Interesting snippet - Armstrong contacted UCI

[mountainrman]

Not optimistic, but hints there may be a way back in for armstrong.

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/sport/cycling/armstrong-contacted-uci-before-ban-20121023-282l2.html

 

[Danilot]

Phat: "But my understanding is that he has no interest in the sport anymore, he's got his other stuff to work on."

Such as looking for a second-hand trailer in Paso.

 

[mountainrman]

Phat: "But my understanding is that he has no interest in the sport anymore, he's got his other stuff to work on."

Such as looking for a second-hand trailer in Paso.

It hints that armstrong expected or hoped for a different result - probably the issue of SOL which UCI do disagree with USADA as it is in violation of WADA rules

 

[Benotti69]

Probably wanting to see what the decision was for his speech writers for his LIEstrong address, nothing more than that!

 

[jam pants]

Not optimistic, but hints there may be a way back in for armstrong.

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/sport/cycling/armstrong-contacted-uci-before-ban-20121023-282l2.html

It must give you wood to know that Legstrong may one day ride as a pro again.

"So you're telling me there's a chance?!"

 

[Tinman]

The interesting thing is that Pat called him back after LA received an SMS. And that Pat also said "he hasn't talked to him for ages" - yesterday at the press conference.

http://www.nst.com.my/latest/armstrong-called-uci-ahead-of-date-with-destiny-1.160930#

 

[reptar]

Ahh.. the Brisbane Times - my local newspaper.

How can McQuaid have both "not spoken to Lance in ages" in the press conference and also have called him on Friday?

 

[D-Queued]

The interesting thing is that Pat called him back after LA received an SMS. And that Pat also said "he hasn't talked to him for ages" - yesterday at the press conference.

http://www.nst.com.my/latest/armstrong-called-uci-ahead-of-date-with-destiny-1.160930#

What was it that Floyd wasn't allowed to say?

Oh, yeah. Pat, you are a liar.

Dave.

 

[Lukenwolf]

Ahh.. the Brisbane Times - my local newspaper.

How can McQuaid have both "not spoken to Lance in ages" in the press conference and also have called him on Friday?

Because he's even more wonderful and mighty than Chuck Norris and Jens Voigt combined...

 

[ebandit]

optimistic?

Not optimistic, but hints there may be a way back in for armstrong.

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/sport/cycling/armstrong-contacted-uci-before-ban-20121023-282l2.html

seems very optimistic to myself..................lance is banninated and will remain..........................banninated

no possibility of a way back

 

[neineinei]

It hints that armstrong expected or hoped for a different result - probably the issue of SOL which UCI do disagree with USADA as it is in violation of WADA rules

I seriously doubt SOL would have cut it for Armstrong. He'd still be a doper. A doper who got to keep five TdF wins on a technicality.

 

[Bosco10]

Ahh.. the Brisbane Times - my local newspaper.

How can McQuaid have both "not spoken to Lance in ages" in the press conference and also have called him on Friday?

Interesting.. maybe he meant that he hadn't really talked with him, as in a prolonged conversation.

 

[reginagold]

As long as Pat and Hein are there, Lance has options. They fought USADA at every juncture. Worldwide media coverage of the contents of the Reasoned Decision trapped them, for now. Pat, sitting as head of the court, calls back the accused for a private chat two days before the court's ruling? He is owned. This is beyond sad.

 

[Big Daddy]

The fact that Armstrong even has McQuaid's mobile phone number is wrong. UCI bull**** hypocrisy. They know they covered up positive tests and accepted unethical payments.

 

[Lukenwolf]

Come to think of it., How many bank robbers have the phone number of tthe local police chief

 

[Tinman]

What was it that Floyd wasn't allowed to say?

Oh, yeah. Pat, you are a liar.

Dave.

Not only that.

HE claimed to have never 1. become a pro cyclist because 2. he didnt want to dope.
1. he was a procyclist for several years 2. he claimed years ago that doping was never talked about, didnt exist in his days. Lying?

http://www.lionelbirnie.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Cycle-Sport.pdf

HE called Tyler and Floyd "scumbags" for speaking out. Defamatory?

HE said USADA witnesses only testified because of FED pressure. Vaughters contradicts this on twitter today, said they spoke out of own free will. Lying and defamatory?

 

[mountainrman]

I seriously doubt SOL would have cut it for Armstrong. He'd still be a doper. A doper who got to keep five TdF wins on a technicality.

Not for reputation - I agree - But it might help him out with the SCA case!
And in the final analysis he beat other dopers, so as far as being the best at doing that, he wins the prize. Which is all Bjarne Riis can claim, and his name is still on the books because of SOL. That is what I dislike about this, It is not even handed or a level playing field. WADA demanded UCI looked at who "was still in the sport" - and I cannot help but feel they were pointing fingers at BR amongst others, you cannot give Bruyneel a lifetime ban without a ban for all other managers who managed doping teams at the time.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Not for reputation - I agree - But it might help him out with the SCA case!
And in the final analysis he beat other dopers, so as far as being the best at doing that, he wins the prize. Which is all Bjarne Riis can claim, and his name is still on the books because of SOL. That is what I dislike about this, It is not even handed or a level playing field. WADA demanded UCI looked at who "was still in the sport" - and I cannot help but feel they were pointing fingers at BR amongst others.

Looks like Lance was SOL on beating the SOL.

 

[spalco]

you cannot give Bruyneel a lifetime ban without a ban for all other managers who managed doping teams at the time.

You've got to start somewhere.

 

[D-Queued]

Not only that.

HE claimed to have never 1. become a pro cyclist because 2. he didnt want to dope.
1. he was a procyclist for several years 2. he claimed years ago that doping was never talked about, didnt exist in his days. Lying?

http://www.lionelbirnie.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Cycle-Sport.pdf

HE called Tyler and Floyd "scumbags" for speaking out. Defamatory?

HE said USADA witnesses only testified because of FED pressure. Vaughters contradicts this on twitter today, said they spoke out of own free will. Lying and defamatory?

Sounds like the organization is completely corrupt!

Oh, dang, Floyd isn't allowed to say that either.

Dave.

 

[neineinei]

Not for reputation - I agree - But it might help him out with the SCA case!
And in the final analysis he beat other dopers, so as far as being the best at doing that, he wins the prize. Which is all Bjarne Riis can claim, and his name is still on the books because of SOL. That is what I dislike about this, It is not even handed or a level playing field. WADA demanded UCI looked at who "was still in the sport" - and I cannot help but feel they were pointing fingers at BR amongst others, you cannot give Bruyneel a lifetime ban without a ban for all other managers who managed doping teams at the time.

The SCA money was for winning six times, so five just doesn't help.

 

[BroDeal]

Congrats, Pat. You are now on Armstrong's enemies list.

This is a good thing. The way the UCI turned its back on Armstrong and threw him under the bus in the press conferance will infuriate Armstrong. For years he carried a grudge about Cofidis him when he had cancer, even though Cofidis paid something like $800K to wiggle out of his contract. Three years later he was still p!ssed off enough to storm into the Cofidis bus and gloat about winning the Tour with another team. Once LA's legal issues are resolved he will strike back by confessing and burying the UCI. Too bad we will have to wait three to five years for him to publicly fess up.

If Armstrong, Bruyneel, and their PR people play this like politics then they will leak damaging information about the UCI and other teams or riders to the press. It is in their best interest now to have the sport burn because the more people involved, the more it diffuses their own culpability.

 

[the asian]

Not optimistic, but hints there may be a way back in for armstrong.

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/sport/cycling/armstrong-contacted-uci-before-ban-20121023-282l2.html

You can keep on dreaming!

 

[Sarcastic Wet Trout]

Congrats, Pat. You are now on Armstrong's enemies list.

Turns out Pat loves cancer.

 

[Big Daddy]

Congrats, Pat. You are now on Armstrong's enemies list.

This is a good thing. The way the UCI turned its back on Armstrong and threw him under the bus in the press conferance will infuriate Armstrong. For years he carried a grudge about Cofidis him when he had cancer, even though Cofidis paid something like $800K to wiggle out of his contract. Three years later he was still p!ssed off enough to storm into the Cofidis bus and gloat about winning the Tour with another team. Once LA's legal issues are resolved he will strike back by confessing and burying the UCI. Too bad we will have to wait three to five years for him to publicly fess up.

If Armstrong, Bruyneel, and their PR people play this like politics then they will leak damaging information about the UCI and other teams or riders to the press. It is in their best interest now to have the sport burn because the more people involved, the more it diffuses their own culpability.

Armstrong can't come back and apologize now. He's in too deep. Everybody knows the UCI is already full of **** because do Verbruggen and McQuaid. If Armstrong ever wants to come out and blame it all in the UCI, who cares? It's like Al Capone or John Gotti blaming the corrupt police system that his mafia was paying off.