LeMond II

[Scott SoCal]

so how do you think the tapes made their way from his house to elsewhere?

I have no idea. You think Greg leaked them and are blaming him for it.

Show me. Simple enough.

 

[Digger]

Look at it this way;

Had Greg not lied to Stephanie first you'd never know she lied under oath, only Greg would. Now, I doubt you'd believe him but maybe I'm not giving you due credit.

I realize you're having trouble with the difference between the two actions but I'll keep pointing it out in the hopes that it might sink in (at some point).

I followed this since day one...I knew she was telling lies. Anyone with a brain knew the hospital room happened...it didn't take Greg taping it...but that aside it made no difference. He lied which was my point...you say for the greater good. But he still lied...At that point Stephanie hadn't wronged Greg and they were friendly so that made it worse...and the tape wasn't deemed admissible due to a law in the state where the hearing took place...that's all I have to say. I remember listening to that tape seven years ago and not being comfortable with that part of it...regarding how the tape got from Greg to the internet I don't know. But it was greg's and it was in his house.

 

[Scott SoCal]

I have no idea what he though - the point is the same he lied - and if it was as harmless as is claimed, it would have been admissible.

It makes a difference, there is a difference and I think you know it.

 

[Scott SoCal]

I'm genuinely confused by the double standard.

Above you called Lemond out for "making nice" with various TdF winners, including Indurain. Yet, to my knowledge, there is no concrete proof that Indurain doped. A lot of circumstantial evidence and his connections to Conconi are beyond sketch - but no concrete proof.

And here you are calling Lemond out for - trying to get proof - that Landis doped, that Armstrong doped, etc...

So Lemond is supposed to ostracize people, even if he has no proof of their doping?? And he's a bad boy for trying to get proof that others are doping?

That doesn't even begin to make sense to me.

Bingo........

 

[Digger]

I'm genuinely confused by the double standard.

Above you called Lemond out for "making nice" with various TdF winners, including Indurain. Yet, to my knowledge, there is no concrete proof that Indurain doped. A lot of circumstantial evidence and his connections to Conconi are beyond sketch - but no concrete proof.

And here you are calling Lemond out for - trying to get proof - that Landis doped, that Armstrong doped, etc...

So Lemond is supposed to ostracize people, even if he has no proof of their doping?? And he's a bad boy for trying to get proof that others are doping?

That doesn't even begin to make sense to me.

Congrats on missing the point...getting proof is one thing...testifying about phone calls and their content, as with landis, which never occurred as how he said, a point later established by other authorities, is not okay.

 

[Digger]

It makes a difference, there is a difference and I think you know it.

If it was harmless why wasn't it admissible

 

[Scott SoCal]

I followed this since day one...I knew she was telling lies. Anyone with a brain knew the hospital room happened...it didn't take Greg taping it...but that aside it made no difference. He lied which was my point...you say for the greater good. But he still lied...At that point Stephanie hadn't wronged Greg and they were friendly so that made it worse...and the tape wasn't deemed admissible due to a law in the state where the hearing took place...that's all I have to say. I remember listening to that tape seven years ago and not being comfortable with that part of it...regarding how the tape got from Greg to the internet I don't know. But it was greg's and it was in his house.

On the other hand if Stephanie doesn't perjure herself (allegedly) you never know of the convo between GLM and SM.

If SM doesn't perjure herself (allegedly) there is never a Lance Armstrong 2.0.

If SM doesn't perjure herself (allegedly) Lance only winds up with a two-year ban.

If SM doesn't perjure herself (allegedly) Hein and Pat likely do far less damage to the sport and/or are run out of town far sooner.

If SM doesn't perjure herself (allegedly) the Andreu's lives probably look far different than today.

If SM doesn't perjure herself (allegedly) (fill in the blank because any number of things would be different).

Yep, Greg lied and that's the problem.

 

[Digger]

On the other hand if Stephanie doesn't perjure herself (allegedly) you never know of the convo between GLM and SM.

If SM doesn't perjure herself (allegedly) there is never a Lance Armstrong 2.0.

If SM doesn't perjure herself (allegedly) Lance only winds up with a two-year ban.

If SM doesn't perjure herself (allegedly) Hein and Pat likely do far less damage to the sport and/or are run out of town far sooner.

If SM doesn't perjure herself (allegedly) the Andreu's lives probably look far different than today.

If SM doesn't perjure herself (allegedly) (fill in the blank because any number of things would be different).

Yep, Greg lied and that's the problem.

Firstly your post is pointless because sca case was lost on contract law...not whether he doped...
So nothing would have been different.
At least you accept Greg lied which was all I said.

 

[thehog]

On the other hand if Stephanie doesn't perjure herself (allegedly) you never know of the convo between GLM and SM.

If SM doesn't perjure herself (allegedly) there is never a Lance Armstrong 2.0.

If SM doesn't perjure herself (allegedly) Lance only winds up with a two-year ban.

If SM doesn't perjure herself (allegedly) Hein and Pat likely do far less damage to the sport and/or are run out of town far sooner.

If SM doesn't perjure herself (allegedly) the Andreu's lives probably look far different than today.

If SM doesn't perjure herself (allegedly) (fill in the blank because any number of things would be different).

Yep, Greg lied and that's the problem.

Greg did lie to procure the information he wanted and then passed it amougst friends, yes. Whether what SM had stated was true or not got lost by the intent to cause duress and embarrassment.

If Armstrong recorded a phone call, released it his friends to be leaked onto the internet, what would the reaction be?

If he recorded a single mother who was obviously compromised between her employer, friends and child what would our reaction be?

I think you'll find the anwser would be somewhere between our prejudices and whom we like on a given day.

No shame in supporting those who like don't kid ourselves the behaviour appropriate. It was not.

 

[Scott SoCal]

If it was harmless why wasn't it admissible

Lots of questions.

Why isn't Stephanie in jail?


So to sum up;

Greg's lie led to inadmissibility, Stephanie's lie was an unprosecuted felony.

It makes a difference, there is a difference and I think you know it

Good post SoCal.

 

[Scott SoCal]

Firstly your post is pointless because sca case was lost on contract law...not whether he doped...
So nothing would have been different.
At least you accept Greg lied which was all I said.

Firstly your post is pointless because sca case was lost on contract law...not whether he doped...
So nothing would have been different.

On the contrary. The case has yet to be decided for the very reason that SM was asked to testify.

Did Lance win those tours he was paid bonus money for?

Imagine for a second SCA was able to prove then what we now know. Would Lance be any more the winner of those tours then than he is now?

Stephanie can be credited for altering the course of these events as much as any other singe individual. You rail against Greg for reasons only you know but she was in a position to bring it all down and instead she committed a felony.

I'm with Bluenote. You make no sense.

 

[Digger]

On the contrary. The case has yet to be decided for the very reason that SM was asked to testify.

Did Lance win those tours he was paid bonus money for?

Imagine for a second SCA was able to prove then what we now know. Would Lance be any more the winner of those tours then than he is now?

Stephanie can be credited for altering the course of these events as much as any other singe individual. You rail against Greg for reasons only you know but she was in a position to bring it all down and instead she committed a felony.

I'm with Bluenote. You make no sense.

Jesus sca could have proved it 100% still would make no odds...contract law...you seem to think her testimony would have brought down lance

Anyway she committed perjury...his call wasn't legal in the state in which the sca trial took place...but look if you want to go with Stephanie telling lies being the difference then you go with that.

 

[DirtyWorks]

I'm genuinely confused by the double standard.

Above you called Lemond out for "making nice" with various TdF winners, including Indurain. Yet, to my knowledge, there is no concrete proof that Indurain doped. A lot of circumstantial evidence and his connections to Conconi are beyond sketch - but no concrete proof.

Just an FYI, Indurain was the original "Mr. July." He vanished into the peloton otherwise. And then when his doctor left, the TdF podiums stopped.

Doper. Verbruggen didn't mind one bit.

 

[ralphbert]

He makes plenty of sense. The point is Greg cloakes himself in anti-doping righteousness where he is in fact more anti-armstrong. Kinda like Lance with his cancer shield.

It is just a bit disingenuous, I would give him more kudos if he just came out and said Lance tried to **** me but I ****ed him. Haha, sucks to be Lance.

For me that is the point. Its not a big issue but something to point out, I don't have a problem with Greg or anything he has done.

 

[Granville57]

Just an FYI...

I'll make a deal with you.

You change " \ " to this " / " and I'll delete this post.

 

[Bluenote]

Congrats on missing the point...getting proof is one thing...testifying about phone calls and their content, as with landis, which never occurred as how he said, a point later established by other authorities, is not okay.

Really, because above you were railing on - how - Lemond tried to get proof. Lies, taped phone calls - y'know.

So if your issue was Lemond allegedly lying about what Landis said, then why didn't you say this clearly when 86TDF asked? And why babble about what a meanie Lemond is for clandestantly taping conversations, if your real issue was lying under oath?

Easy to "miss the point" when the goal posts move so much.

 

[Bluenote]

Just an FYI, Indurain was the original "Mr. July." He vanished into the peloton otherwise. And then when his doctor left, the TdF podiums stopped.

Doper. Verbruggen didn't mind one bit.

I don't disagree.

 

[thehog]

He makes plenty of sense. The point is Greg cloakes himself in anti-doping righteousness where he is in fact more anti-armstrong. Kinda like Lance with his cancer shield.

It is just a bit disingenuous, I would give him more kudos if he just came out and said Lance tried to **** me but I ****ed him. Haha, sucks to be Lance.

For me that is the point. Its not a big issue but something to point out, I don't have a problem with Greg or anything he has done.

Agree. There's a lot of shields and justifications on both sides. There's some fairly suspect behavioural issues going on.

Like you, I don't have a big issue with LeMond. But circumstances led him to what unfolded with regards to Landis and SM. At a guess he's probably not proud of what he did.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

Just an FYI, Indurain was the original "Mr. July." He vanished into the peloton otherwise.

Didn't he win the Giro twice and podium in the Vuelta?

 

[thehog]

Didn't he win the Giro twice and podium in the Vuelta?

Correct.

Hung onto till late season Worlds as well.

Rode a lot of early season races on Spain. Back in those days no need to hide as no one was going to find EPO.

 

[Bluenote]

He makes plenty of sense. The point is Greg cloakes himself in anti-doping righteousness where he is in fact more anti-armstrong. Kinda like Lance with his cancer shield.

It is just a bit disingenuous, I would give him more kudos if he just came out and said Lance tried to **** me but I ****ed him. Haha, sucks to be Lance.

For me that is the point. Its not a big issue but something to point out, I don't have a problem with Greg or anything he has done.

Not sure I agree with that. Lemond has said he feels like rampant doping in the peleton cost him the end years of his career. If there hadn't been so much doping, maybe he would have won more tours or, at least, tour stages.

Kinda hard for a guy in that position to not be anti-doping.

Hey, doping might cost me some tours, but no big deal, I'm not too stressed about it. Doping is cool, but man, I just hate that Lance punk.

I'm not saying that Lemond is the perfect anti-doping angel. After all, I was the one arguing above for shades of grey. I just think he is too complicated a guy to boil down to simple narratives "all about money," "just hates Armstrong," etc...

I mean sure, self interest might be behind his positions on anti-doping. After all, don't all clean athletes dislike doping because a) they don't want to have to take drugs and b) they don't want to get beaten by dopers. Just like factory workers have their own interests at heart when they push for safety measures. Their self interest doesn't invalidate the underlying concern (doping has health risks, no one should die in a factory accident, etc...)

I find his behavior and positions complex and contradictory at times. I've never found a simple narrative that fit him.

 

[MonkeyFace]

He makes plenty of sense. The point is Greg cloakes himself in anti-doping righteousness where he is in fact more anti-armstrong. Kinda like Lance with his cancer shield.

It is just a bit disingenuous, I would give him more kudos if he just came out and said Lance tried to **** me but I ****ed him. Haha, sucks to be Lance.

For me that is the point. Its not a big issue but something to point out, I don't have a problem with Greg or anything he has done.

Lemond doesn't hate dopers. He hates the system that in the least does nothing to stop and at worse encourages it. Lance Armstrong just happens to be entrenched into the system more than any other rider has. What other rider has ended other cyclist careers, bribed officials, had direct lines with the head of he UCI, got positives covered up, and committed perjury and fraud for his benefit and those that helped him. Armstrong is the keystone for anyone wanting to change the UCI. Lance is a lot of things but just a doper isn't one of them.

 

[Archibald]

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

...I don't believe in the situation we're referring to, it was in any way possible to be as even-handed as people wanted. Not arguing the point.

OK. I guess we just have a difference of opinion! You think justice was served by giving meaningless bans to a bunch of career-long hardcore dopers. I don't.

 

[Digger]

Really, because above you were railing on - how - Lemond tried to get proof. Lies, taped phone calls - y'know.

So if your issue was Lemond allegedly lying about what Landis said, then why didn't you say this clearly when 86TDF asked? And why babble about what a meanie Lemond is for clandestantly taping conversations, if your real issue was lying under oath?

Easy to "miss the point" when the goal posts move so much.

Numerous times I said about Floyd in the last few pages. Almost every single post. If you can't read or be bothered to rest that's not my problem. Each post was about the two phone calls....how he only wanted Floyd to confess because of lance...it's all there...anyway glad you are on with him doing this. That we disagree on almost everything is a compliment to me I feel.