Official lance armstrong thread, part 2 (from september 2012)

Page 119 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
purcell said:
By this definition I not a devoted fan of the sport because I do not buy pro sponsored items ( unless on counts Camapgnolo parts), and even though I have been a fan of ice hockey for 40 years I am not a "devoted" fan because I don't go the arena and buy a team jersey???

Really?
Instead of 'devoted fan,' replace it with the term 'schmevoted fan.' I doubt that you are a schmevoted fan.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
MarkvW said:
Bad word choice. I should have used another term to refer to a person who spends money on items sponsored by pro cycling and the UCI.
Yes Mark, you should.
How do you define people - because that is central to your argument., no one else's.

I am a fan of cycling - plain and simple. Am I devoted? Perhaps - but that would be because I believe in the sport, not on what I purchase.

Have you supported Liguigas, Ag2r? You must have Sky as your TV choice, surely?
The people that do purchase those products are not devotee fans.
Please stop this apologetic nonsense.
 
Dr. Maserati said:
Yes Mark, you should.
How do you define people - because that is central to your argument., no one else's.

I am a fan of cycling - plain and simple. Am I devoted? Perhaps - but that would be because I believe in the sport, not on what I purchase.

Have you supported Liguigas, Ag2r? You must have Sky as your TV choice, surely?
The people that do purchase those products are not devotee fans.
Please stop this apologetic nonsense.
Oh yes . . . the True Fans of cycling. Whatever.

If the true fan of cycling spends money on pro cycling's sponsors or on UCI products, then that fan is supporting the whole filthy cesspool.

If the true fan of cycling does not spend money on pro cycling's sponsors or on UCI products, then that fan is NOT supporting the whole filthy cesspool.

I can't possibly make it any more concrete for you.
 
Jun 19, 2009
5,220
0
0
MarkvW said:
Oh yes . . . the True Fans of cycling. Whatever.

If the true fan of cycling spends money on pro cycling's sponsors or on UCI products, then that fan is supporting the whole filthy cesspool.

If the true fan of cycling does not spend money on pro cycling's sponsors or on UCI products, then that fan is NOT supporting the whole filthy cesspool.

I can't possibly make it any more concrete for you.
You must only get Black and White broadcasts on your TV. The world has a few shades of color if you look around.
 
Oldman said:
You must only get Black and White broadcasts on your TV. The world has a few shades of color if you look around.
If you're analogizing "pro cycling" to "the world," I'm not buying it. We've only got one world (with all it's hues), and we're obligated to make the best of that world.

We don't have to be stuck with the world of pro cycling--deprive it of financial support and it will die. That would be a good thing. Petitions and such are fine if they are presented to a receptive audience. McBruggen and the power structure that sustains it are demonstrably not receptive. Festina, Puerto, and Armstrong amply establish that.

There will and should always be bike races. There need not always be bike races sanctioned by the UCI.
 
Aug 18, 2012
1,171
0
0
Robert21 said:
It's difficult with interviews in text form to get a true sense of what they are really saying but some of the stuff in there seems a bit much.

For instance when he says the bit about how he despaired when he heard Lance wasn't going to come clean but refuse to fight the charges. I remember hearing him in a radio interview just after Lance decided not to fight and he sounded very excited.

He's done a good job but I find he comes across as a bit vain in that interview.
 
May 12, 2011
241
0
0
Briant_Gumble said:
He's done a good job but I find he comes across as a bit vain in that interview.
He is vain. Tygart was never doing this for the sport, he was doing it for the attention. As was Novitzy for that matter. I bet Jeff is really ****ed about how much attention TT is getting.
 
Aug 3, 2010
843
0
0
Aleajactaest said:
He is vain. Tygart was never doing this for the sport, he was doing it for the attention. As was Novitzy for that matter. I bet Jeff is really ****ed about how much attention TT is getting.
Attention from whom? Us here in the Clinic? Most people who watch ESPN 24/7 probably couldn't name those two guys even though they were mildly aware of the process taking place.:confused:
 
Jun 19, 2009
5,220
0
0
Aleajactaest said:
He is vain. Tygart was never doing this for the sport, he was doing it for the attention. As was Novitzy for that matter. I bet Jeff is really ****ed about how much attention TT is getting.
So anyone that purchases a product related to pro cycling is hypocritical and one of the few agency employees that have done anything to clean up pro cycling is "vain". Your view of the world is pretty concise and convenient from your cubicle.
 
May 12, 2011
241
0
0
Oldman said:
So anyone that purchases a product related to pro cycling is hypocritical and one of the few agency employees that have done anything to clean up pro cycling is "vain". Your view of the world is pretty concise and convenient from your cubicle.
He runs the organization, he does not do the work. There is no reason, save vanity, for him to end up being the public face of such as organization.

Now, to be perfectly honest, I'd be happy if USADA and WADA went away. Organizations like the UCI should police themselves. Relying on "outside" oversight is just giving up and admitting that you don't have the cojones to police yourself. Sadly true for the UCI.

I'm not clear where the purchases a product thing comes into play. Can you clarify that?
 
Oct 14, 2012
63
0
0
I have to disagree with Aleajacctaest here. UCI cannot and should not be the anti-drug enforcement agency for cycling. Their stated role is to further cycling. A positive test to a "name rider" is a detriment to cycling so thats an automatic conflict of interest. Think about it, when a star is out the interest in any event is reduced, sponsor interest is decreased, revenues are less. And therefore any sporting ban is a detriment to cycling, which is against UCI's stated purpose.
 
cooo........ooool

Aleajactaest said:
Now, to be perfectly honest, I'd be happy if USADA and WADA went away. Organizations like the UCI should police themselves. Relying on "outside" oversight is just giving up and admitting that you don't have the cojones to police yourself. Sadly true for the UCI.
cooo.....ooool! and then lance would still be 7 times winner.............

is that what you would prefer?

usada / wada are important to keep fat pat in check and promote sporting

activity that observers can trust
 
Oldman said:
So anyone that purchases a product related to pro cycling is hypocritical and one of the few agency employees that have done anything to clean up pro cycling is "vain". Your view of the world is pretty concise and convenient from your cubicle.
If you want to strike a blow for change (albeit only a tiny blow), don't financially support the UCI or its sponsors. If you don't, don't.

It doesn't have to be a moral thing, or an all-or-nothing thing.
 
Mar 18, 2009
775
0
0
Aleajactaest said:
He runs the organization, he does not do the work. There is no reason, save vanity, for him to end up being the public face of such as organization.

Now, to be perfectly honest, I'd be happy if USADA and WADA went away. Organizations like the UCI should police themselves. Relying on "outside" oversight is just giving up and admitting that you don't have the cojones to police yourself. Sadly true for the UCI.
The part in bold proves that you haven't paid any attention at all to how this case unfolded and the immense amount of work Tygart put in. Go look at the Reasoned Report.

Your second paragraph is similarly nonsensical. The UCI has no shortage of cojones. They have the arrogance to continually lie and say they can be trusted with policing the sport despite massive evidence of bribes, corruption and test-fixing. Fat Pat knows the world knows he and Hein protected and profited off of Lance and doesn't care.
 
Sep 5, 2009
1,239
0
0
MarkvW said:
If you want to strike a blow for change (albeit only a tiny blow), don't financially support the UCI or its sponsors. If you don't, don't.

It doesn't have to be a moral thing, or an all-or-nothing thing.
So what is your personal contribution to not financially support the UCI?

Not apply for your first cycle racing license with a US club? :)
 
Jun 18, 2009
1,225
1
0
Aleajactaest said:
SO, I take from that article that TT feels like people don't like him and that he is a crusader for truth,justice and the American way.

Nope. He just wants sympathy. What a whiner.
Most people complain about credible death threats. The depth of your chamois sniffing really does know no bounds. Not surprising, since it's probably your own chamois...
 
Jun 18, 2009
1,225
1
0
Aleajactaest said:
He runs the organization, he does not do the work. There is no reason, save vanity, for him to end up being the public face of such as organization.
please stop lying. You obviously know just how limited USADA's budget actually is, and what a large percentage of the work is actually done by TT.

Aleajactaest said:
Now, to be perfectly honest, I'd be happy if USADA and WADA went away. Organizations like the UCI should police themselves. Relying on "outside" oversight is just giving up and admitting that you don't have the cojones to police yourself. Sadly true for the UCI.
Most organizations with strong conflicts of interest have checks and balances in place if they want to function well. You're pretty much alone in this view if you actually want clean sport. My guess is that's really not your desire.
 
May 12, 2011
241
0
0
Wallace said:
The part in bold proves that you haven't paid any attention at all to how this case unfolded and the immense amount of work Tygart put in. Go look at the Reasoned Report.

Your second paragraph is similarly nonsensical. The UCI has no shortage of cojones. They have the arrogance to continually lie and say they can be trusted with policing the sport despite massive evidence of bribes, corruption and test-fixing. Fat Pat knows the world knows he and Hein protected and profited off of Lance and doesn't care.
I read the report. I see no empirical evidence that TT did the legwork. And, if he did, he is a bad executive.

I stand by my statement about the UCI. Stonewalling, blustering and obfuscation do not equal cojones. That is stupidity. Real leadership would be protecting the future of their sport as opposed to short term gain.

e.g. real leadership in other sports involves drafting and developing a team as opposed to using free agency to try and BUY a team. One is long view the other is short. The UCI has consistently show no appreciation for the long view and has always done the most expedient thing they can.
 
May 12, 2011
241
0
0
131313 said:
please stop lying. You obviously know just how limited USADA's budget actually is, and what a large percentage of the work is actually done by TT.
He is the CEO. If he is doing all the work, he is not leading. An executive plans and directs. If he is doing the work, he might the the COO. Either way wrong title and still vain. He and Jeff are a perfect pair. A pair of what, I leave to you.
 
May 12, 2011
241
0
0
ebandit said:
cooo.....ooool! and then lance would still be 7 times winner.............

is that what you would prefer?


usada / wada are important to keep fat pat in check and promote sporting

activity that observers can trust
Yes.

USADA and WADA are warts on the buttock of sport and a waste of my tax dollars.( at least USADA is. I have no idea whose money WADA is wasting)
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
N The Clinic 10

ASK THE COMMUNITY