Eki frustrated by AC's comments

[RhodriM]

You really think Lance did not say this and more to el pistolero's face? Don't be naive.

How on earth am I being naive?

I was referring to public comments. People are accusing Contador of being classless for saying what he thinks publically when Armstrong's been doing the same on Twitter.

Whether those things were said face to face doesn't change that, but would hardly excuse them either IMO. If he cares so much about teamwork he should support the team leader, not undermine him.

 

[Zen Master]

http://www.elpais.com/articulo/deportes/uomo/solo/comando/elpepidep/20090727elpepidep_2/Tes

It appears that the "French Conspiracy" Defense is now being replaced by the "Spanish Media" conspiracy.

I also heard the story (and others) directly from two friends working the Tour on the broadcast side.

And you have another one about Astana circus here

http://www.as.com/ciclismo/articulo...trong-contador/dasclm/20090729dasdaicic_4/Tes

But IMHO you're wasting your time because Retardinho fanboy believes only in his twitting hero

 

[53 x 11]

I'm sorry, but I think it is quite hard to "observe" if someone is more or less intellectual without much contact, and especially when they are speaking a language not your own.

I think we're all forgetting that Alberto is a kid (sorry if any of you are 26 and take offense, but that's it). He is a kid who has been thrust onto the WORLD stage, and forced to catch more arrows than I ever could at that point in my life.

I suggest giving the guy the benefit of the doubt. Besides, he's likely to be around on the top step for some time.

Nice comments! I’m in my mid 20's and and take no offence at all.

I don’t understand why Berto's intellect is such a hot topic, if he’s not the sharpest tool in the box so what? What great cyclists have been towers of intelligence? Fignon got his nickname because he wore glasses not because he possessed degrees in advanced calculus. Lance, judging by his awful books is not that bright but is certainly good as a business man and at choosing the people who advise him.

The best amateur and pro cyclists I know personally are sometimes not very bright at all but make good decisions during races and training, something that I believe Berto has done during this whole season with a possible tiny error. I, however, make stupid decision after stupid decision and rarely get accused of being a dumb person.

 

[Carboncrank]

http://www.elpais.com/articulo/deportes/uomo/solo/comando/elpepidep/20090727elpepidep_2/Tes

It appears that the "French Conspiracy" Defense is now being replaced by the "Spanish Media" conspiracy.

I also heard the story (and others) directly from two friends working the Tour on the broadcast side.

reading translations is frustrating by I can go through and look for sources. Like "according too..." or ".....said" , "sources who wish to be unnamed"... "as reported by..."wittinesses said"...
anything that would say where the information came from... In this case this story is not sourced..... now it is being repeated as though it was valid.

Now you say friends working on the tour broadcast say it, but a journalist would ask them how they know it, not just print it as being true. It's supposed to be the difference between journalism and gossip.

If Alberto would have been missed the start of the TT the blame would have fallen on Johan. It would have been an outrageous reputation shattering blunder. That in itself makes it hard to swallow.

 

[Carboncrank]

Nice comments! I’m in my mid 20's and and take no offence at all.

I don’t understand why Berto's intellect is such a hot topic, if he’s not the sharpest tool in the box so what? What great cyclists have been towers of intelligence? Fignon got his nickname because he wore glasses not because he possessed degrees in advanced calculus. Lance, judging by his awful books is not that bright but is certainly good as a business man and at choosing the people who advise him.

The best armature and pro cyclists I know personally are sometimes not very bright at all but make good decisions during races and training, something that I believe Berto has done during this whole season with possible tiny error. I, however, make stupid decision after stupid decision and rarely get accused of being a dumb person.

Judging by his books he'd not a literary genius but in those books and elsewhere you can see he is very bright.

Alberto is not. As far as vulerabilties go, it's way to easy to get into his head and the rest we'll just have to see about.

 

[Carboncrank]

And you have another one about Astana circus here

http://www.as.com/ciclismo/articulo...trong-contador/dasclm/20090729dasdaicic_4/Tes

But IMHO you're wasting your time because Retardinho fanboy believes only in his twitting hero

the one about Noval we know to be true from reliable sources.

the rest is unsorsed or unintelligle in the translation.

but i guess to you, it's on the internet so it must be true.

 

[Jonathan]

Judging by his books he'd not a literary genius but in those books and elsewhere you can see he is very bright.

Alberto is not. As far as vulerabilties go, it's way to easy to get into his head and the rest we'll just have to see about.

It's not easy to get into Contador's head; he's proven that. During the last Tour, Contador could not be unbalanced to the point that it influenced his abilities and maybe not at all.

He is also a decent strategist when it comes to psychological battles. It was wise of him to wait with talking honestly about Armstrong until after the Tour. If this whole interview vs. twitter thing had been going on then, it could have had more serious consequences.

Evidently, Contador has a stable personality and a lot of resolve.

 

[Carboncrank]

It's not easy to get into Contador's head; he's proven that. During the last Tour, Contador could not be unbalanced to the point that it influenced his abilities and maybe not at all.

He is also a decent strategist when it comes to psychological battles. It was wise of him to wait with talking honestly about Armstrong until after the Tour. If this whole interview vs. twitter thing had been going on then, it could have had more serious consequences.

Evidently, Contador has a stable personality and a lot of resolve.

His unjustified insecurity and immaturity caused him to make tactical errors in the opinion of many.
He had the legs to overcome those errors.

 

[Jonathan]

His unjustified insecurity and immaturity caused him to make tactical errors in the opinion of many.
He had the legs to overcome those errors.

Actually, none of those 'errors' cost him any time, so he did not need to have the legs to overcome them.

 

[Cobber]

Identifying anyone as a rival, especially a teammate, is provocative.


Whatever happened before that is not immaterial, because it could easily explain if not justify why Lance criticized him publicly.

I know of no reason to believe that "everything flows from this first public point".

Someone should ask Bjarne Riis if he considered Ullrich a rival in '97.

 

[Cobber]

Nice comments! I’m in my mid 20's and and take no offence at all.

I don’t understand why Berto's intellect is such a hot topic, if he’s not the sharpest tool in the box so what? What great cyclists have been towers of intelligence? Fignon got his nickname because he wore glasses not because he possessed degrees in advanced calculus. Lance, judging by his awful books is not that bright but is certainly good as a business man and at choosing the people who advise him.

The best amateur and pro cyclists I know personally are sometimes not very bright at all but make good decisions during races and training, something that I believe Berto has done during this whole season with a possible tiny error. I, however, make stupid decision after stupid decision and rarely get accused of being a dumb person.

+1,,,,,,,,,,

 

[pmcg76]

This is so stupid calling AC on making mistakes because Lance also made mistakes in his Tour winning sequence. In 2000, he became so obsessed with Pantani, that he forgot to eat on a mountain stage causing him to bonk on the Col de Joux Plane losing 2 minutes to Jan Ullrich. Fortunately for Lance he was so far ahead in time, that it didnt hurt him too much but it was a very amateurish mistake that could have proved very costly if things had been closer. Didnt hear people obsessing about if afterward the way people are with Contador.

I also remember Indurain bonking on a stage, remember the stage to Sestriere in 92 with Chiappucci in the lead for ages, Indurain looked like he was gonna catch him but bonked big time being passed by Franco Vona and having his other rivals catch up, again he was in such a strong position that it didnt affect him too much. Again, nobody obsessed about it.

Contadors one "mistake" was to attack the Schlecks. It didnt work, he didnt lose time, was he isolated, perhaps but he knew he was stronger than the 2 Schlecks. He dropped Kloeden who was already on the rivet but was of no use to Contador anyway. It didnt affect him in any negative way. If that is the reason for such heated debate, people are clutching are straws. The Lance, Indurain bonks illustrated above were far worse because these mistakes actually cost them serious time to rivals.

As I pointed out before, the only reason all this is receiving so much debate is that LA lost to the superior rider so his people and fans need to belittle AC in whatever way they can.

In team situations, football, basketball whatever, if there is conflict or debate within a team, the general consensus is that the issue should be kept inhouse and sorted out in house. The only time people run to the media is when they want to escalate the conflict, belittle their rival or push an agenda.

When Lance said AC went against team orders at Andorra, it was clear there was conflict within Astana, rather than keep it inhouse, he said it to the media, why? Because he was very obviosuly pushing an agenda, Contador might be the strongest but is a bad team-mate. Any little error by Contador was then super-magnified and criticised.

I was not surprised by Contadors response after the Tour, whatever he felt, he kept it inhouse whilst at the Tour as a good team-man does. Why he should do the same when his nemesis had already announced he is going elsewhere next year is fair game. I am sure he was asked directly about Lance and responded as such but Lance then turned it into a slight against the team which it clearly was not. The only other person actually involved who has commented on this issue thus far is Zubeldia who confirmed AC did thank his team. Merckx, Ekimov, Wilcockson were not there and are thus trading on second hand information or personal opinion at best.

Nobody plays the media game like Lance does and his fans lap it up unquestioned.

 

[Psalmon]

His translated statements are not the only reasons to believe he got shorted in the brains department. Some of his decisions during the Tour are reasons too.

I have agreed on his tactical mistakes. However, I'm not sure whether to chalk those up to inexperience (or youth), intelligence (lack of), or being in a negative situation.

I think everyone knows (and if you don't good, but you probably will someday), you don't always think straight or the best when you're in a negative situation (especially if it involves a woman ).

I'm not making excuses for Alberto, but I don't jump to the conclusion that because of Stage 17 for instance, or just because he got rattled by the press, he's dimwitted. Heck, Carlos Sastre (age 34) snapped back at the media during this Tour and he hardly ever speaks. I wouldn't call Sastre an idiot because of it. He was in a pretty negative situation and lashed out, probably justified (ref my points in the Hall of Fame thread on him).

 

[Publicus]

This is so stupid calling AC on making mistakes because Lance also made mistakes in his Tour winning sequence. In 2000, he became so obsessed with Pantani, that he forgot to eat on a mountain stage causing him to bonk on the Col de Joux Plane losing 2 minutes to Jan Ullrich. Fortunately for Lance he was so far ahead in time, that it didnt hurt him too much but it was a very amateurish mistake that could have proved very costly if things had been closer. Didnt hear people obsessing about if afterward the way people are with Contador.

I also remember Indurain bonking on a stage, remember the stage to Sestriere in 92 with Chiappucci in the lead for ages, Indurain looked like he was gonna catch him but bonked big time being passed by Franco Vona and having his other rivals catch up, again he was in such a strong position that it didnt affect him too much. Again, nobody obsessed about it.

Contadors one "mistake" was to attack the Schlecks. It didnt work, he didnt lose time, was he isolated, perhaps but he knew he was stronger than the 2 Schlecks. He dropped Kloeden who was already on the rivet but was of no use to Contador anyway. It didnt affect him in any negative way. If that is the reason for such heated debate, people are clutching are straws. The Lance, Indurain bonks illustrated above were far worse because these mistakes actually cost them serious time to rivals.

As I pointed out before, the only reason all this is receiving so much debate is that LA lost to the superior rider so his people and fans need to belittle AC in whatever way they can.

In team situations, football, basketball whatever, if there is conflict or debate within a team, the general consensus is that the issue should be kept inhouse and sorted out in house. The only time people run to the media is when they want to escalate the conflict, belittle their rival or push an agenda.

When Lance said AC went against team orders at Andorra, it was clear there was conflict within Astana, rather than keep it inhouse, he said it to the media, why? Because he was very obviosuly pushing an agenda, Contador might be the strongest but is a bad team-mate. Any little error by Contador was then super-magnified and criticised.

I was not surprised by Contadors response after the Tour, whatever he felt, he kept it inhouse whilst at the Tour as a good team-man does. Why he should do the same when his nemesis had already announced he is going elsewhere next year is fair game. I am sure he was asked directly about Lance and responded as such but Lance then turned it into a slight against the team which it clearly was not. The only other person actually involved who has commented on this issue thus far is Zubeldia who confirmed AC did thank his team. Merckx, Ekimov, Wilcockson were not there and are thus trading on second hand information or personal opinion at best.

Nobody plays the media game like Lance does and his fans lap it up unquestioned.

+1 Another great post!

 

[B.Rasmussen]

Judging by his books he'd not a literary genius but in those books and elsewhere you can see he is very bright.

Alberto is not. As far as vulerabilties go, it's way to easy to get into his head and the rest we'll just have to see about.

Did we watch the same Tour? From what i saw it was Contador who got into Armstrong's head and not the other way around. Contador had to put up with a lot of **** and he just used it to fuel his attacks on the road. Sounds familiar?

Stage 1: Contador shows who's boss right away by beating all the GC riders.
Stage 3: Armstrong gets help from his old team mate to gain an advantage and makes stupid comments about it in the press. Contador stays silent.
Stage 7: Contador again shows who is boss by attacking on Arcalis, doing a solo ride the last 2 km clearly fuelled by anger. Armstrong whines about Contador "not sticking to plan" in the press.
Stage 15: Contador destroying everybody on Verbier, even Andy can't follow. Armstrong cried like a little girl, and Contador got kisses from the podium girls.
Stage 17: Contador easily follows Andy's attacks, While Armstrong got ditched by Frank a bit later. Armstrong loses over 2 minutes.
Stage 18: Contador kills the ITT, and if rumors are true, despite having his preparation interrupted by dirty tricks. Armstrong got 16th place, cleary struggling after going out too fast (desperation? certainly an error he doesn't make often).
Podium: Armstrong looking like a puppy that got kicked while the new boss in town lifts the trophy and shows his MJ to the world.

There are more I could list, but this is getting boring. From everything i have seen this Tour Armstrong got beat by his own game. Contador seemed to transfer everything that got thrown at him into energy used to attack on the road.

Now I'll let you go back to shill for his Lanceness. I hope some of you at least get paid for all the hard work you do defending him.

 

[rata de sentina]

Well Mr Contador certainly seems very measured and careful in his media comments which is quite a contrast with his erstwhile ´teammate´. His remarks thusfar have been honest and moderate, merely reflecting what was common knowledge, rather than the verbal evisceration he might have felt like unleashing.

Anyway, questions of his intelligence or lack of it don´t seem to be based upon any particular evidence and are merely parroting the insinuations of certain parties and associated cronies whose statements need to be taken in context. Throughout this Tour Mr Contador showed an excellent grasp of the situation in which he found himself and acted precisely and effectively to acheive his aims. Unfortunately these aims may not have coincided exactly with others so it is hardly suprising that they resorted to mischaracterising his running rings around them as dumb.

 

[Eva Maria]

reading translations is frustrating by I can go through and look for sources. Like "according too..." or ".....said" , "sources who wish to be unnamed"... "as reported by..."wittinesses said"...
anything that would say where the information came from... In this case this story is not sourced..... now it is being repeated as though it was valid.

Now you say friends working on the tour broadcast say it, but a journalist would ask them how they know it, not just print it as being true. It's supposed to be the difference between journalism and gossip.

If Alberto would have been missed the start of the TT the blame would have fallen on Johan. It would have been an outrageous reputation shattering blunder. That in itself makes it hard to swallow.

So you are saying El Pais made it up? I assume you also believe that Le Monde and L'Equipe are tabloids as well?

Considering that The Hog and Armstrong have a long history of lies and douchebag behavior this behavior is completely believable. That you are more willing to believe their twitter's then one of the most prestigious newspapers in the world tells me a ration discussion is not possible.

 

[Carboncrank]

This is so stupid calling AC on making mistakes because Lance also made mistakes in his Tour winning sequence. In 2000, he became so obsessed with Pantani, that he forgot to eat on a mountain stage causing him to bonk on the Col de Joux Plane losing 2 minutes to Jan Ullrich. Fortunately for Lance he was so far ahead in time, that it didnt hurt him too much but it was a very amateurish mistake that could have proved very costly if things had been closer. Didnt hear people obsessing about if afterward the way people are with Contador.

I also remember Indurain bonking on a stage, remember the stage to Sestriere in 92 with Chiappucci in the lead for ages, Indurain looked like he was gonna catch him but bonked big time being passed by Franco Vona and having his other rivals catch up, again he was in such a strong position that it didnt affect him too much. Again, nobody obsessed about it.

Contadors one "mistake" was to attack the Schlecks. It didnt work, he didnt lose time, was he isolated, perhaps but he knew he was stronger than the 2 Schlecks. He dropped Kloeden who was already on the rivet but was of no use to Contador anyway. It didnt affect him in any negative way. If that is the reason for such heated debate, people are clutching are straws. The Lance, Indurain bonks illustrated above were far worse because these mistakes actually cost them serious time to rivals.

As I pointed out before, the only reason all this is receiving so much debate is that LA lost to the superior rider so his people and fans need to belittle AC in whatever way they can.

In team situations, football, basketball whatever, if there is conflict or debate within a team, the general consensus is that the issue should be kept inhouse and sorted out in house. The only time people run to the media is when they want to escalate the conflict, belittle their rival or push an agenda.

When Lance said AC went against team orders at Andorra, it was clear there was conflict within Astana, rather than keep it inhouse, he said it to the media, why? Because he was very obviosuly pushing an agenda, Contador might be the strongest but is a bad team-mate. Any little error by Contador was then super-magnified and criticised.

I was not surprised by Contadors response after the Tour, whatever he felt, he kept it inhouse whilst at the Tour as a good team-man does. Why he should do the same when his nemesis had already announced he is going elsewhere next year is fair game. I am sure he was asked directly about Lance and responded as such but Lance then turned it into a slight against the team which it clearly was not. The only other person actually involved who has commented on this issue thus far is Zubeldia who confirmed AC did thank his team. Merckx, Ekimov, Wilcockson were not there and are thus trading on second hand information or personal opinion at best.

Nobody plays the media game like Lance does and his fans lap it up unquestioned.

Lance wasn't out there spewing "just happy to be here" platitudes when interviewed. He was giving honest assesments of the race from his perspective throught the tour while AC gave little snipets or said nothing at all. I am glad for the Lance interviews. I think he was generous and forthcomeing the whole time, unlike AC.

Talking about AC being a little dim is in no way implying that Alberto Contador was not the strongest rider in the race or not deserving of the win. He is clearly the best in the sport right now and Lance will be amoung the underdogs next year as well.

He is, in fact, such a strong rider that we are left looking for what little vulerabilites he may have. And this is about all we've got. He may be vulerable to mind games and tactics that exploit certain tendencies he has.

Would you rather think he's a dead certain lock?

 

[pmcg76]

Lance wasn't out there spewing "just happy to be here" platitudes when interviewed. He was giving honest assesments of the race from his perspective throught the tour while AC gave little snipets or said nothing at all. I am glad for the Lance interviews. I think he was generous and forthcomeing the whole time, unlike AC.

Talking about AC being a little dim is in no way implying that Alberto Contador was not the strongest rider in the race or not deserving of the win. He is clearly the best in the sport right now and Lance will be amoung the underdogs next year as well.

He is, in fact, such a strong rider that we are left looking for what little vulerabilites he may have. And this is about all we've got. He may be vulerable to mind games and tactics that exploit certain tendencies he has.

Would you rather think he's a dead certain lock?

So what you are saying is that you agree with my assessment of the situation but are just arguing for arguments sake hoping for a fault. Maybe you shoud try to convince Ninety5 and SoCal as well then and end the nonsense.

I agree that I dont want to see Contador turn the Tour into a bore the same way Lance or Indurain did. I would have preferred Schleck or Sastre or anybody other than the guys at Astana to win this year but forced to choose between Lance or Alberto, I will always choose AC. Until another rider does something like Lance done to Filippo Simeoni, no other rider will stand lower in my estimation. When you realise a rider can stoop so low as that, you know there is a good chance the rumours about taking the team car from AC etc could very well be true. Lance is vindictive, of that there is no doubt. You reap what you sow.

 

[Carboncrank]

So you are saying El Pais made it up? I assume you also believe that Le Monde and L'Equipe are tabloids as well?

Considering that The Hog and Armstrong have a long history of lies and douchebag behavior this behavior is completely believable. That you are more willing to believe their twitter's then one of the most prestigious newspapers in the world tells me a ration discussion is not possible.

relax will ya? take a deep breath.

I'm not aware of El Pais being one of the most prestigious papers in the world. I am aware that good journalistic pratice dictates that you name sources when you report. Even if it's to say "sources who wish to stay anonymous say". It takes 2 separate sources for a reporter to be on anything even approaching safe ground. Anything less is just printing gossip.
It's generally a good idea to never take unsourced reporting as true. If it is true someone else will probably pick it up and if they don't it's generally for good reason, and just reprinting it in other places doesn't count. ***

This story had been out for a couple of days without anybody else corroborating it.

Yes, I believe L'Equipe to be tabloid and sensationalist in their reporting of cycling. Twice in recent months, in articles that were sourced, they were immediately contradicted by the sources they used.
That would be the Kohl story and the story about 5-7 more sanctions before the tour.
Their list of previous foul ups is long.
It's always worth noting that L'Equipe is owned by ASO.

*** **** Cheney once leaked a false story to the New York times, then in an interview the next day said it must be true because it was printed in the Times.

 

[workingclasshero]

So you are saying El Pais made it up? I assume you also believe that Le Monde and L'Equipe are tabloids as well?

Considering that The Hog and Armstrong have a long history of lies and douchebag behavior this behavior is completely believable. That you are more willing to believe their twitter's then one of the most prestigious newspapers in the world tells me a ration discussion is not possible.

are you fit eva maria?

 

[Cobber]

This is so stupid calling AC on making mistakes because Lance also made mistakes in his Tour winning sequence. In 2000, he became so obsessed with Pantani, that he forgot to eat on a mountain stage causing him to bonk on the Col de Joux Plane losing 2 minutes to Jan Ullrich. Fortunately for Lance he was so far ahead in time, that it didnt hurt him too much but it was a very amateurish mistake that could have proved very costly if things had been closer. Didnt hear people obsessing about if afterward the way people are with Contador.

I also remember Indurain bonking on a stage, remember the stage to Sestriere in 92 with Chiappucci in the lead for ages, Indurain looked like he was gonna catch him but bonked big time being passed by Franco Vona and having his other rivals catch up, again he was in such a strong position that it didnt affect him too much. Again, nobody obsessed about it.

Contadors one "mistake" was to attack the Schlecks. It didnt work, he didnt lose time, was he isolated, perhaps but he knew he was stronger than the 2 Schlecks. He dropped Kloeden who was already on the rivet but was of no use to Contador anyway. It didnt affect him in any negative way. If that is the reason for such heated debate, people are clutching are straws. The Lance, Indurain bonks illustrated above were far worse because these mistakes actually cost them serious time to rivals.

As I pointed out before, the only reason all this is receiving so much debate is that LA lost to the superior rider so his people and fans need to belittle AC in whatever way they can.

In team situations, football, basketball whatever, if there is conflict or debate within a team, the general consensus is that the issue should be kept inhouse and sorted out in house. The only time people run to the media is when they want to escalate the conflict, belittle their rival or push an agenda.

When Lance said AC went against team orders at Andorra, it was clear there was conflict within Astana, rather than keep it inhouse, he said it to the media, why? Because he was very obviosuly pushing an agenda, Contador might be the strongest but is a bad team-mate. Any little error by Contador was then super-magnified and criticised.

I was not surprised by Contadors response after the Tour, whatever he felt, he kept it inhouse whilst at the Tour as a good team-man does. Why he should do the same when his nemesis had already announced he is going elsewhere next year is fair game. I am sure he was asked directly about Lance and responded as such but Lance then turned it into a slight against the team which it clearly was not. The only other person actually involved who has commented on this issue thus far is Zubeldia who confirmed AC did thank his team. Merckx, Ekimov, Wilcockson were not there and are thus trading on second hand information or personal opinion at best.

Nobody plays the media game like Lance does and his fans lap it up unquestioned.

+2....... great post!

 

[Eva Maria]

are you fit eva maria?

what do you mean Fit?

 

[Eva Maria]

relax will ya? take a deep breath.

I'm not aware of El Pais being one of the most prestigious papers in the world. I am aware that good journalistic pratice dictates that you name sources when you report. Even if it's to say "sources who wish to stay anonymous say". It takes 2 separate sources for a reporter to be on anything even approaching safe ground. Anything less is just printing gossip.
It's generally a good idea to never take unsourced reporting as true. If it is true someone else will probably pick it up and if they don't it's generally for good reason, and just reprinting it in other places doesn't count. ***

This story had been out for a couple of days without anybody else corroborating it.

Yes, I believe L'Equipe to be tabloid and sensationalist in their reporting of cycling. Twice in recent months, in articles that were sourced, they were immediately contradicted by the sources they used.
That would be the Kohl story and the story about 5-7 more sanctions before the tour.
Their list of previous foul ups is long.
It's always worth noting that L'Equipe is owned by ASO.

*** **** Cheney once leaked a false story to the New York times, then in an interview the next day said it must be true because it was printed in the Times.

L'Equipe is not a tabloid, it is the most well respect sports newspaper in the world....that is not only my view but the view of Frank DeFord, former editor of Sports Illustrated. Often in journalism protecting your sources is as important as naming them, your protest is nothing more then a straw man.

The 5-7 more sanctions have come out, Di Lucca was one of them. Their list of foul ups is not long, but the list of Armstrong lies is. That you are more willing to believe a consistent liar shows that the truth is not your concern, but the perpetuation of the Armstrong myth is.

 

[Carboncrank]

L'Equipe is not a tabloid, it is the most well respect sports newspaper in the world....that is not only my view but the view of Frank DeFord, former editor of Sports Illustrated. Often in journalism protecting your sources is as important as naming them, your protest is nothing more then a straw man.

The 5-7 more sanctions have come out, Di Lucca was one of them. Their list of foul ups is not long, but the list of Armstrong lies is. That you are more willing to believe a consistent liar shows that the truth is not your concern, but the perpetuation of the Armstrong myth is.

We're going to agree to disagree about L'Equipe. The Di Lucca case came out July 22nd, not before the tour.

I'm not believing any lier in this case, I'm just choosing not to believe a story without a source.

Like I said in my previous post, there are ways to protect the source yet inform the reader that they exist. You see the phrases all the time. "sources who do not wish to be named" and that sort of thing are common.
There are a lot of people that thing that's bad, that reporters shouldn't even write it if the source isn't willing to be on record.

You take another step toward gossip when you don't even bother to mention sources anywhere in your reporting.

If you find out who said these things about Alberto and being stranded before the TT feel free to tell us. But don't fault people for wanting to hold what they read to some kind of standard.