Originally Posted by Angliru
Hierarchy??? The current best grand tour rider in the world versus an over-the-hill rider with such a massive ego that he figured a fellow champion would simply stepaside and let him take over the team for his grand and hopefully triumphant return to the world stage? Had the audacity to use an Indurain analogy in his argument to support his delusional ambitions? In end admitted that he was beaten by the better man and knew in his heart-of-hearts that had he been in the same circumstances as Contador that he would've done exactly what Contador, and very likely much more to insure he was able to compete and prove who was the best?
If you were in Contador's shoes would you have given in to Armstrong or would you have made sure that you gave yourself the best opportunity to show the world that you were superior and not stood for being suddenly relegated to also ran, support status?
You know Contador is not the best example to say about ego, oppose it to another one's and complain about that. He himself has a huge one. If he is dropped, 10 of 10 times he will say ' I could easily follow but it wouldn't be smart tactically'. Exactly insincerity made me dislike him in 2007 already. Insecerity in anything.
He knew what supposedly he would have to overcome in 2008 autumn yet. Did he budge to change anything? NO. Why??? The answer is obvious...
So playing a poor guy who had to undergo bullying and coercion [which you, Contador defenders, do] is a foolishness. He clearly knew through what he should have passed and chose that option.
The team including spanish speaking riders supported Armstrong. For me this says a lot. It means Contador did something wrong.
If I were in Contador shoes, I would have thought many times before doing that Tour. Winning the Tour that way was doomed to bring inevitable revenge from very influential uncles which really came [it is my vision of what happened].
Uff, sorry. Sadly I can not build short consice sentences.