Emma O'Reilly Responds to Strickland article.

[Benotti69]

People should listen to what Walsh has to say about Emma O'Reilly on the competitor radio interview. Emma O'Reilly really liked Gunderson. It is really interesting stuff and shows how selfish and **** in the head the guy is when he treats a person like Emma in the manner he has done.

He is a real scumbag.






for those who missed the link to the Walsh interview.

http://competitorradio.competitor.com/?s=walsh

 

[Benotti69]

I’ll try to help get it back on topic and discuss the point of your comment. However I’m having a hard time filling in some of the blanks by the way you have it worded.

H88 are you saying that Emma lied and said she was not paid by Walsh? (You said “the lie” not who lied.) Or are you saying Walsh lied when he said he didn’t pay her.

Maybe if you can clearly establish that point, then we can move on to the second point about her credibility.

If she lied, I would say yes it hurts her credibility, if Walsh lied I would say it doesn’t hurt it as much, but still makes it a little messier.

I just need a few more details as the way your comment is worded leaves it open to interpretation.

Thanks

David Walsh explains it clearly in this interview. Please listen to it directly from him and then you will understand.

http://competitorradio.competitor.com/?s=walsh

the above is a link interview and on the website in 2 parts.

A fantastic interview with Walsh.

 

[jimmypop]

Where did I say it did?

Please try to keep up better then certain mods and the obsessives.

Massaging the message works well sometimes, but not when the entire ship is on fire and the rowers have lost their oars.

Your boy is fscked.

 

[cat6cx]

David Walsh explains it clearly in this interview. Please listen to it directly from him and then you will understand.

http://competitorradio.competitor.com/?s=walsh

the above is a link interview and on the website in 2 parts.

A fantastic interview with Walsh.

I understand Walsh's position and I believe him.

I'm just saying if she hadn't been paid period, it would be cleaner.

 

[Mambo95]

This would be a fair assessment except that Bicycling actually present the 'evidence' and then add in their "take".
As its a case of "he said, she said" they should have done what they did in the 'Transfusion' piece and not called it.

With nothing else to go on (as they didn't bother to even call Emma) they said "Armstrong wins this one" - so yes, it is an attack on her credibility.

Also - how did Emma over react? This was her response directly to the Endgame article:

That seems like a pretty honest assessment and certainly not over the top.

You can read anything you want into these things, and get worked up if you want to. But doing so is pretty daft. The thing with these 'our take' stuff is that it's just a snapshot opinion - a hunch. They haven't really put that much thought into (certainly not as much as many on here) and they haven't consulted legal texts.

There's also the fact that journalists doing these sort pieces, by experience, tend to balance these things out to not look bias. For example...

I know a guy who is a TV producer for rugby in the UK. But he started out at the Western Mail (Welsh paper) giving marks out of ten and one line assessment for each player. He had 15-20 minutes to do this, so he worked on gut feeling and gave a variety of marks. He soon learned that if he marked down players of one of the three big clubs (Scarlets, Ospreys, Blues), he would get hate mail, some of it really unhinged nonsense for giving a player 6 rather than a 7. As a result, he gave everyone adjacent marks (eg 6 or 7) except for the star player who got one more. He made sure the three teams balanced out.

The point of that story is that while Emma O'R can might get upset as she's had a lot of stress over the years, the rest of you are those nutters who send the e-mails if their favourite gets a 6 instead of a 7. (Not so much you, Dr M, you tend to seem generally OK). The TUE issue will be a long way down the list of allegations anyway.


PS Am I the only one who noticed that Strickland didn't even write the alleged offending line. It's credited to Joe Lindsey. (Edit: No I'm not. JPM and Dr M, I told you he was OK, have too)

 

[cat6cx]

How hard is to understand when I never said Emma lied, I even made it clear in my second post when I said "...and was part of the denial by not coming clean when Walsh lied...?" It's amazing that you can't figure this out and that others are claiming that I said she lied.

This refers to her comments about LA. As I have said already in this thread, I am not commenting on whether LA doped or not, simply adding a valid point to those making her out to be a bastion of truth.

My apologies, I was up too early working this morning.

Can I ask you straight up ("yes or no" to keep it simple for me today), do you think Emma was lying to David Walsh?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

You can read anything you want into these things, and get worked up if you want to. But doing so is pretty daft. The thing with these 'our take' stuff is that it's just a snapshot opinion - a hunch. They haven't really put that much thought into (certainly not as much as many on here) and they haven't consulted legal texts.

There's also the fact that journalists doing these sort pieces, by experience, tend to balance these things out to not look bias. For example...

I know a guy who is a TV producer for rugby in the UK. But he started out at the Western Mail (Welsh paper) giving marks out of ten and one line assessment for each player. He had 15-20 minutes to do this, so he worked on gut feeling and gave a variety of marks. He soon learned that if he marked down players of one of the three big clubs (Scarlets, Ospreys, Blues), he would get hate mail, some of it really unhinged nonsense for giving a player 6 rather than a 7. As a result, he gave everyone adjacent marks (eg 6 or 7) except for the star player who got one more. He made sure the three teams balanced out.

The point of that story is that while Emma O'R can might get upset as she's had a lot of stress over the years, the rest of you are those nutters who send the e-mails if their favourite gets a 6 instead of a 7. (Not so much you, Dr M, you tend to seem generally OK). The TUE issue will be a long way down the list of allegations anyway.


PS Am I the only one who noticed that Strickland didn't even write the alleged offending line. It's credited to Joe Lindsey. (Edit: No I'm not. JPM and Dr M, I told you he was OK, have too)

Firstly - I have never written to anyone about giving marks to players/cyclists, and quite frankly assuming others here have with such a broad brush is rather petty and adds little to this thread.

You have missed the key point here - Emma's letter to Bicycling shows up the whole 'Endgame' article to be little more than an opportunity to offer Lance (and them) a soft landing. ("He's done a lot of good...")

She shows that they never, in 7 years, once tried to contact her and make a genuine attempt to hear her side of the story.
To add insult to injury Bill then turns around and has his road to Damascus moment without mentioning who or what changed his opinion - when he spends most of the article saying he couldn't get anyone to go 'on the record'.
Its rather clear he didn't fall from his ass, he jumped.

 

[Dallas_]

Another Rat?

The TUE from 99 is getting too close to home. First year of US Postal sponsor dollars. This could posibly be another piece of evidence about breaking the "No Doping" clause in the contract and from year dot of the contact. I dont think the LA camp would want Novi digging into this.
We wouldnt want Floyd's whistleblower case being a slamdunk would we!
.

 

[Digger]

Honestly I am unsure if she is lying. Every time I go over the information I see a number of items that make me think she is (including info from some pro cyclists I have the great fortune of knowing) and some of it makes me think she isn't. I go back and forth, but I don't know for sure since I am not one of the few people who truly know the facts but I think the odds are that LA doped. I also think that many of the stories, both saying he is clean and that he is dirty are complete BS.

.............if there genuinely are 'pro cyclists' out there who think she is lying, God help us.

For argument sake she did decide to lie, why would she not just say yeah I saw him take EPO numerous times. I mean if you're going to lie and invent, in order to make money, why not just go all out....

 

[TexPat]

I smell a Rat.

Maybe h88 has a motive for derailing the thread and Emma got caught in the cross fire.

The TUE from 99 is getting too close to home. First year of US Postal sponsor dollars. This could posibly be another piece of evidence about breaking the "No Doping" clause in the contract and from year dot of the contact. I dont think the LA camp would want Novi digging into this.
We wouldnt want Floyd's whistleblower case being a slamdunk would we!
.

Yes, to point #1
Too late, to point #2

 

[TexPat]

Honestly I am unsure if she is lying. Every time I go over the information I see a number of items that make me think she is (including info from some pro cyclists I have the great fortune of knowing) and some of it makes me think she isn't. I go back and forth, but I don't know for sure since I am not one of the few people who truly know the facts but I think the odds are that LA doped. I also think that many of the stories, both saying he is clean and that he is dirty are complete BS.

Should we start a new thread so that you can enlighten us? I think, it's important to know which ones you believe are BS.
And these pros you know...care to fill in the details?

 

[Barrus]

Okay, he's gone, so lets just forget his posts and go back to regular programming

 

[cat6cx]

Honestly I am unsure if she is lying. Every time I go over the information I see a number of items that make me think she is (including info from some pro cyclists I have the great fortune of knowing) and some of it makes me think she isn't. I go back and forth, but I don't know for sure since I am not one of the few people who truly know the facts but I think the odds are that LA doped. I also think that many of the stories, both saying he is clean and that he is dirty are complete BS.

I think that is a fair and reasonable opinion on your part. I find it very complicated and can see motives driving both sides to "untruths". Some people I find very credible (texpat-andersatan ) and some people partially credible, Floyd (I think he is telling the truth to the best of his recollection.... now).

I can tell you that I am squarely in the "anti-Armstrong brigade", but try to respect other opinions. I feel that ultimately gives me more confidence in my own position later.

 

[Mambo95]

Firstly - I have never written to anyone about giving marks to players/cyclists, and quite frankly assuming others here have with such a broad brush is rather petty and adds little to this thread.

You have missed the key point here - Emma's letter to Bicycling shows up the whole 'Endgame' article to be little more than an opportunity to offer Lance (and them) a soft landing. ("He's done a lot of good...")

No, Dr M, you have missed my point. My point is nothing to do with cycling or Armstrong, it's all about journalism.

Joe Lindsey, who actually wrote the line not Bill Strickland, has most likely been given the job of writing this up pretty fast. (most sports journalists just wing it on instinct - I've actually done this job at a low level). Joe will not be a man immersed in the subject. He's probably written copy about Baseball, Basketball etc, that day.

Really, you're all treating scrappy journalism as conspiracy - just like the 'Truthers' who pounce on that BBC broadcast due to a Reuters f*** up.

A great adage is: "Never ascribe to conspiracy what can be equally be ascribed to laziness or incompetence."

 

[cat6cx]

I haven't seen this referenced yet today.

Bikezilla is posting some exchanges he's had with Bill Strickland in regards to the article.

http://bikezilla.blogspot.com/

I thought it was relevant in this thread.

 

[Fausto's Schnauzer]

Joe Lindsey....not be a man immersed in the subject. He's probably written copy about Baseball, Basketball etc, that day.

Actually, no. Joe has Tri-Flow in his veins (or his preferred brand). He's as immersed in cycling as any scribe ever has been. While he may not win for the "Biggest Bike Geek in History Award," he'd definitely make the finals.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

No, Dr M, you have missed my point. My point is nothing to do with cycling or Armstrong, it's all about journalism.

Joe Lindsey, who actually wrote the line not Bill Strickland, has most likely been given the job of writing this up pretty fast. (most sports journalists just wing it on instinct - I've actually done this job at a low level). Joe will not be a man immersed in the subject. He's probably written copy about Baseball, Basketball etc, that day.

Really, you're all treating scrappy journalism as conspiracy - just like the 'Truthers' who pounce on that BBC broadcast due to a Reuters f*** up.

A great adage is: "Never ascribe to conspiracy what can be equally be ascribed to laziness or incompetence."

Actually - that was exactly my point.

You are on about the (Joe Lindsey) line -what I said was- Emma's letter to Bicycling shows up the whole 'Endgame' article to be little more than an opportunity to offer Lance (and them) a soft landing. ("He's done a lot of good...")

This isn't just one individual piece by one journalist - it is a collective effort of shoddy work by journalists and the editors of the piece.

They aren't lazy or incompetent - in fact they have had to be quite creative in how they are rewriting their involvement.

 

[Francois the Postman]

I haven't seen this referenced yet today.

Bikezilla is posting some exchanges he's had with Bill Strickland in regards to the article.

http://bikezilla.blogspot.com/

I thought it was relevant in this thread.

It certainly is, thanks, great link.

 

[Granville57]

Joe will not be a man immersed in the subject. He's probably written copy about Baseball, Basketball etc, that day.

Whosaywhaaa?

The same guy whose regular column, The Boulder Report appears on Bicycling.com ?

Boulder, Colorado-based contributor Joe Lindsey offers investigative journalism, analysis and humor about cycling. A popular slogan in this cycling and university town is "Keep Boulder Weird." Lindsey's certainly doing his part.

http://bicycling.com/blogs/boulderreport/

 

[Digger]

I also had a twitter 'conversation' with said writer. About Ferrari i asked what he thought Lance was doing? He said he gave the benefit of the doubt and that it was testing. About '99 samples he said there was issues regarding chain of custody. He then said he wasn't interested in going point by point.
I said I aapreciated the replies but that it stretched credibility to think these were genuine answers.
I also spoke about journalists, many of them, being basically wh-o-res with typewriters where truth is secondary to becoming friends with the star, so they can boost their own self importance by saying i hang out with such and such a guy.

 

[thehog]

I haven't seen this referenced yet today.

Bikezilla is posting some exchanges he's had with Bill Strickland in regards to the article.

http://bikezilla.blogspot.com/

I thought it was relevant in this thread.

The retort about not being 'wealthy' is just plain silly.

He made a living. Paid his house for his family, food on the table and all that. That's a strong reason not 'mess' with the story. How's he going to pay the mortgage and school fees when Tour de Lance is Tour de Fraud and it doesn't pay anymore? I know write new stories for the same fanboy audience with a undertone of doping is ok in certain situations and mortgage is paid and kids go to school. Easy. Bill is a sell out. He knows it too but he had 'hope' you see.

 

[Mambo95]

Actually - that was exactly my point.

You are on about the (Joe Lindsey) line -what I said was- Emma's letter to Bicycling shows up the whole 'Endgame' article to be little more than an opportunity to offer Lance (and them) a soft landing. ("He's done a lot of good...")

This isn't just one individual piece by one journalist - it is a collective effort of shoddy work by journalists and the editors of the piece.

They aren't lazy or incompetent - in fact they have had to be quite creative in how they are rewriting their involvement.

But you and others are making it out to be part of some larger LA funded conspiracy.

It's not.

Journalists are just like the rest of us. They want to do a 'good enough' job, get their copy in and go home to the pub.

If you think they're sitting at their desk, fretting over what could be inferred for their words, then you're seriously deluded.


The idea that journalists are completely committed to the full and absolute truth rather than deadlines, is as deluded as the idea that LA is clean.

 

[D-Queued]

But you and others are making it out to be part of some larger LA funded conspiracy.

It's not.

Journalists are just like the rest of us. They want to do a 'good enough' job, get their copy in and go home to the pub.

If you think they're sitting at their desk, fretting over what could be inferred for their words, then you're seriously deluded.


The idea that journalists are completely committed to the full and absolute truth rather than deadlines, is as deluded as the idea that LA is clean.

If journalists had any agenda in the current atmosphere, however, you would think that they would have an axe to grind with anyone associated with Demand Media.

Demand Media's compensation approach tries to transform skill at turning a phrase into a two-bit turnstile.

Journalists who go with the flow are demonstrating their acceptance of their own insignificant value.

Dave.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

But you and others are making it out to be part of some larger LA funded conspiracy.

It's not.

Journalists are just like the rest of us. They want to do a 'good enough' job, get their copy in and go home to the pub.

If you think they're sitting at their desk, fretting over what could be inferred for their words, then you're seriously deluded.


The idea that journalists are completely committed to the full and absolute truth rather than deadlines, is as deluded as the idea that LA is clean.

Oh - I'm sorry I didn't realize they were under a deadline to get the opinion of their own journalist on print, can you link that or did you just make that up?

Actually I'd rather be seriously deluded than ignorant. Strickland has said that he had spoken to both Lance & JB before releasing the article.

Strickland wrote a very long article about how he had heard lots of rumors over the years but couldn't report it as no-one would go on the record.
Then he turns around and says 'oh, Lance doped' on the basis of an unnamed person who didn't go on the record.

 

[Benotti69]

But you and others are making it out to be part of some larger LA funded conspiracy.

It's not.

It was not a conspiracy but it was partly funded by the print media, tv and radio perpetuating his myth as they saw it as a great story, 'beats cancer wins TdF'. It led to a bigger interest in the sport in the English speaking world which generated advertising for those writing about it on a regular basis. It also funded the american revolution for certain bike companies. Would we have all those amercian bikes in the peloton or Sram aswell competing with Shimano and Campag?

Journalists are just like the rest of us. They want to do a 'good enough' job, get their copy in and go home to the pub.

If you think they're sitting at their desk, fretting over what could be inferred for their words, then you're seriously deluded.


The idea that journalists are completely committed to the full and absolute truth rather than deadlines, is as deluded as the idea that LA is clean.

The term journalist has gained unfortunate connotations, like the word 'politician', what professions should attract the most idealistic, altruistic and honourable people? Politics and Journalism. A journalist should stand for integrity, outing hypocrisy, corruption and lies, but in truth it along with politics, both professions are reviled.

While some may think one would live in cloud cuckoo land to expect any different, i believe if we dont expect these sort of attributes we can hardly expect it from others in society, so we should demand it from them and not accept what it has become, a pen pushing button monkey business.