SpartacusRox said:
at least BPC is only doing this to provoke people, and wonderlance is taking the p*ss, but your comments are consistently ridiculous and irritating.
i hope you have the guts to still be around when Lance goes down.
-
The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
at least BPC is only doing this to provoke people, and wonderlance is taking the p*ss, but your comments are consistently ridiculous and irritating.
i hope you have the guts to still be around when Lance goes down.
Susan Westemeyer said:
Ullrich was linked by DNA to blood stored by Fuentes. Storing blood for the purpose of blood doping is a doping offense (just ask Basso, even though his DNA match was never confirmed due to the confession).
In addition to the DNA, Rudy P. has confirmed the doping and confessed to arranging visit to Fuentes.
If Ullrich could stand on the "never tested positive" platform and survived, do you really think he would have not even attempted a return to racing?
Was linked - Purposes of doping - Rudy P is hardly someone with a lot of credibility in the sport of cycling, the guy is a proven fraud and facilitator of dopers and doping.
What about 6 retrospective positives for EPO, failed test for corticosteroids, testimony of former associates and team mates and being trained by the father of EPO and blood doping?
What about 6 retrospective positives for EPO, failed test for corticosteroids, testimony of former associates and team mates and being trained by the father of EPO and blood doping?
Squares said:
I don't disagree with getting the best you can afford, but if you have a sniffle, you go see your GP (probably the best GP that money can buy when you're talking about LA). No need to see the best thoracic surgeon in the world if you have a simple cold.
Just like the divorce lawyer situation. If your marriage is fine and dandy, you take care of your affairs with your personal lawyer. You only hire the famous megabucks divorce lawyer when a divorce is imminent.
If charges are going to be laid against LA, and the claims are going to be as ludicrous as he claims they are, then the charges won't stick, hence no need for a $500/hour lawyer.
SpartacusRox said:
How can that possibly happen with what has been published in the media in the last month alone?????
The Novitsky thing is serious, the guy is like LA, a winner, LA participated in a sport that is notorious for its PED use, there is no way LA is not gonna escape being a part of that PED usage for his TdF victories. This storm that is brewing is gonna rip the facade away and leave a guy standing naked for all to see the truth behind the myth/fraud. The cycling world is the least of the guys worries. If someone decides to take an interest in his charity he is doomed.
Indurain, there's a guy walking around with no worries. Hinault another guy no worries. Uniballer could have done the same. Everyone in cycling has a little bit of dirt stuck under their shoe, even Merckx, but Uniballer wanted not to be the king of cycling he wanted to be a Tyrant Emperor and well he grabbed a handful too much this time...
Sparty your great entertainment, you should post some more
Squares said:
I don't think anyone is saying it was the "wrong" thing to do to hire an Atty with a specific background and key qualifications (and connections). In fact, it was a very smart move to make. At a very minimum, it will assure his rights are protected and the US Feds do everything by the book.
Calling into question the seriousness of the situation, based solely on the hiring of the this Atty Daly, I think we can all agree to an surgical analogy like this:
Atty Herman is a typical country club general practitioner. Loud, overstated and well known for downplaying the seriousness of dirty leakage and discharge from sensitive places. Take two "never tested positives" with a full glass of "sleeping like a baby" and call me in the morning. Turning to Atty Daly is smart, as he is a specialist.
It may be that, sometime soon, Lance needs to fraudectomy. The results at this point, despite looking like he's surely going to get the fraudectomy, are inconclusive and require more testing and analysis. This can be painful and embarrassing, because all the while the discharge and leakage can lead to publicly stained spots where there once were none.
Atty Daly is hard at work, testing and analyzing, to prevent a fraudectomy from being scheduled, though should it be legally necessary, he will perform the operation, as he is the highly regarded specialist in the field.
Fraudectomies are shown to have a 10% survivor rate. The type of malignant evidence came through constant stool sample review. If one undergoes a fraudectomy, it should be noted that those emerging from their rehab often have side effects: new tattoos, experiment with same sex relationships and have a penchant for bodybuilding.
twothirds said:
That's pretty naive. Speaking from personal experience, if a grand jury is looking into something that might significantly impact your interests, even if you are not a subject of the investigation and even if the potential allegations are completely without merit, and there's a chance that you will be asked to provide information, testify, or even talk off record with the prosecutor, you need experience defense counsel. Among other things, competitent counsel can help steer the investigation away from you or in a direction that is favorable to you. It can sometimes obtain confirmatoin that you are not a subject of the investigation. It can help sort out and protect you from the various competing interests in the investigation. And it prevent you from doing or saying something stupid.
There's a reason why almost all, if not all, witnesses to this investigation will have counsel. And while you cannot have a lawyer with you when you testify before a grand jury, I would be surprised if most other dealings between Lemond and the proecutor are done through Lemond's lawyer.
I think the comparison to the medical field only goes so far. Let's keep it in the legal field.
Say you have a small business and you have a problem employee that is always late, takes extended lunches and breaks, always argues when asked to do his job, and when he does his job, he does it poorly. You know he won't respond to warnings, but you decide to give him a chance, because at least then when you fire him, he won't be able to say he hadn't been warned. So you sit down with him and give him a final warning, that if he doesn't shape up, he's fired. He responds that your reaction is because of his race and points out what he claims to be another employee who gets favored treatment. He even complains about some insensitive comments that a couple co-workers made a few weeks back, saying he's the victim of harassment. It's all baseless. Again, you know he's not going to improve and that youi'll eventually have to fire him. But you're scared that when the time comes, you're going to get hit with that discrimination lawsuit. And what do you do in the meantime with his harassment complaint? You know it's bull ****, but can you ignore it -- if you do, will he be able to say you turned a blind eye to it.
So, do you turn to turn to the sole practitioner that's been your de facto general counsel -- the guy that helped you incorporate, that from time to time drafts and reviews contracts, that helped you purchase your current building, that will sometimes handle your past due receivable accounts? He only charges $200/hr. Or do you go to a lawyer that specializes in employment law that charges $400/hr? Does the fact that you chose a specialist mean that there's any merit to your employee's allegations?
Say you have a small business and you have a problem employee that is always late, takes extended lunches and breaks, always argues when asked to do his job, and when he does his job, he does it poorly. You know he won't respond to warnings, but you decide to give him a chance, because at least then when you fire him, he won't be able to say he hadn't been warned. So you sit down with him and give him a final warning, that if he doesn't shape up, he's fired. He responds that your reaction is because of his race and points out what he claims to be another employee who gets favored treatment. He even complains about some insensitive comments that a couple co-workers made a few weeks back, saying he's the victim of harassment. It's all baseless. Again, you know he's not going to improve and that youi'll eventually have to fire him. But you're scared that when the time comes, you're going to get hit with that discrimination lawsuit. And what do you do in the meantime with his harassment complaint? You know it's bull ****, but can you ignore it -- if you do, will he be able to say you turned a blind eye to it.
So, do you turn to turn to the sole practitioner that's been your de facto general counsel -- the guy that helped you incorporate, that from time to time drafts and reviews contracts, that helped you purchase your current building, that will sometimes handle your past due receivable accounts? He only charges $200/hr. Or do you go to a lawyer that specializes in employment law that charges $400/hr? Does the fact that you chose a specialist mean that there's any merit to your employee's allegations?
"100 percent confident" the case will be resolved to his satisfaction, says Armstrong.
http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory?id=11229039
Alan, I think you are throwing a few too many biased points to your scenario above. As far as validity in your example, yes, it does seem proper. As it relates to what is known of Landisgate, you have driven into the wrong fairway.
http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory?id=11229039
Alan, I think you are throwing a few too many biased points to your scenario above. As far as validity in your example, yes, it does seem proper. As it relates to what is known of Landisgate, you have driven into the wrong fairway.
An innocent man needs no defence if he believes truth will win out.
I guess Lance just aint that confident eh?
I guess Lance just aint that confident eh?
Squares said:
I am not saying you are wrong to complain about lack of civility, but this can't possibly be the first or the worst post you have ever seen.
It just goes with the territory. And the person he responded is a borderline troll so for many here, his posts are like nails on a chalkboard.The internet provides a place for people who otherwise wouldn't want to spend 5 seconds together to get to know each other and really discover why they didn't want to get to know them in the first place.
Cal_Joe said:
Cal_joe, when they finally acquire some money, these posters will understand why you keep your attorney on retainer and speed dial.
No doubt, hiring competent defense counsel was a foregone and highly prudent decision, and one that was likely made some time ago.
The guys on the bike side of Lance's posse are definitely prone to talking before thinking, and seem a bit too accustomed to be the big man on campus, but regardless of his recent rather poorly chosen words and actions, Tim Herman isn't at his first rodeo. I am positive that Armstrong was counselled by Herman at the very outset to begin efforts to retain top-notch defense counsel, possibly only waiting as long as necessary to determine, if possible, the likely posture the prosecution's case would take.
The only two things that strike me as odd are, as I said above, Herman's rather public airing of his criticisms of the goverment's parties (and the certain lack of cooperation that is likely to engender), and the rather public hiring of Daly (although it's obviously a message from the Armstrong camp that they aren't bringing a knife to this gunfight) when most would advise a more low-key (wait, watch and see) approach at this juncture.
The guys on the bike side of Lance's posse are definitely prone to talking before thinking, and seem a bit too accustomed to be the big man on campus, but regardless of his recent rather poorly chosen words and actions, Tim Herman isn't at his first rodeo. I am positive that Armstrong was counselled by Herman at the very outset to begin efforts to retain top-notch defense counsel, possibly only waiting as long as necessary to determine, if possible, the likely posture the prosecution's case would take.
The only two things that strike me as odd are, as I said above, Herman's rather public airing of his criticisms of the goverment's parties (and the certain lack of cooperation that is likely to engender), and the rather public hiring of Daly (although it's obviously a message from the Armstrong camp that they aren't bringing a knife to this gunfight) when most would advise a more low-key (wait, watch and see) approach at this juncture.
SpartacusRox
BANNED
Benotti69 said:
And I probably will Beno.I like to throw in a few tongue in cheek teasers amongst my more considered posts to see how the hounds react.
SpartacusRox
BANNED
Mongol_Waaijer said:
Guts? Why would it need guts? I am only putting some balance and considered objectivity into the discussion between the fanboys and those such as yourself.
I am sorry if that irritates you. Good discussion should be provoking, it would be a boring forum if all we had was a mutual admiration society. I haven't seen anything from you worth responding too but once you post something worthy of consideration I will look to respond.
SpartacusRox
BANNED
SpartacusRox said:
Good discussion can only start with people who are not blinded by bad PR and an obfuscation of the evidence being discussed.
It is clear to a blind man that Armstrong doped. But if people are still gonna post arguments similar in tune to the off key song sung by his PR machine, it hardly constitutes good discussion, comical yes, but interesting no.
You ride very close to the troll line and maybe that is your modus. What is taking place in the clinic is the dissection of LA and his career, which due to to the massive amount of PED use, incredible arrogance, ego and bullying of others meant this was always going to be a natural occurrence and trying to hinder it will avail of nothing but make you look like a fanboy who does not wish to accept the reality.
This has not happened to Indurain, Hinault, Ullrich, Contador, why? That let their PED's legs do their talking. But should Contador choose to start copying the sad antics of LA then he too will suffer the same fate as LA on forums.
SpartacusRox said:
Is that your considered response?
The grand sum total of your ability to respond is to play the man not the ball?
Well as long as I have been shot down in flames, I shall just go off and be consider myself having been put in my place.
after giving him the benefit of a doubt for a few hundred posts, i have no doubt anymore. you hit the nail on the head.Benotti69 said:
sr adds no content, attacks posters and not their message, ridicules people for make assumptions and himself goes into baseless supposition immediately after.
to be ignored.
python said:
You know i think Sparty's problem is with PEDs in cycling and Cancellara's, whom he has great respect for, 2 classic wins where he 'incredibly and unbelievably'* rode away from Boonen et al to win by Armstrong proportions.
He seems to have decided to take the PED use as an acceptable part of it and therefore Cancellara's perfromances remain, to him anyway, great victories. Where to the rest of us they remain ''incredible and unbelievable'*
*these were terms used by commentators in various languages...
He has decided to antagonise those who know the reality to Liestrong, to give life and substance to Cancellara. Well that's my reading of his postings.
SpartacusRox
BANNED
Benotti69 said:You know i think Sparty's problem is with PEDs in cycling and Cancellara's, whom he has great respect for, 2 classic wins where he 'incredibly and unbelievably'* rode away from Boonen et al to win by Armstrong proportions.
He seems to have decided to take the PED use as an acceptable part of it and therefore Cancellara's perfromances remain, to him anyway, great victories. Where to the rest of us they remain ''incredible and unbelievable'*
*these were terms used by commentators in various languages...
He has decided to antagonise those who know the reality to Liestrong, to give life and substance to Cancellara. Well that's my reading of his postings.
An interesting assessment. Yes I do have great respect for Cancellara and I think you will see in years to come,he will win in ways similar to what he did this year.
I must admit I find it mildly amusing that anyone who dares to offer an alternative viewpoint on these posts is quickly labelled a 'troll'. Despite what Python said in his post, I do actually offer plenty of rational in my postings for my views. Whether you agree with me or not is a moot point because this is a forum not an anti Armstrong priesthood (difficult to see that sometimes I admit).
Essentially the troll label is put out there by those such as Python as a form of bullying. If a person dares to disagree with them, then he is by default, a 'troll'.
You talk of 'evidence' yet in this very post you make two totally unsubstantiated claims about Cancellara. Firstly you insinuate that because he rode away from the field, that he,by default must have doped and secondly you obliquely insinuate he had a mechanical aid. The latter is a viewpoint you have put forward to me in another post also.
In neither of these insinuations do you have a shred of evidence other than the fact that in your own mind it is 'unbelievable' to you.
If you want to see a troll my friend, I suggest you may first want to look in your nearest mirror.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread- Started by DNP-Old
- Replies: 29K
-
Teams & Riders The Great Big Cycling Transfers, Extensions, and Rumours Thread- Started by RedheadDane
- Replies: 11K
-
Teams & Riders Alberto Contador Discussion Thread- Started by LaFlorecita
- Replies: 51K
-
Teams & Riders Tadej Pogačar discussion thread- Started by Lequack
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Teams & Riders Everybody needs a little bit of Roglstomp in their lives- Started by johnymax
- Replies: 19K
-
Teams & Riders Chris Froome Discussion Thread.- Started by Miburo
- Replies: 21K
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram