The Article: WSJ - reopened!

[carl spackler]

If they responded by saying that it was bull$hit they could make a public statement to that effect without fear of reprisal.

ok this makes sense to me, i get it. If they werent cooperating they would say something like “But I have no clue what went on. I wasn’t a part of it.” - Ochowitz

Or some other Pharmstrong line like "the past is the past"

thanks

 

[Anonymous]

right.. back to bed..

what i will say, to the two riders (or more) whoever they are, better late than never. I think you have the support of at least 50% of cycling fans, and the other 50% dont matter, they will all be gone once lance retires anyway.

 

[Anonymous]

I thought we had an agreement regarding flaming.

My point was not to flame. It was to point out that once again, you are providing commentary, not addressing the topic...like me

 

[Beech Mtn]

Velonation has picked up the story.

 

[Beech Mtn]

It makes sense that the two who cooperated and are in this year's Tour could be DZ and Hincapie. Both of them could easily argue that they left Bruyneel's teams to get away from the doping and are riding clean(er) now.

 

[richwagmn]

Please let him just leave. I'd like to be able to watch the Tour in HD on Versus in my living room, but with LA in the race, I'll be more likely to get annoyed with Phil-n-Paul and end up watching some Flemish livestream on the computer instead.

Same. I'm not sure I can stomach the coverage this year after watching the early season races with Phil and Paul. If I hear "A certain Mr. Lance Armstrong..." one more time, I may throw something through the TV.

 

[Anonymous]

It makes sense that the two who cooperated and are in this year's Tour could be DZ and Hincapie. Both of them could easily argue that they left Bruyneel's teams to get away from the doping and are riding clean(er) now.

I think george was too close to lance and owes too much to him to be one of the two, and his presence at BMC who are in the "deny everything camp" just makes me doubtful..

George is pretty well respected and loved amongst a lot of fans as a domestique, would admitting it hurt or enhance his reputation, would standing up against lance enhance his reputation or damage it in the view of american fans. How would they feel about him bringing down their idol. Seems to me George is one of the riders with more to lose. Then again, he left a few years ago now, and Columbia are reputed to be pretty clean. I dont know.. :/

 

[Anonymous]

Same. I'm not sure I can stomach the coverage this year after watching the early season races with Phil and Paul. If I hear "A certain Mr. Lance Armstrong..." one more time, I may throw something through the TV.

Oh they will be worse now its his last. Constant fawning and reference to a glorious career, blah blah blah.

 

[Oldman]

Same. I'm not sure I can stomach the coverage this year after watching the early season races with Phil and Paul. If I hear "A certain Mr. Lance Armstrong..." one more time, I may throw something through the TV.

If this picks up any momentum you may not have to listen for long. Although their fawning broadcasts make an excellent opportunity to create a Tour drinking game. Pick an obscure phrase or you won't last to the first commercial break.

 

[Anonymous]

If this picks up any momentum you may not have to listen for long. Although their fawning broadcasts make an excellent opportunity to create a Tour drinking game. Pick an obscure phrase or you won't last to the first commercial break.

Sod it.. get drunk.. "legend"

i can exlusively reveal that the two people talking to the feds are in fact (fanfare) Paul Sherwen and Phil Liggett. The Feds will announce over the next couple of days all investigation against Lance has been cancelled as they cannot take listening to those two any longer.

Actually that could be a good tactic by armstrong.. Send tweedledum and tweedledee to bore the *** out of novitsky

 

[Berzin]

Goerge Hincapie has a life after cycling. True, he enriched himself over what was a gigantic fraud (the doping at US Postal while he rode as a domestique) but he has a clothing company and is still a well-respected by the cycling community.

He has more to lose by lying to the Feds than other riders, but it amounts to the same thing.

As for this article being a fluff piece, I don't think so. The reason being is that there is verification that two current riders have verified the claims made by Landis.

Here is the important key-anyone questioning Landis' credibility (a smokescreen tactic by the fanboys to kill the messenger at all costs, utilized by none other than Fat Pat McQuaid himself) will have to come up with something else, because it is obvious that there are others who came clean.

If these two current riders had said something to contrary, they wouldn't have been afraid to be named in the article.

 

[Beech Mtn]

Sod it.. get drunk.. "legend"

i can exlusively reveal that the two people talking to the feds are in fact (fanfare) Paul Sherwen and Phil Liggett. The Feds will announce over the next couple of days all investigation against Lance has been cancelled as they cannot take listening to those two any longer.

Actually that could be a good tactic by armstrong.. Send tweedledum and tweedledee to bore the *** out of novitsky

Novitzky is sure to think "suitcase of courage" is code for "briefcase full of drugs." Hey, maybe it is - maybe that's what Paul means when he says some rider is digging deep into his suitcase of courage = he hit up the doctor that morning for some extra dope.

 

[Beech Mtn]

Now that two riders have apparently corroborated Floyd's story, does this mean USADA can take some kind of action against Lance? Would that be enough to suspend him before the Tour (similar to Kayle Leogrande)?

 

[goober]

Now that two riders have apparently corroborated Floyd's story, does this mean USADA can take some kind of action against Lance? Would that be enough to suspend him before the Tour (similar to Kayle Leogrande)?

How do you guys come to these conclusions lol.

 

[Colm.Murphy]

Now that two riders have apparently corroborated Floyd's story, does this mean USADA can take some kind of action against Lance? Would that be enough to suspend him before the Tour (similar to Kayle Leogrande)?

Why must you ask such provocative questions? <sarcasm on>

 

[Nearly]

Now that two riders have apparently corroborated Floyd's story, does this mean USADA can take some kind of action against Lance? Would that be enough to suspend him before the Tour (similar to Kayle Leogrande)?

What evidence? Not sure that 2 or 3 or a hundred people saying 'he doped' is enough. Also don't think USADA can "suspend" until there has been a process and a breach of the rules found. Whether RS or the ASO would suspend on the basis of commencement of any USADA action is debateable (did not seem to stop Valverde for example). Armstrong will start.

 

[SpartacusRox]

Now that two riders have apparently corroborated Floyd's story, does this mean USADA can take some kind of action against Lance? Would that be enough to suspend him before the Tour (similar to Kayle Leogrande)?

Apparently now there is a loaded word. On this forum it generally means: "I really have no idea but I think I heard someone mention it somewhere"

Eaxamples of 'apparently' include:

Apparently LA is going to be called home by the Feds this week, or was it last week or the week before (apparently not as it turned out)
Apparently LA will not ride the TdS (but apparently he did)
Apparently LA will look for an excuse not to ride the Tour (one of Colm's favourite 'apparently's') but apparently he is.

It is apparent that apparently is used with a great degree of freedom around here.

 

[Publicus]

Now that two riders have apparently corroborated Floyd's story, does this mean USADA can take some kind of action against Lance? Would that be enough to suspend him before the Tour (similar to Kayle Leogrande)?

I think if this was a basic doping case, then I suspect they may have enough. This isn't that type of case anymore. My guess is the Feds are looking to make a big case. That's going to take time and patience. So no need to pull in Armstrong if you don't get those around him or the distributors of the drugs (i.e., who is Armstrong getting them from, etc.).

Of course, this is just pure conjecture on my part based on what's in the article.

And for those questioning Beech Mtn's supposition, here's the language from the article ((i've underlined the relevant part):

At least two of the people Landis implicated said they had met with investigators to tell of their past involvement with doping.

 

[goober]

I think if this was a basic doping case, then I suspect they may have enough. This isn't that type of case anymore. My guess is the Feds are looking to make a big case. That's going to take time and patience. So no need to pull in Armstrong if you don't get those around him or the distributors of the drugs (i.e., who is Armstrong getting them from, etc.).

Of course, this is just pure conjecture on my part based on what's in the article.

And for those questioning Beech Mtn's supposition, here's the language from the article ((i've underlined the relevant part):

Another victim of apparent media hype. Let me "tell you of my past involvement in doping" - answer: I have not been involved. Apparently I still question the supposition.

 

[Barrus]

Velonation has picked up the story.

Jeez, that reads like a quick and dirty copy and paste, really they could just as well just post a link and nothing else

 

[Wheels Go Round and Round]

Apparently now there is a loaded word. On this forum it generally means: "I really have no idea but I think I heard someone mention it somewhere"

Eaxamples of 'apparently' include:

Apparently LA is going to be called home by the Feds this week, or was it last week or the week before (apparently not as it turned out)
Apparently LA will not ride the TdS (but apparently he did)
Apparently LA will look for an excuse not to ride the Tour (one of Colm's favourite 'apparently's') but apparently he is.

It is apparent that apparently is used with a great degree of freedom around here.

roflmao.................

same 5 guys sitting in a circle working that nasty cookie again.......
you would think it would get old?

 

[goober]

roflmao.................

same 5 guys sitting in a circle working that nasty cookie again.......
you would think it would get old?

Apparently not.

 

[lean mean &green]

Apparently now there is a loaded word. On this forum it generally means: "I really have no idea but I think I heard someone mention it somewhere"

Eaxamples of 'apparently' include:

Apparently LA is going to be called home by the Feds this week, or was it last week or the week before (apparently not as it turned out)
Apparently LA will not ride the TdS (but apparently he did)
Apparently LA will look for an excuse not to ride the Tour (one of Colm's favourite 'apparently's') but apparently he is.

It is apparent that apparently is used with a great degree of freedom around here.

if you have an opinion of the article(s) I'd love to hear it.

if you want to attack people for asking reasonable questions, keep it to yourself.

 

[goober]

if you have an opinion of the article(s) I'd love to hear it.

if you want to attack people for asking reasonable questions, keep it to yourself.

I think his "attack" (pretty strong word) is on people making statements not asking questions.

 

[Anonymous]

Wait, so it is the opinion of the Armstrong apologists that 2 people named by Landis have spoken to the Feds honestly regarding the questions asked by investigators, and do not want their names released for fear of reprisal during the Tour, and that means they could have just said they didn't dope? Okay, blind denial seems to once again rule the day in your lollipop world of candy and cream soda. Ask yourself this: what would they have to hide if they had said they knew nothing?