Strong Men Cried
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 12-17-12, 19:40
BillytheKid's Avatar
BillytheKid BillytheKid is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Left of the Duke City
Posts: 2,408
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by D-Queued View Post
Ignorance is bliss.

I am wondering. What is the intent of your actions?

Dave.
The intent? Perhaps I am too focused on human nature. The most people serve themselves. Self interests collide. I just questioning the automatic it-step idea that Greg Lemond is the all-american good guy, out for truth and justice, people claim him to be. Maybe so, maybe not.

He was clearly wiped off the map by the rise of the Armstrong era. What I am pointing out is his loss of forture, in my opinion, is more likely his innermost motivation rather a man out for the good of the sport. Doping made no sudden apperence with Lance Armstrong. Lemond never took to the anti-doping soapbox until it and LA pinched his pocket. The LA super stardom must of really hurt, especially with some knowledge of how the game evolved. We are afterall taking about very competitive people. Lemond already knew about the rise of EPO, but if I even heard about people using blood transfusions down-home here in the late 1980s, I have to think that EPO was the evolution of the former and, as we all know, became a game of both.

I once cheered Lemond. He motivated me to race a bike. I really don't want to go here, but after all that I've read, I am left with doubts about how this played out. Someone from the outside the sport should be the next head of the UCI. Someone wit no connection to the sport at all.

I think we all want to protect our legacy whatever it might be.

So why would Greg Lemond want to head the UCI?
__________________
I tell ya, it's not the water.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 12-17-12, 19:54
BillytheKid's Avatar
BillytheKid BillytheKid is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Left of the Duke City
Posts: 2,408
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Z_man View Post
I, for one, have never called Pat a drunk.



Billy,

Greg LeMond is in such dire straits that he took the settlement from Trek and donated it. Yeah, he's really in it for the cash.

What a load. He was a great champion, and is now trying to return the credibility of the sport. He's not in the fight against doping because he wants a pay day.
So what's his net worth? Occupation? Source of income? Was the donation worth more as a tax write-off that the total taxes owed if he took it as income?Who are is backers?

I don't know the answers to these questions, but they should be asked.

If he's seriously vying to head the UCI, would not his current cycling company be a conflict of interest? Would he be willing to give all commercial income from his cycling Brand up?

Those are the questions that should be asked, but instead people believe that the are no self-interests.
__________________
I tell ya, it's not the water.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 12-17-12, 19:55
Dr. Maserati Dr. Maserati is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 11,035
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BillytheKid View Post
The intent? Perhaps I am too focused on human nature. The most people serve themselves. Self interests collide. I just questioning the automatic it-step idea that Greg Lemond is the all-american good guy, out for truth and justice, people claim him to be. Maybe so, maybe not.

He was clearly wiped off the map by the rise of the Armstrong era. What I am pointing out is his loss of forture, in my opinion, is more likely his innermost motivation rather a man out for the good of the sport. Doping made no sudden apperence with Lance Armstrong. Lemond never took to the anti-doping soapbox until it and LA pinched his pocket. The LA super stardom must of really hurt, especially with some knowledge of how the game evolved. We are afterall taking about very competitive people. Lemond already knew about the rise of EPO, but if I even heard about people using blood transfusions down-home here in the late 1980s, I have to think that EPO was the evolution of the former and, as we all know, became a game of both.

I once cheered Lemond. He motivated me to race a bike. I really don't want to go here, but after all that I've read, I am left with doubts about how this played out. Someone from the outside the sport should be the next head of the UCI. Someone wit no connection to the sport at all.

I think we all want to protect our legacy whatever it might be.
Hey Billy,
Could you link in any way at all that Greg has, as you put it "lost his fortune"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillytheKid View Post
So why would Greg Lemond want to head the UCI?
He doesn't - but don't let that stop you rambling on.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 12-17-12, 19:59
The_Z_man's Avatar
The_Z_man The_Z_man is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: The Manayunk Wall
Posts: 293
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BillytheKid View Post
Lemond never took to the anti-doping soapbox until it and LA pinched his pocket.
WRONG! LeMond started speaking out about Lance in 2001 after learning that Lance was working with Ferrari. At that point, LeMond bikes, a brand of Trek, was doing very well. Greg LeMond HURT himself by speaking out, as the lawsuit has shown.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BillytheKid View Post
I really don't want to go here, but after all that I've read, I am left with doubts about how this played out.
I have never heard anything about Greg LeMond being tied to doping. In fact, I've only ever heard the opposite. From what I've read, he left PDM because they wanted him to use testosterone.


Quote:
Originally Posted by BillytheKid View Post
So why would Greg Lemond want to head the UCI?
Because Jonathan Vaughters asked him to do it to restore credibility. Since he has never been in a doping scandal, and (unlike you think) really has nothing to gain from being president of the UCI, could restore some credibility to the sport. Someone from outside, with no ties to cycling, wouldn't bring the same cachet as LeMond would.
__________________
June 5, 1988 The Day the Strong Men Cried
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 12-17-12, 20:02
noddy69 noddy69 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 417
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BillytheKid View Post
So what's his net worth? Occupation? Source of income? Was the donation worth more as a tax write-off that the total taxes owed if he took it as income?Who are is backers?

I don't know the answers to these questions, but they should be asked.

If he's seriously vying to head the UCI, would not his current cycling company be a conflict of interest? Would he be willing to give all commercial income from his cycling Brand up?

Those are the questions that should be asked, but instead people believe that the are no self-interests.
Why should they be asked exactly ?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 18:44.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited. All rights reserved. Future Publishing Limited is part of the Future plc group. Future Publishing Limited is a company registered in England and Wales with company registration number 2008885 whose registered office is at Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW England.