Armstrong - response to his article on Pantani

Page 3 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
singer-songwriter said:
Please forgive my posting this here but I was not able to post my comments in full under the actual article today (http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/armstrong-if-i-was-the-carpenter-pantani-was-the-artist) and I wanted them to be read in their entirety as I feel strongly about this subject that is important in the ongoing recouperation of our sports reputation...

IN RESPONSE TO: wfaulconer post (for some reason there was no "reply" tab on this post!)

(QUOTING wfaulconer post) ... I would have liked him to say, "It's utterly unacceptable that we had to lose a cycling talent so early and in such a tormented way. The way we lived and raced back then was deplorable and will hopefully never be repeated. It was ignorant, selfish and dishonest. For anyone to pay for all that with their life is a terrible waste. I sure hope that competing with me didn't somehow contribute to the level of doping and drug activity he did, but I'm sure that it probably did and I'll never forgive myself for that. I'm lucky. I'm humiliated and ruined, but I'm alive. He wasn't the only one to pay with his life, we let it go on much too long and trusted doctors who really shouldn't have held anyone's lives in their hands. The best thing I can do for the sport since I'm not actually willing to really tell it like it is, is to fade into the background and stay away so better minds and better ideas can prevail. We are all ghosts from the past and we should stop haunting everyone. It's practically sacrilegious to comment on it anymore, we're lucky not to be in jail for all the blood on our hands. If we'd all laid down our guns back then, we could have easily raced each other clean and fair. I wish I had been more brave looking back. It's not like I don't know what bravery is, I've stared death down before. I should have said something no matter the cost. Really I was the only one who could have made it work." ....

TO ALL POSTERS HERE... I felt compelled to join CN today after years of being a non subscribing viewer and quite impulsively after having just read this particular post by wfaulconor.

The mounting pressures within a sport I love very much both as a cyclist and an ever excited viewer of the peloton are reaching a peek or at least a poignant stage within the ongoing unravelling of the sports tarnished reputation. Todays anniversary of the great rider Marco Pantani's tragic death is indeed a stark reminder of why we need to rid professional cycling of all its foul play.

I sympathise with the original poster's comments here but I do think there is still a chance Mr Armstrong may indeed be "willing to really tell it like it is". I think it would be a mistake to banish him at this point "to fade into the background and stay away". Yes! Mr Armstrong is a key culprit in the demise of the sports reputation and he has been slow and cautious to respond but it is his very position in this situation that could be vital to help amend the harm that has occurred. I don't for a moment condone his behaviour nor have any doubts that he deserves the punishment he is now having to deal with as a result of his years of deceit, but I do think one should consider the pressure he must have to face with the force of this punishment and appreciate that it must take immense self-will to accept it, swallow it and move on- hopefully to much more moral ground. That "self-will" I can sense some readers thinking: "Armstrongs old selfish ambition" OK! we know of the mans unrelenting will: so far, for the most part, he has used it immorally but I believe everyone has a right to be given a second chance to make amends and as far as professional cycling's current predicament is concerned this might be a second chance that could well serve to go a long way to help restore the sports reputation. I think the real question here is for how long and how far does a man need to be punished before he is deemed able or disable to prove he can follow the right path?

Yes! we could all interpret his comments on Signor Pantani here as another PR exercise. I deplore any drug induced performances in sport and there is no excuse whatsoever for the drug taking Mr Armstrong or any other cyclist has done including the notion: "if everyone else is doing it why should I believe that my doing it is cheating?" We can all interpret what he says here one way or another but between the lines I think there may be a hint of the mans compassion. Professional cycling is no different from football or any other financially driven sport in that the athletes rely on its reputation to earn a living. The hub of the commercial machine that provides that living is in question now: all the drugs and the riders that become tempted to take them are a by-product of the very way that machine entices the foul play to take place: overpassing moral values and replacing them with self-centred desires and greed: a tragic brainwashing of a noble, competitive spirit. I am not suggesting for a moment that the flaw in the machine is an excuse for those riders who have decided to cheat: they know full well it is wrong and should have made more effort to muster their individual strength to resist. I am not here to put that machine to rights nor argue about the amount footballers or any other professional sports people get payed; but I am here saying that whatever it is within the commercial machine that is causing this brainwashing it needs to be kicked into touch: for good. That machine by the way continues to wreak havoc after the culprits have been caught within it. One could argue that the publics current impatience with Mr Armstrongs failure so far to do something truly positive to help the situation is also a result of the same machine that spits out one of its victims damning him from ever doing something right for a change. We all pay to watch these guys spinning round the globe and without our enthusiasm for the sport it wouldn't exist as a public entertainment. Again I make no excuse for the deceitful but I question the very foundations of the current system that promotes cycling. It is a complex web of connections to bring the sport to the public eye but somewhere within this structure are things that continue to tempt the weak into immoral practice. There will always be greedy people in any warp of life: those that are so are sometimes incapable of changing but the weak should be given a chance.

I think it is possible Mr Armstrong has the capacity and courage to say and do what is right to help the sport amend itself. Indeed, for this to happen Mr Armstrong has to tell the world what he surely must see deep down is not only the truth but is the ultimately important, moral and just thing to do to truly help loosen the awful stigma that surrounds professional cycling. Many would say that he has had ample time to do this and I would agree. However considering the density of the quagmire Mr Armstrong has immersed himself into perhaps each relevant jogging of his memories like the unfortunate demise of Marco Pantani today will goad him eventually into full action rather than continuing, disappointingly, to avoid addressing the real issues full in the face as the original poster understandably expresses.

I believe Mr Armstrong does have the compassion to do this if that compassion is currently buried under what must be piles of ongoing practical pressures and maybe his very own self-centred ambition that unfortunately appears, so far, as an old affliction that continues to dominate his actions in the eyes of the public. it is this seemingly old flaw that still thwarts the mans potential to speak out and do something truly great: something that is so, so needed to help project professional cycling into a new clean arena. However I haven't yet ruled out the possibility of seeing Mr Armstrong's status change. Forgive my perhaps naive, over optimistic nature but perhaps we shouldn't rule out the possibility of events occurring in the not too distant future that could curtail a more hopeful outcome possibly a little like the former impostor Frank Abagnale turned government consultant in the film "Catch Me If You Can"

I really hope that the original passion and drive that saved his own life when he was lying on that bed riddled with cancer was a different kind: one from a person indeed among those with "better minds and better ideas" that can eventually prevail and offer a significant boost to the recovery of a sport we all love and admire. Like many I was drawn by the Armstrong story of the cancer survivor and was increasingly disappointed as the drug stories emerged. Few of us have actually met Lance Armstrong and most of us can only surmise his personality from what we read and see on the media (myself included). Perhaps we should be a little more patient to see if he does indeed put that relentless drive to good use. I think the wait could be an important one for the sport. I hope he stops listening to his lawyers or anyone thriving off his public image even in its current notorious state!: including himself! I hope Mr Armstrong sees the real issues here because the true achievers in this life are always the ones who pursue those paths that can help steer man to a more moral and noble existence. I hope.
ebandit said:
whinge on chewie

Mark L
You're the expert on whining...

Anyway, I get that you have chagrin over your present state, that being that you're too fu*king stupid to work out that this is a troll thread, and the OP is a sockpuppet, but quit harshing everybody's buzz Mark...or is it Francis?

Trey W
 
Dec 7, 2010
5,507
0
0
Let us not forget the French. They deserve this as well.

chanteur-compositeur-interprète said:
S'il vous plaît pardonnez mon annonce ce ici, mais je n'étais pas en mesure de publier mes commentaires en plein dans l'article réel aujourd'hui(http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/armstrong-if-i-was-the-carpenter-pantani-was-the-artist)et je voulais les lire dans leur intégralité que je crois fermement à ce sujet qui est important dans la recouperation cours de notre réputation de sport ...

En réponse à: wfaulconer poste (pour quelque raison il n'y avait pas l'onglet "répondre" sur ce post ! )

(Citant poste de wfaulconer ) ...je l'aurais voulu dire , " C'est tout à fait inacceptable que nous devions perdre un talent de vélo si tôt et de manière tourmentée . La façon dont nous vivions et couru à l'époque était déplorable et nous l'espérons, ne se répétera jamais . c'était ignorant, égoïste et malhonnête . pour ceux à payer pour tout ce qui touche leur vie est un terrible gaspillage . J'espère bien que la concurrence avec moi n'a pas contribué en quelque sorte le niveau de dopage et le trafic de drogues il l'a fait , mais je suis sûr qu'il a probablement fait et je ne me suis jamais pardonner pour cela. J'ai de la chance . je humilié et ruiné , mais je suis en vie . il n'était pas le seul à payer avec sa vie , nous laissons aller beaucoup trop longtemps et de confiance des médecins qui ne devrait vraiment pas avoir lieu n'importe qui vivent dans leurs mains . la meilleure chose que je peux faire pour le sport depuis que je ne suis pas réellement prêts à dire vraiment , comme il est , est de se fondre dans l'arrière-plan et de rester loin afin de meilleurs esprits et les meilleures idées peuvent prévaloir . nous sommes tous des fantômes du passé et nous devrions cesser de hanter tout le monde. c'est pratiquement sacrilège de le commenter plus , nous avons de la chance de ne pas être en prison pour tout le sang sur nos mains . Si nous avions tous déposé les armes à l'époque , nous aurions pu facilement couru l'autre propre et juste . J'aurais aimé être plus courageux en regardant en arrière . C'est pas comme si je ne sais pas ce qu'est la bravoure , j'ai regardé la mort en bas avant . j'aurais dit quelque chose , peu importe le coût . Vraiment j'étais le seul qui aurait pu fonctionner. "....

POUR TOUTES LES AFFICHES ICI ... Je me suis senti obligé de rejoindre le CN aujourd'hui, après des années d'être un spectateur non d'abonnement et assez impulsive juste après avoir lu ce post notamment par wfaulconor .

Les pressions croissantes dans un sport que j'aime beaucoup à la fois comme un cycliste et un spectateur jamais excité du peloton atteignent un coup d'oeil ou au moins une étape poignant dans le dénouement cours de sports terni sa réputation. Aujourd'hui anniversaire de la mort tragique du grand coureur Marco Pantani est en effet un rappel brutal de la raison pour laquelle nous devons débarrasser le cyclisme professionnel de tout son jeu déloyal .

Je sympathise avec les commentaires de l'auteur original ici, mais je pense qu'il ya encore une chance M. Armstrong peut en effet être " prêt à dire vraiment les choses comme il est ." Je pense que ce serait une erreur de le bannir à ce stade " de se fondre dans l'arrière-plan et de rester loin " . Oui ! M. Armstrong est un coupable clé dans la disparition de la réputation de sport et il a été lente et prudente de répondre, mais il est de sa position très dans cette situation qui pourrait être vital pour aider à modifier le préjudice qui s'est produit. Je ne tolérer un moment pas son comportement , ni avoir des doutes qu'il mérite le châtiment qu'il est maintenant d'avoir à traiter avec un résultat de ses années de tromperie , mais je ne pense on doit considérer la pression qu'il doit faire face à la force de ce châtiment et apprécient le fait qu'elle doit prendre immense volonté propre de l'accepter , avaler et se déplacer sur l'espérons à la terre beaucoup plus moral . Que « l'auto- vais " Je peux sentir une certaine lecteurs pensée : " vieux Armstrong ambition égoïste " OK ! nous savons de l' équipe volonté implacable : jusqu'à présent , la plupart du temps , il a utilisé de façon immorale mais je crois que tout le monde a le droit d'être donné une deuxième chance de faire amende honorable et aussi loin que situation actuelle du cyclisme professionnel est préoccupé par ce qui pourrait être une seconde chance qui pourrait bien servir à aller un long chemin pour aider à rétablir la réputation de sport . Je pense que la vraie question ici est pour combien de temps et jusqu'où un homme a besoin d'être puni avant il est réputé pouvoir désactiver ou de prouver qu'il peut suivre le droit chemin ?

Oui ! nous pourrions tous interpréter ses commentaires sur Signor Pantani ici comme un autre exercice de relations publiques . Je déplore tout médicament performances induites dans le sport et il n'y a aucune excuse pour la prise de drogue de M. Armstrong ou de toute autre cycliste a fait notamment la notion : « si tout le monde le fait pourquoi devrais-je croire que mon faire c'est de la triche " Nous pouvons tous interpréter ce qu'il dit ici d'une façon ou d'une autre , mais entre les lignes, je pense qu'il peut être un indice de la compassion du Mans. Cyclisme professionnel n'est pas différent du football ou tout autre sport financièrement entraînée en ce que les athlètes comptent sur sa réputation pour gagner leur vie . Le moyeu de la machine commerciale qui prévoit que la vie est en question maintenant : tous les médicaments et les coureurs qui deviennent tenté de prendre eux sont un sous-produit de la façon dont cette machine très séduit le jeu faute d'avoir lieu : dépassant pas les valeurs morales et les remplacer par des désirs et la cupidité égocentriques : un lavage de cerveau tragique d'un noble , l'esprit de compétition . Je ne prétends pas un instant que le défaut de la machine est une excuse pour les coureurs qui ont décidé de tricher : ils savent très bien que c'est mal et aurait dû faire plus d'efforts pour rassembler leur force individuelle de résister. Je ne suis pas ici pour mettre la machine à l'homme , ni argumenter sur les footballeurs montant ou d'autres professionnels des sportifs se payées , mais je suis ici pour dire que quoi que ce soit au sein de la machine commerciale qui est la cause de ce lavage de cerveau , il a besoin d'être botté en touche : pour de bon. Cette machine par la voie continue de faire des ravages après les coupables ont été pris en son sein. On pourrait dire que le courant publics impatience à l'échec de M. Armstrong à ce jour pour faire quelque chose de vraiment positif pour améliorer la situation est aussi le résultat de la même machine qui crache une de ses victimes lui accablants de jamais faire quelque chose de bien pour un changement . Nous payons tous pour regarder ces gars rotation autour du globe et sans notre enthousiasme pour le sport, il n'existerait pas comme un divertissement public . Encore une fois , je ne fais aucune excuse pour le trompeur , mais je m'interroge sur les fondements mêmes du système actuel qui favorise le vélo . Il s'agit d'un réseau complexe de connexions à faire du sport aux yeux du public , mais quelque part dans cette structure sont des choses qui continuent à tenter le faible en pratique immorale . Il y aura toujours des gens avides de toute la chaîne de la vie : ceux qui sont si sont parfois incapables de changer , mais les faibles devraient avoir une chance .

Je pense qu'il est possible de M. Armstrong a la capacité et le courage de dire et de faire ce qui est juste pour aider le sport lui-même modifier . En effet , pour ce faire , M. Armstrong a à dire au monde ce qu'il doit sûrement voir en profondeur n'est pas seulement la vérité, mais la chose importante en fin de compte , moral et juste à faire pour aider vraiment desserrer le stigmate horrible qui entoure le cyclisme professionnel . Beaucoup diront qu'il a eu amplement le temps de le faire et je suis d'accord . Toutefois, compte tenu de la densité du bourbier M. Armstrong s'est plongé dans le jogging peut-être chaque pertinente de ses souvenirs comme la malheureuse disparition de Marco Pantani aujourd'hui le pousser finalement en pleine action plutôt que de continuer , malheureusement , à éviter d'aborder les vrais problèmes à part entière dans la face en tant que l'affiche originale exprime naturellement .

J'espère vraiment que la passion original et dur qui a sauvé sa propre vie quand il était couché sur ce lit criblé de cancer était un genre différent : l'un d'une personne en effet parmi ceux qui « meilleurs esprits et les meilleures idées » qui peut éventuellement l'emporter et offre une forte impulsion à la reprise d'un sport que nous aimons tous et admirons . Comme beaucoup j'ai été attiré par l'histoire Armstrong du survivant du cancer et j'étais de plus en plus déçu que les histoires de drogues ont émergé . Peu d'entre nous ont effectivement rencontré Lance Armstrong et la plupart de nous ne peut deviner sa personnalité à partir de ce que nous lisons et voir sur les médias ( moi y compris) . Nous devrions peut-être être un peu plus patient pour voir si il ne fait que mettre entraînement sans relâche à la bonne utilisation . Je pense que l'attente pourrait être une année importante pour le sport . J'espère qu'il arrête d'écouter ses avocats ou toute personne prospère hors de son image publique , même dans son état actuel notoire : y compris lui-même! J'espère que M. Armstrong voit les vrais problèmes ici parce que les vrais performants dans cette vie sont toujours ceux qui poursuivent ces chemins qui peuvent aider à orienter l'homme à une existence plus moral et noble . J'espère .
 
Dec 7, 2010
5,507
0
0
singer-songwriter said:
Please forgive my posting this here but I was not able to post my comments in full under the actual article today (http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/armstrong-if-i-was-the-carpenter-pantani-was-the-artist) and I wanted them to be read in their entirety as I feel strongly about this subject that is important in the ongoing recouperation of our sports reputation...

IN RESPONSE TO: wfaulconer post (for some reason there was no "reply" tab on this post!)

(QUOTING wfaulconer post) ... I would have liked him to say, "It's utterly unacceptable that we had to lose a cycling talent so early and in such a tormented way. The way we lived and raced back then was deplorable and will hopefully never be repeated. It was ignorant, selfish and dishonest. For anyone to pay for all that with their life is a terrible waste. I sure hope that competing with me didn't somehow contribute to the level of doping and drug activity he did, but I'm sure that it probably did and I'll never forgive myself for that. I'm lucky. I'm humiliated and ruined, but I'm alive. He wasn't the only one to pay with his life, we let it go on much too long and trusted doctors who really shouldn't have held anyone's lives in their hands. The best thing I can do for the sport since I'm not actually willing to really tell it like it is, is to fade into the background and stay away so better minds and better ideas can prevail. We are all ghosts from the past and we should stop haunting everyone. It's practically sacrilegious to comment on it anymore, we're lucky not to be in jail for all the blood on our hands. If we'd all laid down our guns back then, we could have easily raced each other clean and fair. I wish I had been more brave looking back. It's not like I don't know what bravery is, I've stared death down before. I should have said something no matter the cost. Really I was the only one who could have made it work." ....

TO ALL POSTERS HERE... I felt compelled to join CN today after years of being a non subscribing viewer and quite impulsively after having just read this particular post by wfaulconor.

The mounting pressures within a sport I love very much both as a cyclist and an ever excited viewer of the peloton are reaching a peek or at least a poignant stage within the ongoing unravelling of the sports tarnished reputation. Todays anniversary of the great rider Marco Pantani's tragic death is indeed a stark reminder of why we need to rid professional cycling of all its foul play.

I sympathise with the original poster's comments here but I do think there is still a chance Mr Armstrong may indeed be "willing to really tell it like it is". I think it would be a mistake to banish him at this point "to fade into the background and stay away". Yes! Mr Armstrong is a key culprit in the demise of the sports reputation and he has been slow and cautious to respond but it is his very position in this situation that could be vital to help amend the harm that has occurred. I don't for a moment condone his behaviour nor have any doubts that he deserves the punishment he is now having to deal with as a result of his years of deceit, but I do think one should consider the pressure he must have to face with the force of this punishment and appreciate that it must take immense self-will to accept it, swallow it and move on- hopefully to much more moral ground. That "self-will" I can sense some readers thinking: "Armstrongs old selfish ambition" OK! we know of the mans unrelenting will: so far, for the most part, he has used it immorally but I believe everyone has a right to be given a second chance to make amends and as far as professional cycling's current predicament is concerned this might be a second chance that could well serve to go a long way to help restore the sports reputation. I think the real question here is for how long and how far does a man need to be punished before he is deemed able or disable to prove he can follow the right path?

Yes! we could all interpret his comments on Signor Pantani here as another PR exercise. I deplore any drug induced performances in sport and there is no excuse whatsoever for the drug taking Mr Armstrong or any other cyclist has done including the notion: "if everyone else is doing it why should I believe that my doing it is cheating?" We can all interpret what he says here one way or another but between the lines I think there may be a hint of the mans compassion. Professional cycling is no different from football or any other financially driven sport in that the athletes rely on its reputation to earn a living. The hub of the commercial machine that provides that living is in question now: all the drugs and the riders that become tempted to take them are a by-product of the very way that machine entices the foul play to take place: overpassing moral values and replacing them with self-centred desires and greed: a tragic brainwashing of a noble, competitive spirit. I am not suggesting for a moment that the flaw in the machine is an excuse for those riders who have decided to cheat: they know full well it is wrong and should have made more effort to muster their individual strength to resist. I am not here to put that machine to rights nor argue about the amount footballers or any other professional sports people get payed; but I am here saying that whatever it is within the commercial machine that is causing this brainwashing it needs to be kicked into touch: for good. That machine by the way continues to wreak havoc after the culprits have been caught within it. One could argue that the publics current impatience with Mr Armstrongs failure so far to do something truly positive to help the situation is also a result of the same machine that spits out one of its victims damning him from ever doing something right for a change. We all pay to watch these guys spinning round the globe and without our enthusiasm for the sport it wouldn't exist as a public entertainment. Again I make no excuse for the deceitful but I question the very foundations of the current system that promotes cycling. It is a complex web of connections to bring the sport to the public eye but somewhere within this structure are things that continue to tempt the weak into immoral practice. There will always be greedy people in any warp of life: those that are so are sometimes incapable of changing but the weak should be given a chance.

I think it is possible Mr Armstrong has the capacity and courage to say and do what is right to help the sport amend itself. Indeed, for this to happen Mr Armstrong has to tell the world what he surely must see deep down is not only the truth but is the ultimately important, moral and just thing to do to truly help loosen the awful stigma that surrounds professional cycling. Many would say that he has had ample time to do this and I would agree. However considering the density of the quagmire Mr Armstrong has immersed himself into perhaps each relevant jogging of his memories like the unfortunate demise of Marco Pantani today will goad him eventually into full action rather than continuing, disappointingly, to avoid addressing the real issues full in the face as the original poster understandably expresses.

I believe Mr Armstrong does have the compassion to do this if that compassion is currently buried under what must be piles of ongoing practical pressures and maybe his very own self-centred ambition that unfortunately appears, so far, as an old affliction that continues to dominate his actions in the eyes of the public. I hope Mr Armstrong's ambitious streak is indeed a genuine by-product of what can happen to a gifted athlete as a result of an immorally run commercial machine. If not he should indeed step back from the public eye or at least from the cycling community. However my hunch is that, for the moment, predominantly, it is this seemingly old flaw that still thwarts the mans potential to speak out and do something truly great: something that is so, so needed to help project professional cycling into a new clean arena. However I haven't yet ruled out the possibility of seeing Mr Armstrong's status change. Forgive my perhaps naive, over optimistic nature but perhaps we shouldn't rule out the possibility of events occurring in the not too distant future that could curtail a more hopeful outcome possibly a little like the former impostor Frank Abagnale turned government consultant in the film "Catch Me If You Can"

I really hope that the original passion and drive that saved his own life when he was lying on that bed riddled with cancer was a different kind: one from a person indeed among those with "better minds and better ideas" that can eventually prevail and offer a significant boost to the recovery of a sport we all love and admire. Like many I was drawn by the Armstrong story of the cancer survivor and was increasingly disappointed as the drug stories emerged. Few of us have actually met Lance Armstrong and most of us can only surmise his personality from what we read and see on the media (myself included). Perhaps we should be a little more patient to see if he does indeed put that relentless drive to good use. I think the wait could be an important one for the sport. I hope he stops listening to his lawyers or anyone thriving off his public image even in its current notorious state!: including himself! I hope Mr Armstrong sees the real issues here because the true achievers in this life are always the ones who pursue those paths that can help steer man to a more moral and noble existence. I hope.

For a limited time only, Velopress will be offering a print version of the above. It required a multi-volume set.

 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
singer-songwriter said:
Please forgive my posting this here but I was not able to post my comments in full under the actual article today (http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/armstrong-if-i-was-the-carpenter-pantani-was-the-artist) and I wanted them to be read in their entirety as I feel strongly about this subject that is important in the ongoing recouperation of our sports reputation...

IN RESPONSE TO: wfaulconer post (for some reason there was no "reply" tab on this post!)

(QUOTING wfaulconer post) ... I would have liked him to say, "It's utterly unacceptable that we had to lose a cycling talent so early and in such a tormented way. The way we lived and raced back then was deplorable and will hopefully never be repeated. It was ignorant, selfish and dishonest. For anyone to pay for all that with their life is a terrible waste. I sure hope that competing with me didn't somehow contribute to the level of doping and drug activity he did, but I'm sure that it probably did and I'll never forgive myself for that. I'm lucky. I'm humiliated and ruined, but I'm alive. He wasn't the only one to pay with his life, we let it go on much too long and trusted doctors who really shouldn't have held anyone's lives in their hands. The best thing I can do for the sport since I'm not actually willing to really tell it like it is, is to fade into the background and stay away so better minds and better ideas can prevail. We are all ghosts from the past and we should stop haunting everyone. It's practically sacrilegious to comment on it anymore, we're lucky not to be in jail for all the blood on our hands. If we'd all laid down our guns back then, we could have easily raced each other clean and fair. I wish I had been more brave looking back. It's not like I don't know what bravery is, I've stared death down before. I should have said something no matter the cost. Really I was the only one who could have made it work." ....

TO ALL POSTERS HERE... I felt compelled to join CN today after years of being a non subscribing viewer and quite impulsively after having just read this particular post by wfaulconor.

The mounting pressures within a sport I love very much both as a cyclist and an ever excited viewer of the peloton are reaching a peek or at least a poignant stage within the ongoing unravelling of the sports tarnished reputation. Todays anniversary of the great rider Marco Pantani's tragic death is indeed a stark reminder of why we need to rid professional cycling of all its foul play.

I sympathise with the original poster's comments here but I do think there is still a chance Mr Armstrong may indeed be "willing to really tell it like it is". I think it would be a mistake to banish him at this point "to fade into the background and stay away". Yes! Mr Armstrong is a key culprit in the demise of the sports reputation and he has been slow and cautious to respond but it is his very position in this situation that could be vital to help amend the harm that has occurred. I don't for a moment condone his behaviour nor have any doubts that he deserves the punishment he is now having to deal with as a result of his years of deceit, but I do think one should consider the pressure he must have to face with the force of this punishment and appreciate that it must take immense self-will to accept it, swallow it and move on- hopefully to much more moral ground. That "self-will" I can sense some readers thinking: "Armstrongs old selfish ambition" OK! we know of the mans unrelenting will: so far, for the most part, he has used it immorally but I believe everyone has a right to be given a second chance to make amends and as far as professional cycling's current predicament is concerned this might be a second chance that could well serve to go a long way to help restore the sports reputation. I think the real question here is for how long and how far does a man need to be punished before he is deemed able or disable to prove he can follow the right path?

Yes! we could all interpret his comments on Signor Pantani here as another PR exercise. I deplore any drug induced performances in sport and there is no excuse whatsoever for the drug taking Mr Armstrong or any other cyclist has done including the notion: "if everyone else is doing it why should I believe that my doing it is cheating?" We can all interpret what he says here one way or another but between the lines I think there may be a hint of the mans compassion. Professional cycling is no different from football or any other financially driven sport in that the athletes rely on its reputation to earn a living. The hub of the commercial machine that provides that living is in question now: all the drugs and the riders that become tempted to take them are a by-product of the very way that machine entices the foul play to take place: overpassing moral values and replacing them with self-centred desires and greed: a tragic brainwashing of a noble, competitive spirit. I am not suggesting for a moment that the flaw in the machine is an excuse for those riders who have decided to cheat: they know full well it is wrong and should have made more effort to muster their individual strength to resist. I am not here to put that machine to rights nor argue about the amount footballers or any other professional sports people get payed; but I am here saying that whatever it is within the commercial machine that is causing this brainwashing it needs to be kicked into touch: for good. That machine by the way continues to wreak havoc after the culprits have been caught within it. One could argue that the publics current impatience with Mr Armstrongs failure so far to do something truly positive to help the situation is also a result of the same machine that spits out one of its victims damning him from ever doing something right for a change. We all pay to watch these guys spinning round the globe and without our enthusiasm for the sport it wouldn't exist as a public entertainment. Again I make no excuse for the deceitful but I question the very foundations of the current system that promotes cycling. It is a complex web of connections to bring the sport to the public eye but somewhere within this structure are things that continue to tempt the weak into immoral practice. There will always be greedy people in any warp of life: those that are so are sometimes incapable of changing but the weak should be given a chance.

I think it is possible Mr Armstrong has the capacity and courage to say and do what is right to help the sport amend itself. Indeed, for this to happen Mr Armstrong has to tell the world what he surely must see deep down is not only the truth but is the ultimately important, moral and just thing to do to truly help loosen the awful stigma that surrounds professional cycling. Many would say that he has had ample time to do this and I would agree. However considering the density of the quagmire Mr Armstrong has immersed himself into perhaps each relevant jogging of his memories like the unfortunate demise of Marco Pantani today will goad him eventually into full action rather than continuing, disappointingly, to avoid addressing the real issues full in the face as the original poster understandably expresses.

I believe Mr Armstrong does have the compassion to do this if that compassion is currently buried under what must be piles of ongoing practical pressures and maybe his very own self-centred ambition that unfortunately appears, so far, as an old affliction that continues to dominate his actions in the eyes of the public. I hope Mr Armstrong's ambitious streak is indeed a genuine by-product of what can happen to a gifted athlete as a result of an immorally run commercial machine. If not he should indeed step back from the public eye or at least from the cycling community. However my hunch is that, for the moment, predominantly, it is this seemingly old flaw that still thwarts the mans potential to speak out and do something truly great: something that is so, so needed to help project professional cycling into a new clean arena. However I haven't yet ruled out the possibility of seeing Mr Armstrong's status change. Forgive my perhaps naive, over optimistic nature but perhaps we shouldn't rule out the possibility of events occurring in the not too distant future that could curtail a more hopeful outcome possibly a little like the former impostor Frank Abagnale turned government consultant in the film "Catch Me If You Can"

I really hope that the original passion and drive that saved his own life when he was lying on that bed riddled with cancer was a different kind: one from a person indeed among those with "better minds and better ideas" that can eventually prevail and offer a significant boost to the recovery of a sport we all love and admire. Like many I was drawn by the Armstrong story of the cancer survivor and was increasingly disappointed as the drug stories emerged. Few of us have actually met Lance Armstrong and most of us can only surmise his personality from what we read and see on the media (myself included). Perhaps we should be a little more patient to see if he does indeed put that relentless drive to good use. I think the wait could be an important one for the sport. I hope he stops listening to his lawyers or anyone thriving off his public image even in its current notorious state!: including himself! I hope Mr Armstrong sees the real issues here because the true achievers in this life are always the ones who pursue those paths that can help steer man to a more moral and noble existence. I hope.
 
Mar 16, 2013
98
0
0
singer-songwriter said:
Please forgive my posting this here but I was not able to post my comments in full under the actual article today (http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/armstrong-if-i-was-the-carpenter-pantani-was-the-artist) and I wanted them to be read in their entirety as I feel strongly about this subject that is important in the ongoing recouperation of our sports reputation...

IN RESPONSE TO: wfaulconer post (for some reason there was no "reply" tab on this post!)

(QUOTING wfaulconer post) ... I would have liked him to say, "It's utterly unacceptable that we had to lose a cycling talent so early and in such a tormented way. The way we lived and raced back then was deplorable and will hopefully never be repeated. It was ignorant, selfish and dishonest. For anyone to pay for all that with their life is a terrible waste. I sure hope that competing with me didn't somehow contribute to the level of doping and drug activity he did, but I'm sure that it probably did and I'll never forgive myself for that. I'm lucky. I'm humiliated and ruined, but I'm alive. He wasn't the only one to pay with his life, we let it go on much too long and trusted doctors who really shouldn't have held anyone's lives in their hands. The best thing I can do for the sport since I'm not actually willing to really tell it like it is, is to fade into the background and stay away so better minds and better ideas can prevail. We are all ghosts from the past and we should stop haunting everyone. It's practically sacrilegious to comment on it anymore, we're lucky not to be in jail for all the blood on our hands. If we'd all laid down our guns back then, we could have easily raced each other clean and fair. I wish I had been more brave looking back. It's not like I don't know what bravery is, I've stared death down before. I should have said something no matter the cost. Really I was the only one who could have made it work." ....

TO ALL POSTERS HERE... I felt compelled to join CN today after years of being a non subscribing viewer and quite impulsively after having just read this particular post by wfaulconor.

The mounting pressures within a sport I love very much both as a cyclist and an ever excited viewer of the peloton are reaching a peek or at least a poignant stage within the ongoing unravelling of the sports tarnished reputation. Todays anniversary of the great rider Marco Pantani's tragic death is indeed a stark reminder of why we need to rid professional cycling of all its foul play.

I sympathise with the original poster's comments here but I do think there is still a chance Mr Armstrong may indeed be "willing to really tell it like it is". I think it would be a mistake to banish him at this point "to fade into the background and stay away". Yes! Mr Armstrong is a key culprit in the demise of the sports reputation and he has been slow and cautious to respond but it is his very position in this situation that could be vital to help amend the harm that has occurred. I don't for a moment condone his behaviour nor have any doubts that he deserves the punishment he is now having to deal with as a result of his years of deceit, but I do think one should consider the pressure he must have to face with the force of this punishment and appreciate that it must take immense self-will to accept it, swallow it and move on- hopefully to much more moral ground. That "self-will" I can sense some readers thinking: "Armstrongs old selfish ambition" OK! we know of the mans unrelenting will: so far, for the most part, he has used it immorally but I believe everyone has a right to be given a second chance to make amends and as far as professional cycling's current predicament is concerned this might be a second chance that could well serve to go a long way to help restore the sports reputation. I think the real question here is for how long and how far does a man need to be punished before he is deemed able or disable to prove he can follow the right path?

Yes! we could all interpret his comments on Signor Pantani here as another PR exercise. I deplore any drug induced performances in sport and there is no excuse whatsoever for the drug taking Mr Armstrong or any other cyclist has done including the notion: "if everyone else is doing it why should I believe that my doing it is cheating?" We can all interpret what he says here one way or another but between the lines I think there may be a hint of the mans compassion. Professional cycling is no different from football or any other financially driven sport in that the athletes rely on its reputation to earn a living. The hub of the commercial machine that provides that living is in question now: all the drugs and the riders that become tempted to take them are a by-product of the very way that machine entices the foul play to take place: overpassing moral values and replacing them with self-centred desires and greed: a tragic brainwashing of a noble, competitive spirit. I am not suggesting for a moment that the flaw in the machine is an excuse for those riders who have decided to cheat: they know full well it is wrong and should have made more effort to muster their individual strength to resist. I am not here to put that machine to rights nor argue about the amount footballers or any other professional sports people get payed; but I am here saying that whatever it is within the commercial machine that is causing this brainwashing it needs to be kicked into touch: for good. That machine by the way continues to wreak havoc after the culprits have been caught within it. One could argue that the publics current impatience with Mr Armstrongs failure so far to do something truly positive to help the situation is also a result of the same machine that spits out one of its victims damning him from ever doing something right for a change. We all pay to watch these guys spinning round the globe and without our enthusiasm for the sport it wouldn't exist as a public entertainment. Again I make no excuse for the deceitful but I question the very foundations of the current system that promotes cycling. It is a complex web of connections to bring the sport to the public eye but somewhere within this structure are things that continue to tempt the weak into immoral practice. There will always be greedy people in any warp of life: those that are so are sometimes incapable of changing but the weak should be given a chance.

I think it is possible Mr Armstrong has the capacity and courage to say and do what is right to help the sport amend itself. Indeed, for this to happen Mr Armstrong has to tell the world what he surely must see deep down is not only the truth but is the ultimately important, moral and just thing to do to truly help loosen the awful stigma that surrounds professional cycling. Many would say that he has had ample time to do this and I would agree. However considering the density of the quagmire Mr Armstrong has immersed himself into perhaps each relevant jogging of his memories like the unfortunate demise of Marco Pantani today will goad him eventually into full action rather than continuing, disappointingly, to avoid addressing the real issues full in the face as the original poster understandably expresses.

I believe Mr Armstrong does have the compassion to do this if that compassion is currently buried under what must be piles of ongoing practical pressures and maybe his very own self-centred ambition that unfortunately appears, so far, as an old affliction that continues to dominate his actions in the eyes of the public. I hope Mr Armstrong's ambitious streak is indeed a genuine by-product of what can happen to a gifted athlete as a result of an immorally run commercial machine. If not he should indeed step back from the public eye or at least from the cycling community. However my hunch is that, for the moment, predominantly, it is this seemingly old flaw that still thwarts the mans potential to speak out and do something truly great: something that is so, so needed to help project professional cycling into a new clean arena. However I haven't yet ruled out the possibility of seeing Mr Armstrong's status change. Forgive my perhaps naive, over optimistic nature but perhaps we shouldn't rule out the possibility of events occurring in the not too distant future that could curtail a more hopeful outcome possibly a little like the former impostor Frank Abagnale turned government consultant in the film "Catch Me If You Can"

I really hope that the original passion and drive that saved his own life when he was lying on that bed riddled with cancer was a different kind: one from a person indeed among those with "better minds and better ideas" that can eventually prevail and offer a significant boost to the recovery of a sport we all love and admire. Like many I was drawn by the Armstrong story of the cancer survivor and was increasingly disappointed as the drug stories emerged. Few of us have actually met Lance Armstrong and most of us can only surmise his personality from what we read and see on the media (myself included). Perhaps we should be a little more patient to see if he does indeed put that relentless drive to good use. I think the wait could be an important one for the sport. I hope he stops listening to his lawyers or anyone thriving off his public image even in its current notorious state!: including himself! I hope Mr Armstrong sees the real issues here because the true achievers in this life are always the ones who pursue those paths that can help steer man to a more moral and noble existence. I hope
.

Hard to read with it only being in bold. Larger font would really help.
 
Feb 14, 2014
9
0
0
ChewbaccaD said:
You're the expert on whining...

Anyway, I get that you have chagrin over your present state, that being that you're too fu*king stupid to work out that this is a troll thread, and the OP is a sockpuppet, but quit harshing everybody's buzz Mark...or is it Francis?

Trey W
To all readers, jokers, half-wits and concienscious posters alike:

I may have been a little over-reactionary to say I would not return to comment here but just for the record I have opened my PM folder for anyone who wishes to contact me directly. Further more if anyone doubts my status as a genuine public poster then perhaps you can click on my signature link below to see that in fact I am NOT Sheryl Crow. (I thank the original joker-poster for this oh so highly amusing assumption and apologise unwittingly for hijacking it for my signature)

Rather than my reacting the way I did initially conveying my irritated disappointment from the dominant frivolity on this thread I felt I had to post again to make some sense out of it.

I think most cycling enthusiasts who follow professional cycling have a clearer idea now of the way professional riders can fall into the doping culture and the more it is exposed and discussed the better. However considering most of the cynical comments here it is obvious that current progress to clean the sport up is not convincing the general public enough (and probably the cynical amongst you are understandably so when it comes to anything about Mr Armstrong).

From the reaction so far, both light-hearted and serious, I am getting a general consensus here that Mr Armstrong is regarded as a lost cause and not someone who will ever provide any significant progress to the cleaning up process of professional cycling. Again, another effect the "commercial machine" has on the public is to limit its patience in waiting for somebody fallen from grace to see the light. However I no longer see this as relevant in Mr Armstrong's case: after all, he has indeed done little to change peoples continuing perception of him as anything more than a sociopath. I must say, the more time passes the more I hope there will be others from the heart of the pro cycling community with genuine conviction to emerge and make a significant contribution to the process of dispelling the flaws in the "commercial cycling machine" and pro cycling's tarnished image.

That process seems to be shaping up with a recent change of the guard within the official cycling bodies but I still think it is going to take a strong character from one of the guilty participants within the current doping culture itself to really make a significant difference. I say "current" because I believe it would have to be somebody to emerge from the smoke of his own free will rather than somebody who had previously been caught or one that decides to help out after being exposed through a positive doping story. Don't get me wrong: I admire riders like David Millar who has obviously had to go through hell and back to get where he is today and he certainly comes over as somebody with a lot of integrity. Also I am not just referring to the riders but also anyone else involved within the machine that puts these riders on the road.

We live in a world where any news story has to be increasingly more sensational to get the publics true attention. As such, in order for everyone to sit up and listen that story needs to be either an extremely unexpected one or one disclosed with a barrage of unmissable and commendable events over a significant period of time. Anyone who does have the courage to come forward would also have to be free of any questionable motives to do so. I am not denying that such a rider or other guilty participant deciding to come forward on their own free will is highly unlikely to occur but I am saying that it is going to take some similarly unexpected effort to convince the public that professional cycling is truly on the mend.

There are noises made mainly from the riders who understandably want to continue earning their living without the discomfort of cycling's current tarnished image. However it is not surprising to find nearly every famous rider scrutinised. The reason for the publics suspicions are two-fold. Firstly it is nigh-on impossible and a long year by year process to uncover all the cheats- something which has been going on for decades. Secondly I think the continuing exposure of cheats, although necessary, is not the kind of evidence that is going to fully convince the public that cycling is becoming a clean sport. I think the publics apathy toward cycling regarding its doping culture is all down to a lack of a significant outcry from the professional cycling community itself. If the rumours are true that "they're all on it" then surely it is indeed going to take one or a number of them to come clean of their own free will to really convince us all. Do we really believe that the long and probably never ending trail of cheats that the cycling bodies continue to expose is ever going to change the sports image? No! I don't think so. I think it needs to come from deep inside the pro-cycling community somehow. Yes! we have seen and heard confessions from riders but only after they have been exposed. It would take an extremely brave rider to do this of course but he would be sacrificing a dishonest career for an infinitely greater cause. As much as I am sick of witnessing public apathy I am tired of feeling the disappointment of hearing and somewhat having to second guess about the true progress of this cleaning up process, amidst what I see as a sport run under the spell of a "cloak and dagger" system. Rather than exposing the cheats I think it is going to take one of the yet undiscovered ones to come clean off their own free will to really get the ball rolling.

Just as unseen as the flaws within the system which professional cycling is run, there are the untold efforts of those behind the scenes who are trying to put things right. The press need to make more of a conscious effort to make the public aware of these efforts by diligent people we never get to hear about. Again: the more the better. For it is going to take more than all be it constant subtle changes and the exposure of one doper after another to not only convince the public but also extinguish whatever it is that is encouraging the foul practice. The subtle ongoing efforts need to be reinforced with genuinely remarkable changes of human heart: rare occurrences indeed I know! No doubt many of you here will scold me for perhaps sounding way too idealistic and I wouldn't necessarily disagree with you but I am merely saying we need to keep searching for more solid ways to speed up the process. Sometimes ideals can turn into reality with decent helpings of hope, courage and believe in true human integrity.

It is perhaps revealing and a further reminder of just how serious this issue is that having followed all the comments from my original post on the anniversary of Marco Pantani's death, amongst only a few others it is the original poster who has found himself re-reading his own words and ended up responding in a considered fashion. As such I have stumbled into the conclusion that Mr Armstrong's participation at this point, leaving his personality aside and considering he is just another cheat caught out, would not be the ideal person to propel the necessary progress. Bringing his personality back into the equation I can no longer see how the public could possibly believe him any more anyway. In fact it would indeed take some pretty astonishing action by Mr Armstrong to convince me or, I imagine, anyone else that if he did "tell it how it is" it would be for genuinely selfless and noble reasons. I actually just looked up in the dictionary the meaning of the word "selfless" and found this quote along side the definition: "Volunteers need both selfish and selfless motives to sustain their interest" (Natalie de Combray). I agree with this quote but unfortunately it appears that Mr Armstrong has rather too much of the former.

Oh! and by the way, if my dispelling of the last 2 days "buzz" that I may be a "sock puppet" now brings disappointment and discourages people from reading or commenting further on this thread about this important issue then this is indeed a sad forum to be a part of and I really won't bother returning a second time.

P.S. I changed the font as although I am flattered people continue to re-quote my original post I thought it might be prudent as readers may overlook the length of this one thinking it is merely another duplication.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
0
0
singer-songwriter said:
To all readers, jokers, half-wits and concienscious posters alike:

I may have been a little over-reactionary to say I would not return to comment here but just for the record I have opened my PM folder for anyone who wishes to contact me directly. Further more if anyone doubts my status as a genuine public poster then perhaps you can click on my signature link below to see that in fact I am NOT Sheryl Crow. (I thank the original joker-poster for this oh so highly amusing assumption and apologise unwittingly for hijacking it for my signature)

Rather than my reacting the way I did initially conveying my irritated disappointment from the dominant frivolity on this thread I felt I had to post again to make some sense out of it.

I think most cycling enthusiasts who follow professional cycling have a clearer idea now of the way professional riders can fall into the doping culture and the more it is exposed and discussed the better. However considering most of the cynical comments here it is obvious that current progress to clean the sport up is not convincing the general public enough (and probably the cynical amongst you are understandably so when it comes to anything about Mr Armstrong).

From the reaction so far, both light-hearted and serious, I am getting a general consensus here that Mr Armstrong is regarded as a lost cause and not someone who will ever provide any significant progress to the cleaning up process of professional cycling. Again, another effect the "commercial machine" has on the public is to limit its patience in waiting for somebody fallen from grace to see the light. However I no longer see this as relevant in Mr Armstrong's case: after all, he has indeed done little to change peoples continuing perception of him as anything more than a sociopath. I must say, the more time passes the more I hope there will be others from the heart of the pro cycling community with genuine conviction to emerge and make a significant contribution to the process of dispelling the flaws in the "commercial cycling machine" and pro cycling's tarnished image.

That process seems to be shaping up with a recent change of the guard within the official cycling bodies but I still think it is going to take a strong character from one of the guilty participants within the current doping culture itself to really make a significant difference. I say "current" because I believe it would have to be somebody to emerge from the smoke of his own free will rather than somebody who had previously been caught or one that decides to help out after being exposed through a positive doping story. Don't get me wrong: I admire riders like David Millar who has obviously had to go through hell and back to get where he is today and he certainly comes over as somebody with a lot of integrity. Also I am not just referring to the riders but also anyone else involved within the machine that puts these riders on the road.

We live in a world where any news story has to be increasingly more sensational to get the publics true attention. As such, in order for everyone to sit up and listen that story needs to be either an extremely unexpected one or one disclosed with a barrage of unmissable and commendable events over a significant period of time. Anyone who does have the courage to come forward would also have to be free of any questionable motives to do so. I am not denying that such a rider or other guilty participant deciding to come forward on their own free will is highly unlikely to occur but I am saying that it is going to take some similarly unexpected effort to convince the public that professional cycling is truly on the mend.

There are noises made mainly from the riders who understandably want to continue earning their living without the discomfort of cycling's current tarnished image. However it is not surprising to find nearly every famous rider scrutinised. The reason for the publics suspicions are two-fold. Firstly it is nigh-on impossible and a long year by year process to uncover all the cheats- something which has been going on for decades. Secondly I think the continuing exposure of cheats, although necessary, is not the kind of evidence that is going to fully convince the public that cycling is becoming a clean sport. I think the publics apathy toward cycling regarding its doping culture is all down to a lack of a significant outcry from the professional cycling community itself. If the rumours are true that "they're all on it" then surely it is indeed going to take one or a number of them to come clean of their own free will to really convince us all. Do we really believe that the long and probably never ending trail of cheats that the cycling bodies continue to expose is ever going to change the sports image? No! I don't think so. I think it needs to come from deep inside the pro-cycling community somehow. Yes! we have seen and heard confessions from riders but only after they have been exposed. It would take an extremely brave rider to do this of course but he would be sacrificing a dishonest career for an infinitely greater cause. As much as I am sick of witnessing public apathy I am tired of feeling the disappointment of hearing and somewhat having to second guess about the true progress of this cleaning up process, amidst what I see as a sport run under the spell of a "cloak and dagger" system. Rather than exposing the cheats I think it is going to take one of the yet undiscovered ones to come clean off their own free will to really get the ball rolling.

Just as unseen as the flaws within the system which professional cycling is run, there are the untold efforts of those behind the scenes who are trying to put things right. The press need to make more of a conscious effort to make the public aware of these efforts by diligent people we never get to hear about. Again: the more the better. For it is going to take more than all be it constant subtle changes and the exposure of one doper after another to not only convince the public but also extinguish whatever it is that is encouraging the foul practice. The subtle ongoing efforts need to be reinforced with genuinely remarkable changes of human heart: rare occurrences indeed I know! No doubt many of you here will scold me for perhaps sounding way too idealistic and I wouldn't necessarily disagree with you but I am merely saying we need to keep searching for more solid ways to speed up the process. Sometimes ideals can turn into reality with decent helpings of hope, courage and believe in true human integrity.

It is perhaps revealing and a further reminder of just how serious this issue is that having followed all the comments from my original post on the anniversary of Marco Pantani's death, amongst only a few others it is the original poster who has found himself re-reading his own words and ended up responding in a considered fashion. As such I have stumbled into the conclusion that Mr Armstrong's participation at this point, leaving his personality aside and considering he is just another cheat caught out, would not be the ideal person to propel the necessary progress. Bringing his personality back into the equation I can no longer see how the public could possibly believe him any more anyway. In fact it would indeed take some pretty astonishing action by Mr Armstrong to convince me or, I imagine, anyone else that if he did "tell it how it is" it would be for genuinely selfless and noble reasons. I actually just looked up in the dictionary the meaning of the word "selfless" and found this quote along side the definition: "Volunteers need both selfish and selfless motives to sustain their interest" (Natalie de Combray). I agree with this quote but unfortunately it appears that Mr Armstrong has rather too much of the former.

Oh! and by the way, if my dispelling of the last 2 days "buzz" that I may be a "sock puppet" now brings disappointment and discourages people from reading or commenting further on this thread about this important issue then this is indeed a sad forum to be a part of and I really won't bother returning a second time.

P.S. I changed the font as although I am flattered people continue to re-quote my original post I thought it might be prudent as readers may overlook the length of this one thinking it is merely another duplication.
Any relation to Peter?
 
Jul 6, 2010
2,340
0
0
singer-songwriter said:
To all readers, jokers, half-wits and concienscious posters alike:

I may have been a little over-reactionary to say I would not return to comment here but just for the record I have opened my PM folder for anyone who wishes to contact me directly. Further more if anyone doubts my status as a genuine public poster then perhaps you can click on my signature link below to see that in fact I am NOT Sheryl Crow. (I thank the original joker-poster for this oh so highly amusing assumption and apologise unwittingly for hijacking it for my signature)

Rather than my reacting the way I did initially conveying my irritated disappointment from the dominant frivolity on this thread I felt I had to post again to make some sense out of it.

I think most cycling enthusiasts who follow professional cycling have a clearer idea now of the way professional riders can fall into the doping culture and the more it is exposed and discussed the better. However considering most of the cynical comments here it is obvious that current progress to clean the sport up is not convincing the general public enough (and probably the cynical amongst you are understandably so when it comes to anything about Mr Armstrong).

From the reaction so far, both light-hearted and serious, I am getting a general consensus here that Mr Armstrong is regarded as a lost cause and not someone who will ever provide any significant progress to the cleaning up process of professional cycling. Again, another effect the "commercial machine" has on the public is to limit its patience in waiting for somebody fallen from grace to see the light. However I no longer see this as relevant in Mr Armstrong's case: after all, he has indeed done little to change peoples continuing perception of him as anything more than a sociopath. I must say, the more time passes the more I hope there will be others from the heart of the pro cycling community with genuine conviction to emerge and make a significant contribution to the process of dispelling the flaws in the "commercial cycling machine" and pro cycling's tarnished image.

That process seems to be shaping up with a recent change of the guard within the official cycling bodies but I still think it is going to take a strong character from one of the guilty participants within the current doping culture itself to really make a significant difference. I say "current" because I believe it would have to be somebody to emerge from the smoke of his own free will rather than somebody who had previously been caught or one that decides to help out after being exposed through a positive doping story. Don't get me wrong: I admire riders like David Millar who has obviously had to go through hell and back to get where he is today and he certainly comes over as somebody with a lot of integrity. Also I am not just referring to the riders but also anyone else involved within the machine that puts these riders on the road.

We live in a world where any news story has to be increasingly more sensational to get the publics true attention. As such, in order for everyone to sit up and listen that story needs to be either an extremely unexpected one or one disclosed with a barrage of unmissable and commendable events over a significant period of time. Anyone who does have the courage to come forward would also have to be free of any questionable motives to do so. I am not denying that such a rider or other guilty participant deciding to come forward on their own free will is highly unlikely to occur but I am saying that it is going to take some similarly unexpected effort to convince the public that professional cycling is truly on the mend.

There are noises made mainly from the riders who understandably want to continue earning their living without the discomfort of cycling's current tarnished image. However it is not surprising to find nearly every famous rider scrutinised. The reason for the publics suspicions are two-fold. Firstly it is nigh-on impossible and a long year by year process to uncover all the cheats- something which has been going on for decades. Secondly I think the continuing exposure of cheats, although necessary, is not the kind of evidence that is going to fully convince the public that cycling is becoming a clean sport. I think the publics apathy toward cycling regarding its doping culture is all down to a lack of a significant outcry from the professional cycling community itself. If the rumours are true that "they're all on it" then surely it is indeed going to take one or a number of them to come clean of their own free will to really convince us all. Do we really believe that the long and probably never ending trail of cheats that the cycling bodies continue to expose is ever going to change the sports image? No! I don't think so. I think it needs to come from deep inside the pro-cycling community somehow. Yes! we have seen and heard confessions from riders but only after they have been exposed. It would take an extremely brave rider to do this of course but he would be sacrificing a dishonest career for an infinitely greater cause. As much as I am sick of witnessing public apathy I am tired of feeling the disappointment of hearing and somewhat having to second guess about the true progress of this cleaning up process, amidst what I see as a sport run under the spell of a "cloak and dagger" system. Rather than exposing the cheats I think it is going to take one of the yet undiscovered ones to come clean off their own free will to really get the ball rolling.

Just as unseen as the flaws within the system which professional cycling is run, there are the untold efforts of those behind the scenes who are trying to put things right. The press need to make more of a conscious effort to make the public aware of these efforts by diligent people we never get to hear about. Again: the more the better. For it is going to take more than all be it constant subtle changes and the exposure of one doper after another to not only convince the public but also extinguish whatever it is that is encouraging the foul practice. The subtle ongoing efforts need to be reinforced with genuinely remarkable changes of human heart: rare occurrences indeed I know! No doubt many of you here will scold me for perhaps sounding way too idealistic and I wouldn't necessarily disagree with you but I am merely saying we need to keep searching for more solid ways to speed up the process. Sometimes ideals can turn into reality with decent helpings of hope, courage and believe in true human integrity.

It is perhaps revealing and a further reminder of just how serious this issue is that having followed all the comments from my original post on the anniversary of Marco Pantani's death, amongst only a few others it is the original poster who has found himself re-reading his own words and ended up responding in a considered fashion. As such I have stumbled into the conclusion that Mr Armstrong's participation at this point, leaving his personality aside and considering he is just another cheat caught out, would not be the ideal person to propel the necessary progress. Bringing his personality back into the equation I can no longer see how the public could possibly believe him any more anyway. In fact it would indeed take some pretty astonishing action by Mr Armstrong to convince me or, I imagine, anyone else that if he did "tell it how it is" it would be for genuinely selfless and noble reasons. I actually just looked up in the dictionary the meaning of the word "selfless" and found this quote along side the definition: "Volunteers need both selfish and selfless motives to sustain their interest" (Natalie de Combray). I agree with this quote but unfortunately it appears that Mr Armstrong has rather too much of the former.

Oh! and by the way, if my dispelling of the last 2 days "buzz" that I may be a "sock puppet" now brings disappointment and discourages people from reading or commenting further on this thread about this important issue then this is indeed a sad forum to be a part of and I really won't bother returning a second time.

P.S. I changed the font as although I am flattered people continue to re-quote my original post I thought it might be prudent as readers may overlook the length of this one thinking it is merely another duplication.
Take it easy on the half-wits.

We have feelings, too...
 
clever

ChewbaccaD said:
You're the expert on whining...

Anyway, I get that you have chagrin over your present state, that being that you're too fu*king stupid to work out that this is a troll thread, and the OP is a sockpuppet, but quit harshing everybody's buzz Mark...or is it Francis?

Trey W
as i stated to another member.......i may not be the brightest but i know what love is

i would sooner appear naive and risk being deceived than be ignorant to others without good reson

Mark L
 
singer-songwriter said:
To all readers, jokers, half-wits and concienscious posters alike:

I may have been a little over-reactionary to say I would not return to comment here but just for the record I have opened my PM folder for anyone who wishes to contact me directly. Further more if anyone doubts my status as a genuine public poster then perhaps you can click on my signature link below to see that in fact I am NOT Sheryl Crow. (I thank the original joker-poster for this oh so highly amusing assumption and apologise unwittingly for hijacking it for my signature)

Rather than my reacting the way I did initially conveying my irritated disappointment from the dominant frivolity on this thread I felt I had to post again to make some sense out of it.

I think most cycling enthusiasts who follow professional cycling have a clearer idea now of the way professional riders can fall into the doping culture and the more it is exposed and discussed the better. However considering most of the cynical comments here it is obvious that current progress to clean the sport up is not convincing the general public enough (and probably the cynical amongst you are understandably so when it comes to anything about Mr Armstrong).

From the reaction so far, both light-hearted and serious, I am getting a general consensus here that Mr Armstrong is regarded as a lost cause and not someone who will ever provide any significant progress to the cleaning up process of professional cycling. Again, another effect the "commercial machine" has on the public is to limit its patience in waiting for somebody fallen from grace to see the light. However I no longer see this as relevant in Mr Armstrong's case: after all, he has indeed done little to change peoples continuing perception of him as anything more than a sociopath. I must say, the more time passes the more I hope there will be others from the heart of the pro cycling community with genuine conviction to emerge and make a significant contribution to the process of dispelling the flaws in the "commercial cycling machine" and pro cycling's tarnished image.

That process seems to be shaping up with a recent change of the guard within the official cycling bodies but I still think it is going to take a strong character from one of the guilty participants within the current doping culture itself to really make a significant difference. I say "current" because I believe it would have to be somebody to emerge from the smoke of his own free will rather than somebody who had previously been caught or one that decides to help out after being exposed through a positive doping story. Don't get me wrong: I admire riders like David Millar who has obviously had to go through hell and back to get where he is today and he certainly comes over as somebody with a lot of integrity. Also I am not just referring to the riders but also anyone else involved within the machine that puts these riders on the road.

We live in a world where any news story has to be increasingly more sensational to get the publics true attention. As such, in order for everyone to sit up and listen that story needs to be either an extremely unexpected one or one disclosed with a barrage of unmissable and commendable events over a significant period of time. Anyone who does have the courage to come forward would also have to be free of any questionable motives to do so. I am not denying that such a rider or other guilty participant deciding to come forward on their own free will is highly unlikely to occur but I am saying that it is going to take some similarly unexpected effort to convince the public that professional cycling is truly on the mend.

There are noises made mainly from the riders who understandably want to continue earning their living without the discomfort of cycling's current tarnished image. However it is not surprising to find nearly every famous rider scrutinised. The reason for the publics suspicions are two-fold. Firstly it is nigh-on impossible and a long year by year process to uncover all the cheats- something which has been going on for decades. Secondly I think the continuing exposure of cheats, although necessary, is not the kind of evidence that is going to fully convince the public that cycling is becoming a clean sport. I think the publics apathy toward cycling regarding its doping culture is all down to a lack of a significant outcry from the professional cycling community itself. If the rumours are true that "they're all on it" then surely it is indeed going to take one or a number of them to come clean of their own free will to really convince us all. Do we really believe that the long and probably never ending trail of cheats that the cycling bodies continue to expose is ever going to change the sports image? No! I don't think so. I think it needs to come from deep inside the pro-cycling community somehow. Yes! we have seen and heard confessions from riders but only after they have been exposed. It would take an extremely brave rider to do this of course but he would be sacrificing a dishonest career for an infinitely greater cause. As much as I am sick of witnessing public apathy I am tired of feeling the disappointment of hearing and somewhat having to second guess about the true progress of this cleaning up process, amidst what I see as a sport run under the spell of a "cloak and dagger" system. Rather than exposing the cheats I think it is going to take one of the yet undiscovered ones to come clean off their own free will to really get the ball rolling.

Just as unseen as the flaws within the system which professional cycling is run, there are the untold efforts of those behind the scenes who are trying to put things right. The press need to make more of a conscious effort to make the public aware of these efforts by diligent people we never get to hear about. Again: the more the better. For it is going to take more than all be it constant subtle changes and the exposure of one doper after another to not only convince the public but also extinguish whatever it is that is encouraging the foul practice. The subtle ongoing efforts need to be reinforced with genuinely remarkable changes of human heart: rare occurrences indeed I know! No doubt many of you here will scold me for perhaps sounding way too idealistic and I wouldn't necessarily disagree with you but I am merely saying we need to keep searching for more solid ways to speed up the process. Sometimes ideals can turn into reality with decent helpings of hope, courage and believe in true human integrity.

It is perhaps revealing and a further reminder of just how serious this issue is that having followed all the comments from my original post on the anniversary of Marco Pantani's death, amongst only a few others it is the original poster who has found himself re-reading his own words and ended up responding in a considered fashion. As such I have stumbled into the conclusion that Mr Armstrong's participation at this point, leaving his personality aside and considering he is just another cheat caught out, would not be the ideal person to propel the necessary progress. Bringing his personality back into the equation I can no longer see how the public could possibly believe him any more anyway. In fact it would indeed take some pretty astonishing action by Mr Armstrong to convince me or, I imagine, anyone else that if he did "tell it how it is" it would be for genuinely selfless and noble reasons. I actually just looked up in the dictionary the meaning of the word "selfless" and found this quote along side the definition: "Volunteers need both selfish and selfless motives to sustain their interest" (Natalie de Combray). I agree with this quote but unfortunately it appears that Mr Armstrong has rather too much of the former.

Oh! and by the way, if my dispelling of the last 2 days "buzz" that I may be a "sock puppet" now brings disappointment and discourages people from reading or commenting further on this thread about this important issue then this is indeed a sad forum to be a part of and I really won't bother returning a second time.

P.S. I changed the font as although I am flattered people continue to re-quote my original post I thought it might be prudent as readers may overlook the length of this one thinking it is merely another duplication.
thank you
;)
……………..
carry on!
 
Dec 7, 2010
5,507
0
0
singer-songwriter said:
To all readers, jokers, half-wits and concienscious posters alike:

I may have been a little over-reactionary to say I would not return to comment here but just for the record I have opened my PM folder for anyone who wishes to contact me directly. Further more if anyone doubts my status as a genuine public poster then perhaps you can click on my signature link below to see that in fact I am NOT Sheryl Crow. (I thank the original joker-poster for this oh so highly amusing assumption and apologise unwittingly for hijacking it for my signature)

Rather than my reacting the way I did initially conveying my irritated disappointment from the dominant frivolity on this thread I felt I had to post again to make some sense out of it.

I think most cycling enthusiasts who follow professional cycling have a clearer idea now of the way professional riders can fall into the doping culture and the more it is exposed and discussed the better. However considering most of the cynical comments here it is obvious that current progress to clean the sport up is not convincing the general public enough (and probably the cynical amongst you are understandably so when it comes to anything about Mr Armstrong).

From the reaction so far, both light-hearted and serious, I am getting a general consensus here that Mr Armstrong is regarded as a lost cause and not someone who will ever provide any significant progress to the cleaning up process of professional cycling. Again, another effect the "commercial machine" has on the public is to limit its patience in waiting for somebody fallen from grace to see the light. However I no longer see this as relevant in Mr Armstrong's case: after all, he has indeed done little to change peoples continuing perception of him as anything more than a sociopath. I must say, the more time passes the more I hope there will be others from the heart of the pro cycling community with genuine conviction to emerge and make a significant contribution to the process of dispelling the flaws in the "commercial cycling machine" and pro cycling's tarnished image.

That process seems to be shaping up with a recent change of the guard within the official cycling bodies but I still think it is going to take a strong character from one of the guilty participants within the current doping culture itself to really make a significant difference. I say "current" because I believe it would have to be somebody to emerge from the smoke of his own free will rather than somebody who had previously been caught or one that decides to help out after being exposed through a positive doping story. Don't get me wrong: I admire riders like David Millar who has obviously had to go through hell and back to get where he is today and he certainly comes over as somebody with a lot of integrity. Also I am not just referring to the riders but also anyone else involved within the machine that puts these riders on the road.

We live in a world where any news story has to be increasingly more sensational to get the publics true attention. As such, in order for everyone to sit up and listen that story needs to be either an extremely unexpected one or one disclosed with a barrage of unmissable and commendable events over a significant period of time. Anyone who does have the courage to come forward would also have to be free of any questionable motives to do so. I am not denying that such a rider or other guilty participant deciding to come forward on their own free will is highly unlikely to occur but I am saying that it is going to take some similarly unexpected effort to convince the public that professional cycling is truly on the mend.

There are noises made mainly from the riders who understandably want to continue earning their living without the discomfort of cycling's current tarnished image. However it is not surprising to find nearly every famous rider scrutinised. The reason for the publics suspicions are two-fold. Firstly it is nigh-on impossible and a long year by year process to uncover all the cheats- something which has been going on for decades. Secondly I think the continuing exposure of cheats, although necessary, is not the kind of evidence that is going to fully convince the public that cycling is becoming a clean sport. I think the publics apathy toward cycling regarding its doping culture is all down to a lack of a significant outcry from the professional cycling community itself. If the rumours are true that "they're all on it" then surely it is indeed going to take one or a number of them to come clean of their own free will to really convince us all. Do we really believe that the long and probably never ending trail of cheats that the cycling bodies continue to expose is ever going to change the sports image? No! I don't think so. I think it needs to come from deep inside the pro-cycling community somehow. Yes! we have seen and heard confessions from riders but only after they have been exposed. It would take an extremely brave rider to do this of course but he would be sacrificing a dishonest career for an infinitely greater cause. As much as I am sick of witnessing public apathy I am tired of feeling the disappointment of hearing and somewhat having to second guess about the true progress of this cleaning up process, amidst what I see as a sport run under the spell of a "cloak and dagger" system. Rather than exposing the cheats I think it is going to take one of the yet undiscovered ones to come clean off their own free will to really get the ball rolling.

Just as unseen as the flaws within the system which professional cycling is run, there are the untold efforts of those behind the scenes who are trying to put things right. The press need to make more of a conscious effort to make the public aware of these efforts by diligent people we never get to hear about. Again: the more the better. For it is going to take more than all be it constant subtle changes and the exposure of one doper after another to not only convince the public but also extinguish whatever it is that is encouraging the foul practice. The subtle ongoing efforts need to be reinforced with genuinely remarkable changes of human heart: rare occurrences indeed I know! No doubt many of you here will scold me for perhaps sounding way too idealistic and I wouldn't necessarily disagree with you but I am merely saying we need to keep searching for more solid ways to speed up the process. Sometimes ideals can turn into reality with decent helpings of hope, courage and believe in true human integrity.

It is perhaps revealing and a further reminder of just how serious this issue is that having followed all the comments from my original post on the anniversary of Marco Pantani's death, amongst only a few others it is the original poster who has found himself re-reading his own words and ended up responding in a considered fashion. As such I have stumbled into the conclusion that Mr Armstrong's participation at this point, leaving his personality aside and considering he is just another cheat caught out, would not be the ideal person to propel the necessary progress. Bringing his personality back into the equation I can no longer see how the public could possibly believe him any more anyway. In fact it would indeed take some pretty astonishing action by Mr Armstrong to convince me or, I imagine, anyone else that if he did "tell it how it is" it would be for genuinely selfless and noble reasons. I actually just looked up in the dictionary the meaning of the word "selfless" and found this quote along side the definition: "Volunteers need both selfish and selfless motives to sustain their interest" (Natalie de Combray). I agree with this quote but unfortunately it appears that Mr Armstrong has rather too much of the former.

Oh! and by the way, if my dispelling of the last 2 days "buzz" that I may be a "sock puppet" now brings disappointment and discourages people from reading or commenting further on this thread about this important issue then this is indeed a sad forum to be a part of and I really won't bother returning a second time.

P.S. I changed the font as although I am flattered people continue to re-quote my original post I thought it might be prudent as readers may overlook the length of this one thinking it is merely another duplication.
Yeah, me too. I prefer sans serif. Always sans serif.
 
Granville57 said:
Yeah, me too. I prefer sans serif. Always sans serif.
See that, sans original post in full. Let's not all go down that route again people. Yes, they are long posts but really this is stupid. Please desist if you are replying, it just makes the whole thread unreadable. And yes, I know what some of you feel about the thread full stop.
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
singer-songwriter said:
To all readers, jokers, half-wits and concienscious posters alike:

I may have been a little over-reactionary to say I would not return to comment here but just for the record I have opened my PM folder for anyone who wishes to contact me directly. Further more if anyone doubts my status as a genuine public poster then perhaps you can click on my signature link below to see that in fact I am NOT Sheryl Crow. (I thank the original joker-poster for this oh so highly amusing assumption and apologise unwittingly for hijacking it for my signature)

Rather than my reacting the way I did initially conveying my irritated disappointment from the dominant frivolity on this thread I felt I had to post again to make some sense out of it.

I think most cycling enthusiasts who follow professional cycling have a clearer idea now of the way professional riders can fall into the doping culture and the more it is exposed and discussed the better. However considering most of the cynical comments here it is obvious that current progress to clean the sport up is not convincing the general public enough (and probably the cynical amongst you are understandably so when it comes to anything about Mr Armstrong).

From the reaction so far, both light-hearted and serious, I am getting a general consensus here that Mr Armstrong is regarded as a lost cause and not someone who will ever provide any significant progress to the cleaning up process of professional cycling. Again, another effect the "commercial machine" has on the public is to limit its patience in waiting for somebody fallen from grace to see the light. However I no longer see this as relevant in Mr Armstrong's case: after all, he has indeed done little to change peoples continuing perception of him as anything more than a sociopath. I must say, the more time passes the more I hope there will be others from the heart of the pro cycling community with genuine conviction to emerge and make a significant contribution to the process of dispelling the flaws in the "commercial cycling machine" and pro cycling's tarnished image.

That process seems to be shaping up with a recent change of the guard within the official cycling bodies but I still think it is going to take a strong character from one of the guilty participants within the current doping culture itself to really make a significant difference. I say "current" because I believe it would have to be somebody to emerge from the smoke of his own free will rather than somebody who had previously been caught or one that decides to help out after being exposed through a positive doping story. Don't get me wrong: I admire riders like David Millar who has obviously had to go through hell and back to get where he is today and he certainly comes over as somebody with a lot of integrity. Also I am not just referring to the riders but also anyone else involved within the machine that puts these riders on the road.

We live in a world where any news story has to be increasingly more sensational to get the publics true attention. As such, in order for everyone to sit up and listen that story needs to be either an extremely unexpected one or one disclosed with a barrage of unmissable and commendable events over a significant period of time. Anyone who does have the courage to come forward would also have to be free of any questionable motives to do so. I am not denying that such a rider or other guilty participant deciding to come forward on their own free will is highly unlikely to occur but I am saying that it is going to take some similarly unexpected effort to convince the public that professional cycling is truly on the mend.

There are noises made mainly from the riders who understandably want to continue earning their living without the discomfort of cycling's current tarnished image. However it is not surprising to find nearly every famous rider scrutinised. The reason for the publics suspicions are two-fold. Firstly it is nigh-on impossible and a long year by year process to uncover all the cheats- something which has been going on for decades. Secondly I think the continuing exposure of cheats, although necessary, is not the kind of evidence that is going to fully convince the public that cycling is becoming a clean sport. I think the publics apathy toward cycling regarding its doping culture is all down to a lack of a significant outcry from the professional cycling community itself. If the rumours are true that "they're all on it" then surely it is indeed going to take one or a number of them to come clean of their own free will to really convince us all. Do we really believe that the long and probably never ending trail of cheats that the cycling bodies continue to expose is ever going to change the sports image? No! I don't think so. I think it needs to come from deep inside the pro-cycling community somehow. Yes! we have seen and heard confessions from riders but only after they have been exposed. It would take an extremely brave rider to do this of course but he would be sacrificing a dishonest career for an infinitely greater cause. As much as I am sick of witnessing public apathy I am tired of feeling the disappointment of hearing and somewhat having to second guess about the true progress of this cleaning up process, amidst what I see as a sport run under the spell of a "cloak and dagger" system. Rather than exposing the cheats I think it is going to take one of the yet undiscovered ones to come clean off their own free will to really get the ball rolling.

Just as unseen as the flaws within the system which professional cycling is run, there are the untold efforts of those behind the scenes who are trying to put things right. The press need to make more of a conscious effort to make the public aware of these efforts by diligent people we never get to hear about. Again: the more the better. For it is going to take more than all be it constant subtle changes and the exposure of one doper after another to not only convince the public but also extinguish whatever it is that is encouraging the foul practice. The subtle ongoing efforts need to be reinforced with genuinely remarkable changes of human heart: rare occurrences indeed I know! No doubt many of you here will scold me for perhaps sounding way too idealistic and I wouldn't necessarily disagree with you but I am merely saying we need to keep searching for more solid ways to speed up the process. Sometimes ideals can turn into reality with decent helpings of hope, courage and believe in true human integrity.

It is perhaps revealing and a further reminder of just how serious this issue is that having followed all the comments from my original post on the anniversary of Marco Pantani's death, amongst only a few others it is the original poster who has found himself re-reading his own words and ended up responding in a considered fashion. As such I have stumbled into the conclusion that Mr Armstrong's participation at this point, leaving his personality aside and considering he is just another cheat caught out, would not be the ideal person to propel the necessary progress. Bringing his personality back into the equation I can no longer see how the public could possibly believe him any more anyway. In fact it would indeed take some pretty astonishing action by Mr Armstrong to convince me or, I imagine, anyone else that if he did "tell it how it is" it would be for genuinely selfless and noble reasons. I actually just looked up in the dictionary the meaning of the word "selfless" and found this quote along side the definition: "Volunteers need both selfish and selfless motives to sustain their interest" (Natalie de Combray). I agree with this quote but unfortunately it appears that Mr Armstrong has rather too much of the former.

Oh! and by the way, if my dispelling of the last 2 days "buzz" that I may be a "sock puppet" now brings disappointment and discourages people from reading or commenting further on this thread about this important issue then this is indeed a sad forum to be a part of and I really won't bother returning a second time.

P.S. I changed the font as although I am flattered people continue to re-quote my original post I thought it might be prudent as readers may overlook the length of this one thinking it is merely another duplication.
ebandit said:
as i stated to another member.......i may not be the brightest but i know what love is

i would sooner appear naive and risk being deceived than be ignorant to others without good reson

Mark L
Cool story bro. Good for you.

Proclamations of genuineness on the intertubes can always be believed. PM me because I have something really great I want to sell you that is a sure genuine article that I will get rid of for a song...if you can buy a song for $1000 (don't fret, you'll quintuple your money. I promise. You can trust me because this is the intertubes.)

PT Barnum in tha' house.

Trey W
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
ferryman said:
See that, sans original post in full. Let's not all go down that route again people. Yes, they are long posts but really this is stupid. Please desist if you are replying, it just makes the whole thread unreadable. And yes, I know what some of you feel about the thread full stop.
Sorry, just saw this.

Now that the thread has been muzzled, I will stop coming because there is nothing valuable to see here.

Toodles.
 
Dec 7, 2010
5,507
0
0
ferryman said:
P
l
e
a
s
e

d
e
s
i
s
t

i
f

y
o
u

a
r
e

r
e
p
l
y
i
n
g,

i
t

j
u
s
t

m
a
k
e
s

t
h
e

w
h
o
l
e

t
h
r
e
a
d

u
n
r
e
a
d
a
b
l
e.

A
n
d

y
e
s,

I

k
n
o
w

w
h
a
t

s
o
m
e

o
f

y
o
u

f
e
e
l

a
b
o
u
t

t
h
e

t
h
r
e
a
d

f
u
l
l

s
t
o
p.

Then just close the damn thing and be done with it.


Although the nearly 4,000 views at this point may challenge the definition of "readable."


(I promise to take any further discussion of this to the Moderator thread)
 
singer-songwriter said:
To all readers, jokers, half-wits and concienscious posters alike:

I may have been a little over-reactionary to say I would not return to comment here but just for the record I have opened my PM folder for anyone who wishes to contact me directly. Further more if anyone doubts my status as a genuine public poster then perhaps you can click on my signature link below to see that in fact I am NOT Sheryl Crow. (I thank the original joker-poster for this oh so highly amusing assumption and apologise unwittingly for hijacking it for my signature)

Rather than my reacting the way I did initially conveying my irritated disappointment from the dominant frivolity on this thread I felt I had to post again to make some sense out of it.

I think most cycling enthusiasts who follow professional cycling have a clearer idea now of the way professional riders can fall into the doping culture and the more it is exposed and discussed the better. However considering most of the cynical comments here it is obvious that current progress to clean the sport up is not convincing the general public enough (and probably the cynical amongst you are understandably so when it comes to anything about Mr Armstrong).


From the reaction so far, both light-hearted and serious, I am getting a general consensus here that Mr Armstrong is regarded as a lost cause and not someone who will ever provide any significant progress to the cleaning up process of professional cycling. Again, another effect the "commercial machine" has on the public is to limit its patience in waiting for somebody fallen from grace to see the light. However I no longer see this as relevant in Mr Armstrong's case: after all, he has indeed done little to change peoples continuing perception of him as anything more than a sociopath. I must say, the more time passes the more I hope there will be others from the heart of the pro cycling community with genuine conviction to emerge and make a significant contribution to the process of dispelling the flaws in the "commercial cycling machine" and pro cycling's tarnished image.
That process seems to be shaping up with a recent change of the guard within the official cycling bodies but I still think it is going to take a strong character from one of the guilty participants within the current doping culture itself to really make a significant difference. I say "current" because I believe it would have to be somebody to emerge from the smoke of his own free will rather than somebody who had previously been caught or one that decides to help out after being exposed through a positive doping story. Don't get me wrong: I admire riders like David Millar who has obviously had to go through hell and back to get where he is today and he certainly comes over as somebody with a lot of integrity. Also I am not just referring to the riders but also anyone else involved within the machine that puts these riders on the road.We live in a world where any news story has to be increasingly more sensational to get the publics true attention. As such, in order for everyone to sit up and listen that story needs to be either an extremely unexpected one or one disclosed with a barrage of unmissable and commendable events over a significant period of time. Anyone who does have the courage to come forward would also have to be free of any questionable motives to do so. I am not denying that such a rider or other guilty participant deciding to come forward on their own free will is highly unlikely to occur but I am saying that it is going to take some similarly unexpected effort to convince the public that professional cycling is truly on the mend.

There are noises made mainly from the riders who understandably want to continue earning their living without the discomfort of cycling's current tarnished image. However it is not surprising to find nearly every famous rider scrutinised. The reason for the publics suspicions are two-fold. Firstly it is nigh-on impossible and a long year by year process to uncover all the cheats- something which has been going on for decades. Secondly I think the continuing exposure of cheats, although necessary, is not the kind of evidence that is going to fully convince the public that cycling is becoming a clean sport. I think the publics apathy toward cycling regarding its doping culture is all down to a lack of a significant outcry from the professional cycling community itself. If the rumours are true that "they're all on it" then surely it is indeed going to take one or a number of them to come clean of their own free will to really convince us all. Do we really believe that the long and probably never ending trail of cheats that the cycling bodies continue to expose is ever going to change the sports image? No! I don't think so. I think it needs to come from deep inside the pro-cycling community somehow. Yes! we have seen and heard confessions from riders but only after they have been exposed. It would take an extremely brave rider to do this of course but he would be sacrificing a dishonest career for an infinitely greater cause. As much as I am sick of witnessing public apathy I am tired of feeling the disappointment of hearing and somewhat having to second guess about the true progress of this cleaning up process, amidst what I see as a sport run under the spell of a "cloak and dagger" system. Rather than exposing the cheats I think it is going to take one of the yet undiscovered ones to come clean off their own free will to really get the ball rolling.

Just as unseen as the flaws within the system which professional cycling is run, there are the untold efforts of those behind the scenes who are trying to put things right. The press need to make more of a conscious effort to make the public aware of these efforts by diligent people we never get to hear about. Again: the more the better. For it is going to take more than all be it constant subtle changes and the exposure of one doper after another to not only convince the public but also extinguish whatever it is that is encouraging the foul practice. The subtle ongoing efforts need to be reinforced with genuinely remarkable changes of human heart: rare occurrences indeed I know! No doubt many of you here will scold me for perhaps sounding way too idealistic and I wouldn't necessarily disagree with you but I am merely saying we need to keep searching for more solid ways to speed up the process. Sometimes ideals can turn into reality with decent helpings of hope, courage and believe in true human integrity.

It is perhaps revealing and a further reminder of just how serious this issue is that having followed all the comments from my original post on the anniversary of Marco Pantani's death, amongst only a few others it is the original poster who has found himself re-reading his own words and ended up responding in a considered fashion. As such I have stumbled into the conclusion that Mr Armstrong's participation at this point, leaving his personality aside and considering he is just another cheat caught out, would not be the ideal person to propel the necessary progress. Bringing his personality back into the equation I can no longer see how the public could possibly believe him any more anyway. In fact it would indeed take some pretty astonishing action by Mr Armstrong to convince me or, I imagine, anyone else that if he did "tell it how it is" it would be for genuinely selfless and noble reasons. I actually just looked up in the dictionary the meaning of the word "selfless" and found this quote along side the definition: "Volunteers need both selfish and selfless motives to sustain their interest" (Natalie de Combray). I agree with this quote but unfortunately it appears that Mr Armstrong has rather too much of the former.

Oh! and by the way, if my dispelling of the last 2 days "buzz" that I may be a "sock puppet" now brings disappointment and discourages people from reading or commenting further on this thread about this important issue then this is indeed a sad forum to be a part of and I really won't bother returning a second time.

P.S. I changed the font as although I am flattered people continue to re-quote my original post I thought it might be prudent as readers may overlook the length of this one thinking it is merely another duplication
.
Highlighted is the best I've seen on here.
 
Granville57 said:
Then just close the damn thing and be done with it.


Although the nearly 4,000 views at this point may challenge the definition of "readable."


(I promise to take any further discussion of this to the Moderator thread)
Calm down son. How many are actually responding? They may read and get turned off by the usual posters making the thread both unreadable and maybe just a bit intimidating.
 
Jun 15, 2009
8,530
1
0
singer-songwriter said:
Please forgive my posting this here but I was not able to post my comments in full under the actual article today (http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/armstrong-if-i-was-the-carpenter-pantani-was-the-artist) and I wanted them to be read in their entirety as I feel strongly about this subject that is important in the ongoing recouperation of our sports reputation...

IN RESPONSE TO: wfaulconer post (for some reason there was no "reply" tab on this post!)

(QUOTING wfaulconer post) ... I would have liked him to say, "It's utterly unacceptable that we had to lose a cycling talent so early and in such a tormented way. The way we lived and raced back then was deplorable and will hopefully never be repeated. It was ignorant, selfish and dishonest. For anyone to pay for all that with their life is a terrible waste. I sure hope that competing with me didn't somehow contribute to the level of doping and drug activity he did, but I'm sure that it probably did and I'll never forgive myself for that. I'm lucky. I'm humiliated and ruined, but I'm alive. He wasn't the only one to pay with his life, we let it go on much too long and trusted doctors who really shouldn't have held anyone's lives in their hands. The best thing I can do for the sport since I'm not actually willing to really tell it like it is, is to fade into the background and stay away so better minds and better ideas can prevail. We are all ghosts from the past and we should stop haunting everyone. It's practically sacrilegious to comment on it anymore, we're lucky not to be in jail for all the blood on our hands. If we'd all laid down our guns back then, we could have easily raced each other clean and fair. I wish I had been more brave looking back. It's not like I don't know what bravery is, I've stared death down before. I should have said something no matter the cost. Really I was the only one who could have made it work." ....

TO ALL POSTERS HERE... I felt compelled to join CN today after years of being a non subscribing viewer and quite impulsively after having just read this particular post by wfaulconor.

The mounting pressures within a sport I love very much both as a cyclist and an ever excited viewer of the peloton are reaching a peek or at least a poignant stage within the ongoing unravelling of the sports tarnished reputation. Todays anniversary of the great rider Marco Pantani's tragic death is indeed a stark reminder of why we need to rid professional cycling of all its foul play.

I sympathise with the original poster's comments here but I do think there is still a chance Mr Armstrong may indeed be "willing to really tell it like it is". I think it would be a mistake to banish him at this point "to fade into the background and stay away". Yes! Mr Armstrong is a key culprit in the demise of the sports reputation and he has been slow and cautious to respond but it is his very position in this situation that could be vital to help amend the harm that has occurred. I don't for a moment condone his behaviour nor have any doubts that he deserves the punishment he is now having to deal with as a result of his years of deceit, but I do think one should consider the pressure he must have to face with the force of this punishment and appreciate that it must take immense self-will to accept it, swallow it and move on- hopefully to much more moral ground. That "self-will" I can sense some readers thinking: "Armstrongs old selfish ambition" OK! we know of the mans unrelenting will: so far, for the most part, he has used it immorally but I believe everyone has a right to be given a second chance to make amends and as far as professional cycling's current predicament is concerned this might be a second chance that could well serve to go a long way to help restore the sports reputation. I think the real question here is for how long and how far does a man need to be punished before he is deemed able or disable to prove he can follow the right path?

Yes! we could all interpret his comments on Signor Pantani here as another PR exercise. I deplore any drug induced performances in sport and there is no excuse whatsoever for the drug taking Mr Armstrong or any other cyclist has done including the notion: "if everyone else is doing it why should I believe that my doing it is cheating?" We can all interpret what he says here one way or another but between the lines I think there may be a hint of the mans compassion. Professional cycling is no different from football or any other financially driven sport in that the athletes rely on its reputation to earn a living. The hub of the commercial machine that provides that living is in question now: all the drugs and the riders that become tempted to take them are a by-product of the very way that machine entices the foul play to take place: overpassing moral values and replacing them with self-centred desires and greed: a tragic brainwashing of a noble, competitive spirit. I am not suggesting for a moment that the flaw in the machine is an excuse for those riders who have decided to cheat: they know full well it is wrong and should have made more effort to muster their individual strength to resist. I am not here to put that machine to rights nor argue about the amount footballers or any other professional sports people get payed; but I am here saying that whatever it is within the commercial machine that is causing this brainwashing it needs to be kicked into touch: for good. That machine by the way continues to wreak havoc after the culprits have been caught within it. One could argue that the publics current impatience with Mr Armstrongs failure so far to do something truly positive to help the situation is also a result of the same machine that spits out one of its victims damning him from ever doing something right for a change. We all pay to watch these guys spinning round the globe and without our enthusiasm for the sport it wouldn't exist as a public entertainment. Again I make no excuse for the deceitful but I question the very foundations of the current system that promotes cycling. It is a complex web of connections to bring the sport to the public eye but somewhere within this structure are things that continue to tempt the weak into immoral practice. There will always be greedy people in any warp of life: those that are so are sometimes incapable of changing but the weak should be given a chance.

I think it is possible Mr Armstrong has the capacity and courage to say and do what is right to help the sport amend itself. Indeed, for this to happen Mr Armstrong has to tell the world what he surely must see deep down is not only the truth but is the ultimately important, moral and just thing to do to truly help loosen the awful stigma that surrounds professional cycling. Many would say that he has had ample time to do this and I would agree. However considering the density of the quagmire Mr Armstrong has immersed himself into perhaps each relevant jogging of his memories like the unfortunate demise of Marco Pantani today will goad him eventually into full action rather than continuing, disappointingly, to avoid addressing the real issues full in the face as the original poster understandably expresses.

I believe Mr Armstrong does have the compassion to do this if that compassion is currently buried under what must be piles of ongoing practical pressures and maybe his very own self-centred ambition that unfortunately appears, so far, as an old affliction that continues to dominate his actions in the eyes of the public. I hope Mr Armstrong's ambitious streak is indeed a genuine by-product of what can happen to a gifted athlete as a result of an immorally run commercial machine. If not he should indeed step back from the public eye or at least from the cycling community. However my hunch is that, for the moment, predominantly, it is this seemingly old flaw that still thwarts the mans potential to speak out and do something truly great: something that is so, so needed to help project professional cycling into a new clean arena. However I haven't yet ruled out the possibility of seeing Mr Armstrong's status change. Forgive my perhaps naive, over optimistic nature but perhaps we shouldn't rule out the possibility of events occurring in the not too distant future that could curtail a more hopeful outcome possibly a little like the former impostor Frank Abagnale turned government consultant in the film "Catch Me If You Can"

I really hope that the original passion and drive that saved his own life when he was lying on that bed riddled with cancer was a different kind: one from a person indeed among those with "better minds and better ideas" that can eventually prevail and offer a significant boost to the recovery of a sport we all love and admire. Like many I was drawn by the Armstrong story of the cancer survivor and was increasingly disappointed as the drug stories emerged. Few of us have actually met Lance Armstrong and most of us can only surmise his personality from what we read and see on the media (myself included). Perhaps we should be a little more patient to see if he does indeed put that relentless drive to good use. I think the wait could be an important one for the sport. I hope he stops listening to his lawyers or anyone thriving off his public image even in its current notorious state!: including himself! I hope Mr Armstrong sees the real issues here because the true achievers in this life are always the ones who pursue those paths that can help steer man to a more moral and noble existence. I hope.
ChewbaccaD said:
I like this original response the most.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
masking_agent The Clinic 2

ASK THE COMMUNITY