Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession) - Page 14 - 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
  #131  
Old 01-21-13, 09:07
RobbieCanuck's Avatar
RobbieCanuck RobbieCanuck is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Okanagan Valley, Canada
Posts: 811
Talking Lance was the leader make no mistake about it

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bicycle tramp View Post

But his "success" rested on systemic corruption that went beyond anything he could have personally orchestrated, although he was a wilful player.
This is about as naive as it gets. Armstrong as the USADA Reasoned Decision clearly points out was the initiator, instigator, mastermind, comptroller, conducter and hub of the greatest sports fraud in history. The system (The UCI, the TDF and Cycling USA) only let him get away with it.
__________________
I have vision and the rest of the world wears bifocals
- Butch Cassidy
Reply With Quote
  #132  
Old 01-21-13, 10:02
spiaggia spiaggia is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 15
Default

In the world of lying cheating sociopathic scumbagging professionals such as Bernie Madoff and Armstrong, the difference is:

Madoff gave his post-conviction confession interview to a news journalist who had complete access to the facts. Madoff didn't need to show up.

But, Armstrong gave his "Guess what DOJ, USADA, & WADA? I'm still holding all the cards but I've promised to be completely honest." interview to a former daytime talk-show host. Technically, Armstrong didn't need to show up either.

Ratings and ill-informed soft-ball questions trumped truth.

Juan Pelota 1: Cycling 0 (but it's still very early in the game).
Reply With Quote
  #133  
Old 01-21-13, 10:18
zebedee zebedee is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 259
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobbieCanuck View Post
This is about as naive as it gets. Armstrong as the USADA Reasoned Decision clearly points out was the initiator, instigator, mastermind, comptroller, conducter and hub of the greatest sports fraud in history. The system (The UCI, the TDF and Cycling USA) only let him get away with it.
How do you or USADA know whether this was the greatest doping scheme ever?
The fact is none of us know. Presumably there were equally sophisticated doping operations going on elsewhere, mostly still undiscovered.

What USADA claimed was hyperbole; a soundbite, used for effect.
Reply With Quote
  #134  
Old 01-21-13, 10:56
TheEnoculator's Avatar
TheEnoculator TheEnoculator is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 624
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Maserati View Post
I have no intention in talking about his family.
They are not to blame for his actions.
Why is family off limits? When we talk about the ones he bullied, Betsy and Frankie Andreu, Greg and Kathy Lemond, these are all families, so why can't we talk about Armstrong's? I never said his family is to be blamed for his behaviour, but they have to deal with his crap too; his son had to defend him, he even got Kristin involved in the drug distribution.
Reply With Quote
  #135  
Old 01-21-13, 11:16
thirteen's Avatar
thirteen thirteen is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,369
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheEnoculator View Post
Why is family off limits? When we talk about the ones he bullied, Betsy and Frankie Andreu, Greg and Kathy Lemond, these are all families, so why can't we talk about Armstrong's? I never said his family is to be blamed for his behaviour, but they have to deal with his crap too; his son had to defend him, he even got Kristin involved in the drug distribution.
believe it or not, there is a level of decorum here, even in The Clinic.

we do not discuss children. period.

they have access to the internet and what you say can be very hurtful to them. be honourable -- let it go. don't talk about the kids.

wives, ex-wives (especially when they are complicit), and girlfriends seem to be fair game.
__________________
______________
sempre con noi
Reply With Quote
  #136  
Old 01-21-13, 11:16
hrotha's Avatar
hrotha hrotha is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 12,470
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheEnoculator View Post
Why is family off limits? When we talk about the ones he bullied, Betsy and Frankie Andreu, Greg and Kathy Lemond, these are all families, so why can't we talk about Armstrong's? I never said his family is to be blamed for his behaviour, but they have to deal with his crap too; his son had to defend him, he even got Kristin involved in the drug distribution.
Because it was Armstrong messing with those people, not his family.

Well, Kristin is fair game as she obviously played a role.
Reply With Quote
  #137  
Old 01-21-13, 11:24
Benotti69's Avatar
Benotti69 Benotti69 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 13,002
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hrotha View Post
Because it was Armstrong messing with those people, not his family.

Well, Kristin is fair game as she obviously played a role.
Not only played a role but benefitted greatly from it too.

She is a now minor celeb in the running world. She uses (that might change soon though) his name 'Armstrong' to make money.
__________________
"ahaha, ever had the feeling you been cheated?" JL SF Jan'78
Reply With Quote
  #138  
Old 01-21-13, 12:07
martinvickers martinvickers is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Ireland
Posts: 2,861
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheEnoculator View Post
Why is family off limits? When we talk about the ones he bullied, Betsy and Frankie Andreu, Greg and Kathy Lemond, these are all families, so why can't we talk about Armstrong's? I never said his family is to be blamed for his behaviour, but they have to deal with his crap too; his son had to defend him, he even got Kristin involved in the drug distribution.
We don't talk about them because they were families - we talk about them because each individual was bullied - we don't mention Frankie Andreu's brothers or sisiters - because THEY WEREN'T INVOLVED.

Betsy was involved - not as family, but as a witness in her own right. Same with Kathy. Same with Kristen for that matter.

Armstrongs pre-teenage kids had damn all to do with it.

So yes, families are off limits, unless they are actually involved in the story.
Reply With Quote
  #139  
Old 01-21-13, 12:10
trailrunner's Avatar
trailrunner trailrunner is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: UTC-5
Posts: 251
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benotti69 View Post
She is a now minor celeb in the running world.
Another unfortunate fallout from the Armstrong affair. Sometimes I think her columns are ghost written and they just put her face on the story to appeal to women.
Reply With Quote
  #140  
Old 01-21-13, 12:32
Susan Westemeyer's Avatar
Susan Westemeyer Susan Westemeyer is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 7,407
Default

The family question is a tricky one. Discussion of partner's participation in doping practices is allowed, especially when the rider in question has already commented on it.

The kids: on the whole, we stay away from them. IN this particular instance, Armstrong himself introduced the issue, my mentioning his oldest son.

I think the best thing to do is just for everyone to say, "This is very hard for his kids" and leave it at that. There is not really anything to be gained by going into more detail, nor frankly, is it really relevant to this forum.

Susan
__________________
I dream of a better world, where chickens can cross the road without having their motives questioned.
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 09:48.


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.