Re: Re:
PremierAndrew said:
sniper said:
Brits are overdoing it, kwikki, why are u constantly deflecting away from that?
We,ve spent several years focusing on Spain, Contador and USPS.
Those guys have been exposed. Clinic,s been there done that.
Brits are having their golden sports era now. Tough luck for them that it coincides with the growth of social media.
Now lets stop deflecting away from one of the most ridiculous cycling eras ever, dominated by Brits.
I've got no problem with that. But when people hate on Brits for doping while cheering the likes of Contador Valverde Nibali or anyone else successful as if they're some heroes fighting against the dirty dopers...
I think part of it may be a kind of rejection of what is seen as a very hypocritical and arrogant stance; because the current crop of Britons have yet to really have their moment where it comes crashing down - their Operación Puerto, their Festina Affair, their Reasoned Decision. As a result, we're still being sold the narrative that this is all being done clean, and - and this particular part is in a large way less their fault than others - the rise of social media makes the message harder to keep without constant reiteration meaning we're being bludgeoned over the head, over and over again, with it to the point where even when they've stopped repeating certain talking points they keep being used as a stick to beat them with. Most of us have seen this narrative many times. Most of us have seen many similarities in many ways on multiple levels that cause us to think that there's a very strong chance that the Emperor is, in fact, naked. There is certainly a feeling of resentment among many, and a bitterness as many feel that doping in the name of clean competition is somehow more offensive than doping unapologetically. And, let's make no bones about it, quite simply many of the people involved are simply unlikable. Yes, many of them are reacting under duress and pressure and in the face of some pretty harsh treatment (another effect of social media, the fact that fans spitting out the narrative they're being asked to swallow has become a story in and of itself - the fanbase is much harder to control now, and the Britons are simply the ones unfortunate to be the ones having their turn at the top at the time that became the case) and so sometimes the reactions are understandable. But the likes of Peter Kennaugh, to pick one example, have shown themselves on a number of occasions to be pretty difficult guys to support, and he's far from the only one. It's not surprising that some fans would cheer not necessarily
for the dopers who are unapologetic or less subtle, but
against the ones they think are dopers who aren't likely to be called to account or who they see as getting away with things in plain sight or who they suspect (sometimes with some justification, sometimes on the flimsiest of evidence) are protected or being treated with overt favouritism
even if this entails cheering for unapologetic or less subtle dopers (I mean, look at the fervour with which we were told cycling was clean now after the 2011-12 Tours, and the success of the new clean template with Sky - so to see convicted unapologetic doper Aleksandr Vinokourov triumphing at the Olympics in the first big event of the Games, which had been so proudly earmarked as the golden beginning for the home team, and see the whole marketing shebang blow up in the face of the widely disliked Pat McQuaid, was greeted with much more positivity than it ought to have been). Which, sure, is just as hypocritical as the athletes seemingly claiming their victories as triumphs of clean competition despite doping, but this kind of Schadenfreude is something that we all have.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram