BroDeal said:
It is ironic how people who were so upset about being labeled by Armstrong have spent years proving that Armstrong made the right call. Many who used charges of doping to tar their foes are now exposed as obsessed axe grinders. It was never about doping. On this very forum, which was built on years of arguing for the prevalence of doping in the European peloton, they now deny doping's extent because it might lessen the culpability of one rider.
This is such BS. Endless posts on Froome, Horner, Contador, et al testify to the absurdity of your charge. Try your spiel on all the people complaining about the hate that Froome gets. Try to convince Foxxy Brown, who never stops attacking Horner, that it isn’t about doping. Good luck telling Robbie Canuck that everyone in the Clinic loves Contador. You must not spend much time here if you think most posters here believe that doping doesn’t continue. Not to mention that even if some people do deny doping's extent (for the very good reason that none of us, including you, has enough facts to be certain of that extent) that in no way means they are doing this so that LA doesn't look better. Nothing is going to make LA look better at this point, and you know it. He's irrelevant to the arguments over the current cleanliness of the peloton.
They would prefer to live in a phantasmagorical reality where a few riders condemning themselves to stay in the U.S. would have changed the fates of their mythical clean riders, as though the places for those who stayed home would not have been filled by the thousands of eager amateurs who were not only willing to do what was necessary to race in the big leagues but had already started.
No, we just think they’re deserving of praise. The fact that one person’s act of conscience may be powerless to change the flow of history doesn’t make that act any less laudable. I don’t know anyone in the Clinic who thinks a few riders would have changed anything.
To cut to the chase, what I assume is bugging you is that LA gets so much hate for being a ringleader, even though the circus would have gone on without him. But very few people here deny this. You conveniently overlook the fact that LA had the chance to get just as light a sentence as everyone else, or at least a much lighter sentence than he ended up with. You also don't acknowledge that LA's sins went far beyond doping.
It has been a seemy [sic] exercise in human duplicity. Remember the fanboys who would prefix a post with a denial about being a fan? The other side of the coin has been revealed. It is haters denying they hate Armstrong. It has reached a risible point where they now claim they care about him and hope he gets help. This of course is often done in the same post used to attack any teammate or friend who has presented a more nuanced explanation of what went into the decisions that were made. Those who have been lauded as heroes of the revolution get an ice pick to the head if they, after the better part of two decades have gone by, reconcile. Those traitors are put on the Andreu Strategies enemies list, and the call goes out the interns to attack them at every turn.
Can you provide a single example of an intern who has been called to attack a “traitor”? Can you provide a more nuanced explanation of the decisions that were made that doesn’t ignore all the things LA did to smear his enemies, all the things that garden-variety dopers don’t do?
Believe it or not, it’s possible to hope LA gets help without forgetting what he did. Really doesn't require a lot of nuance.
This Armstrong affair could have been the catharsis to change the sport, to admit its past and transition to a better future. Instead it has been the dawning of a new omerta.
And it could have been used to transition to a better future if only…?
And you know for a certainty that the doping now is just as bad as it was ten years ago because…?
And you claim that this hypothetical turn of events is all the fault of posters in the Clinic because…?
Seriously, Brodeal, why don't you explain just what those of us in the Clinic are supposed to do that we're not already doing to help the sport move to a better future. I really have no idea. I definitely don't think a mass movement to aid LA's comeback is going to help, but if you beg to differ, I'm all ears.
The demonization of Armstrong's doping is an extension and reinforcement of the scapegoat policy that was used to cover up the sport's systemic doping. Those who promote the division of riders into good dopers and bad dopers are now part of the problem. They are far more toxic than a pro making a dumb tweet or a UCI apparatchik telling the prols we are in a new era.
You are too intelligent and informed really to believe that the tendency of some, not all, fans to like some dopers while criticizing others is new in the post-Armstrong era. It’s always gone on. You also know that a great many posters in the Clinic don’t make this division, but again, this is a nuanced view that you perhaps avoid because then you couldn’t paint the Clinic as this monolithic force that you, the Brave Dissenter on the White Bicycle, charges to do battle with.
The fact that some people are more forgiving of some dopers than others is not the root of the problem. If it were, all the Froome antipathy here by now would have had him banned. What some people choose to believe or feel doesn't have any effect at all on whether someone actually tests positive. Like a lot of others, I detest Lemond's support of Pantani and some other dopers, but you can't convince me that attitudes like that are making it easier for current riders to dope. It may be symbolic of a problem, but it doesn't have any practical consequences.
I've appreciated a lot of your posts in the past, BroDeal, and I look forward to more in the future. But all this attacking of LA critics is not accomplishing anything that I can see. If you think it's holding back the sport, outline a plan for getting it back on track.
Race Radio said:
It used to be entertaining to watch a handful of posters drive the Armstrong fanboys crazy by baiting them, but now we realize that many of those posters didn't hate Lance, or doping, or even love the sport.....they just love conflict.
Elaborate conspiracy theories, paranoid obsessions, baiting, twisting, inventing. Anything to provoke a response. Armstrong just provided momentary fuel for their obsession for conflict, once they used him up they eagerly search for anything that can help fill that hole.
Bingo.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram