The Official Lance-Oprah Excuse Contest

[Tinman]

The media smelling a rat, and the influence of The Clinic... Also made the online Sydney Morning Herald.

http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/i-wont-be-watching-oprahs-lance-armstrong-interview/

 

[D-Queued]

The media smelling a rat, and the influence of The Clinic... Also made the online Sydney Morning Herald.

http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/i-wont-be-watching-oprahs-lance-armstrong-interview/

Maybe, for the folks down under, Lance can manage some sort of half apology for the $1m appearance fee.

Dave.

 

[Cookster15]

"Everyone was doing it" "Level playing field"

This is the biggest problem I have with Lance defenders and it is often said by people who know little about Cycling. Even if every rider doped to assume they all doped at the same level is ludicrous. Unless you think every rider and team of Lance's era conducted the most sophisticated doping in sporting history.

 

[blackcat]

Maybe, for the folks down under, Lance can manage some sort of half apology for the $1m appearance fee.

Dave.

he ended up with much more than $1 mill for both the years. Dont know how much the gas bill was for the jet, and the rest. lots of double counting cost plus accounting goin on.

$SA taxoers a minimum of 3 mill Aussie down on my estimate

 

[DirtyWorks]

This is the biggest problem I have with Lance defenders and it is often said by people who know little about Cycling. Even if every rider doped to assume they all doped at the same level is ludicrous. Unless you think every rider and team of Lance's era conducted the most sophisticated doping in sporting history.

Well, it might not have actually been that sophisticated. I'm not saying it wasn't. I'm saying it doesn't look like it. I might be wrong.

We do know, with great certainty, the UCI was complicit in creating the myth. So, ordinary doping, just suppressed positives, by the UCI goes a long way to explaining the "Blue Train" and 7x winner myth.

 

[Cookster15]

Well, it might not have actually been that sophisticated. I'm not saying it wasn't. I'm saying it doesn't look like it. I might be wrong.

We do know, with great certainty, the UCI was complicit in creating the myth. So, ordinary doping, just suppressed positives, by the UCI goes a long way to explaining the "Blue Train" and 7x winner myth.

Fair enough. And not just suppressed positives but also managing to avoid the testers in the first place. But this continued avoidance just points the finger back at the UCI. If someone managed to avoid the testers with such regularity it should have raised suspicions long before 7 Tour wins.

 

[SundayRider]

This is the biggest problem I have with Lance defenders and it is often said by people who know little about Cycling. Even if every rider doped to assume they all doped at the same level is ludicrous. Unless you think every rider and team of Lance's era conducted the most sophisticated doping in sporting history.

What a ridiculous post, you quoted something I had posted when that was in fact a quote of another poster. You totally missed out what I actually posted.

 

[Cookster15]

What a ridiculous post, you quoted something I had posted when that was in fact a quote of another poster. You totally missed out what I actually posted.

It was not aimed at you. I was just making the point that probably the most common justification uninformed people make of Lance is that "everyone doped so it's okay and he's still a hero". The quote by another poster in your post enabled me to make that point and apologies for any offense caused.

 

[webvan]

Ten questions Oprah will (unfortunately) not ask : 10 questions Walsh would ask Lance Armstrong

1. Did you tell doctors at the Indiana University Hospital on October 27, 1996 that you had taken EPO, human growth hormone, cortisone, steroids and testosterone?

2. After returning from cancer, how did you justify putting banned drugs in your body?

3. Did you have any sympathy for those rivals determined to race clean?

4. Do you regret how you treated Betsy Andreu, your former masseuse Emma O'Reilly and Greg LeMond?

5. Do you admit that your friend Dr Michele Ferrari fully supported your team's doping?

6. Is it your intention to return the prize money you earned from September 1998 to July 2010?

7. Did you sue The Sunday Times to shut us up?

8. Was your failure to understand Floyd Landis the key to your downfall?

9. Do you accept lying to the cancer community was the greatest deception of all?

10. Why have you chosen Oprah Winfrey for your first interview as a banned athlete?

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

you are welcome for the link.

But totally disagree with Fotheringham being anything but Omerta. He is not fit to polish the shoes of others who took every opportunity to deal with the doping in the sport.

The Guradian are an absolute joke on the doping in cycling. They left the Armstrong issue alone for years. Would not go near it, with 1 or 2 exceptions.

They have recently jumped on the bandwago once it was safe to do so.

Just have to look at omerta mag 'Rouleur' that he is invloved in that will absolutely not address doping in its publication. Never. Let's pretend it does not exist.

Anyone who wants any idea of Fotheringham the omertist needs to read his truly awful 'Cyclopedia' - the historical stuff is interesting, but anything about the post-1999 period is one long fawn over every english speaking rider there is.

The only good news at the moment is that the Guardian is cutting jobs left and right and centre. Richard Williams, a man whose knowledge of cycling was limited to 'Lance, Lance, Lance, Sky, Sky, Sky' was finally sacked over xmas.

With any luck Fotheringham will be next, leaving him plenty of time to write **** books about British cycling, hopefully a few more of the smug ****s will also lose their jobs as well.

 

[DirtyWorks]

What a ridiculous post.....

Is this an appropriate response for such an unoriginal idea?

The UCI and USAC definitely had a part in making the myth.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

When lance cries about being forced to dope Oprah will understand. She was forced to eat 2 dozen Krispy Kreme for breakfast

LOL! I doubt Oprah bothers to ask many significant questions.

 

[blackcat]

yo-yo diets r not just for yo-yos. Oprah is a walking talking endorsement for yo-yo diets.

 

[Vanilla Thrilla]

To paraphrase Joe Biden, Pharmstrong's response to every question is:

a noun, a verb, and "fighting cancer"

 

[Turner29]

Somewhere, he will blame the French.

 

[D-Queued]

Somewhere, he will blame the French.

I've been waiting for that one!

Dave.

 

[rickshaw]

Because Cancer started in FRANCE

Somewhere, he will blame the French.

"The answer to your question, Oprah, is "Yes". I did do things I knew were wrong to win bike races. The TRUTH, Opera has a lot more to it than just that one word.

To win my first Toor da France I knew I had to do something, and I'm not proud of it, to get back where I was, you know, before the cancer which I battled and beat, with the help of God, and the support of my MOM. Just to stay even with all those guys in the European pel-a-ton, who were taking tons of stuff, and me being barely able to finish a race. I was weak from the cancer, I was desperate, but I had faith that if I, well, did something I knew was wrong, I could keep up with the Europeans, and if I trained like an American, harder, and longer than any of those French or Italian guys I might just win, with God's help. .... and when I won that first Toor, I just couldn't believe the outpouring from the Cancer community, from MY community, and how ME winning a bike race gave so much hope to so many people. I mean, it was just, you know, a bike race, and people were telling me how it gave them so much hope that they could beat the cancer, and look forward to a life without pain, people with kids of their own, and Moms, and sisters and Veterans who risked their lives to keep America Free, people who owned puppies and baby bunnies. I'm hot proud of it, fer sure and if I could do it all over again, I'd do it with just the hard work. At least I'd try. I compromised, and went against my my own beliefs, the moral values I learned from my MOM, at home. I forgot what it means to be an American who believes in fair play. But it wasn't just for myself. I saw how much good could be done by me being there on the top step of the podium, showing cancer victims there was hope, that just something like a silly yellow bracelet could help them to lick cancer. They needed that hope, and I needed to give it to them.

Sometimes being a winner makes other people jealous, because they won't put in the long hours, training, watching their diet, year in year out. And they hate you for winning. They hate you for being a winner, when they are loosers. Did any of those other guys give hope to cancer victims? As if! So why did they only go after me? There's a million guys they coulda picked. What did I do that was so terrible, that some bureaucrats would want to take hope away from millions of cancer victims, for the headlines? To make names for themselves? They just wanted to bring down the biggest name in cycling, ever. Does that seem right? Does that seem fair?. Because I really DID win those races. I'm the guy who did the hard work, who trained like crazy and put my body on the line. And I'm the rider who came in first. Everybody knows I won those races and no committee of bureaucrats can take that away from me. You know I'm a great admirer of yours, Oprah and I want to thank you for giving me the chance to get the truth out there, for my kids' sake, for my people, the cancer victims who still could use a little hope.

Good Night Mrs. Calabash, wherever you are...."

 

[BroDeal]

Armstrong has been motivated his entire life by two things, money and public adulation. The reason he went in to cycling was money. He never had any respect for cycling's traditions. He never cared about the sport, ever. He never really liked the sport. It was always about money. Unless he has made disasterous financial decisions over the last decade then he does not have to worry about that motivation again, even with the potential lawsuits hanging over his head.

It is about having his ego stroked. He cannot stand that his pedestal has crumbled underneath him, he is no longer idolized, and people are referring to him as the Bernie Madoff of sports. He wants the respect back. That will shape his "confession." It will concentrate on casting him in the best possible light with a good layering of excuses for his behavior.

Any confession will be light on details and heavy on rhetoric about doing what everyone else was doing. Do not expect him to apologize to all the people he bullied and hurt because that won't be part of the narrative. He wants to be the guy who had to go along to get along, not the guy who spread lies that a female employee was a prostitute or the guy who hounded people out of jobs because they refused to commit perjury to protect him. Don't expect him to talk about bribing the UCI or having positive tests fixed or being protected by his buddies at USA Cycling because, again, doing much much more than other riders is not the story he wants to tell the rubes.

Expect to hear a whole lot about cancer and how he needs to get back to helping people. Expect some shameless exploitation of his children as a reason for why he decided to come forward. Also expect complaints about being singled out and treated differently than his teammates who got six months.

The interesting thing will be whether the journalists who write articles after his appearance will buy what he is selling.

 

[velascoabuela]

"The answer to your question, Oprah, is "Yes". I did do things I knew were wrong to win bike races. The TRUTH, Opera has a lot more to it than just that one word.

To win my first Toor da France I knew I had to do something, and I'm not proud of it, to get back where I was, you know, before the cancer which I battled and beat, with the help of God, and the support of my MOM. Just to stay even with all those guys in the European pel-a-ton, who were taking tons of stuff, and me being barely able to finish a race. I was weak from the cancer, I was desperate, but I had faith that if I, well, did something I knew was wrong, I could keep up with the Europeans, and if I trained like an American, harder, and longer than any of those French or Italian guys I might just win, with God's help. .... and when I won that first Toor, I just couldn't believe the outpouring from the Cancer community, from MY community, and how ME winning a bike race gave so much hope to so many people. I mean, it was just, you know, a bike race, and people were telling me how it gave them so much hope that they could beat the cancer, and look forward to a life without pain, people with kids of their own, and Moms, and sisters and Veterans who risked their lives to keep America Free, people who owned puppies and baby bunnies. I'm hot proud of it, fer sure and if I could do it all over again, I'd do it with just the hard work. At least I'd try. I compromised, and went against my my own beliefs, the moral values I learned from my MOM, at home. I forgot what it means to be an American who believes in fair play. But it wasn't just for myself. I saw how much good could be done by me being there on the top step of the podium, showing cancer victims there was hope, that just something like a silly yellow bracelet could help them to lick cancer. They needed that hope, and I needed to give it to them.

Sometimes being a winner makes other people jealous, because they won't put in the long hours, training, watching their diet, year in year out. And they hate you for winning. They hate you for being a winner, when they are loosers. Did any of those other guys give hope to cancer victims? As if! So why did they only go after me? There's a million guys they coulda picked. What did I do that was so terrible, that some bureaucrats would want to take hope away from millions of cancer victims, for the headlines? To make names for themselves? They just wanted to bring down the biggest name in cycling, ever. Does that seem right? Does that seem fair?. Because I really DID win those races. I'm the guy who did the hard work, who trained like crazy and put my body on the line. And I'm the rider who came in first. Everybody knows I won those races and no committee of bureaucrats can take that away from me. You know I'm a great admirer of yours, Oprah and I want to thank you for giving me the chance to get the truth out there, for my kids' sake, for my people, the cancer victims who still could use a little hope.

Good Night Mrs. Calabash, wherever you are...."

Long time lurker, first time poster. Not sure if buried somewhere in this thread is a link to http://www.oprah.com There are interesting commentaries related to the Armstrong, "Now I must Fall On MY Plastic Sword" spectacle.

 

[thehog]

Any bets on home much fake tan?

 

[86TDFWinner]

Long time lurker, first time poster. Not sure if buried somewhere in this thread is a link to http://www.oprah.com There are interesting commentaries related to the Armstrong, "Now I must Fall On MY Plastic Sword" spectacle.

Welcome to CN! Whoever the "mod" is for that board, is a f8&^%4 tool, and most likely a fanboy. My face was hurting from laughing so hard at some of those responses, the guy from Canada(page one of comments) was hysterical. Thanks for posting the link.

What would make that "interview" awesome is if LeMond just walked in unannounced and said "Hey Lance, I have some questions for you too".

Or, Have Travis walk in and start grilling him.....

Neither will happen mind you, but it'd sure be fun seeing Wonderboy squirm in his seat trying to explain stuff to either.

 

[ebandit]

whatever

i may be wrong but my take on things is that it is already too late for
lance

any excuse / reasoning he comes up will not be enough to quell the truth
spread across the net

if the 'interview' goes well and 'looks good' observers will be quick to find the
dirty truth within lance and oprah's cosy chat

i did it for cancer sufferers will be known as a lie when lance only did it for the $

may this be lance's first and only foray into mass media..................although
a book is sure to follow

 

[Granville57]

Armstrong has been motivated his entire life by two things, money and public adulation. The reason he went in to cycling was money. He never had any respect for cycling's traditions. He never cared about the sport, ever. He never really liked the sport. It was always about money. Unless he has made disasterous financial decisions over the last decade then he does not have to worry about that motivation again, even with the potential lawsuits hanging over his head.

It is about having his ego stroked. He cannot stand that his pedestal has crumbled underneath him, he is no longer idolized, and people are referring to him as the Bernie Madoff of sports. He wants the respect back. That will shape his "confession." It will be concentrate on casting him in the best possible light with a good layerering of excuses for his behavior.

Any confession will be light on details and heavy on rhetoric about doing what everyone else was doing. Do not expect him to apologize to all the people he bullied and hurt because that won't be part of the narrative. He wants to be the guy who had to go along to get along, not the guy who spread lies that a female employee was a prostitute or the guy who hounded people out of jobs because they refused to commit perjury to protect him. Don't expect him to talk about bribing the UCI or having positive tests fixed or being protected by his buddies at USA Cycling because, again, doing much much more than other riders is not the story he wants to tell the rubes.

Expect to hear a whole lot about cancer and how he needs to get back to helping people. Expect some shameless exploitation of his children as a reason for why he decided to come forward. Also expect complaints about being singled out and treated differently than his teammates who got six months.

The interesting thing will be whether the journalists who write articles after his appearance will buy what he is selling.

Jesus christ. BroDeal nails it with a huge hammer yet again. Quoting this post was, in and of itself, worth the ridiculous hoop-jumping necessary to log into this god-forsaken place again.

 

[D-Queued]

Excellent article by Mike Lupica, that points out the absolute obvious. Particularly striking given that even the Clinic hasn't highlighted some of this:

Lance Armstrong's worldwide web of lies

1. Two big lies in one: Lance leaks a confession, Herman denies it, Oprah schedules it.

...Armstrong leaks it that he’s thinking of confessing. Then one of his lawyers says no, no, no, that’s not true. And it is just more drama that has helped fuel Armstrong, along with his own competitiveness and all the drugs he was taking to stay ahead of the field, even as he told us for a decade and a half that he was the only clean guy in the race.

...

2. Building a house on foundations of sand - OR, I had to do it

...And then he will tell us that he had to maintain the lie, his own version of the worldwide lie — I’m clean, they’re dirty — to prop up Livestrong, his foundation that raises money for cancer survivors. He needed the yellow jerseys from the Tour de France to sell all those Livestrong yellow bracelets. At the heart of this “confession” from Lance Armstrong will be that he had to do a lot of bad things for the greater good, all the while getting richer and more famous himself and shamefully attacking anyone who dared suggest that he was anything less than an icon and living saint.

...

3. Vindicated

...A company called SCA Promotions ended up paying Armstrong more than $7.5 million as a settlement covering the bonus and interest, and after it this is what Armstrong said:

“It’s over. We won. They lost. I was yet again completely vindicated.”

...

Vindicated? Where have we heard that before? Perhaps Mike wasn't aware of this wonderful lie based upon the lie of the Vrijman report:

"...what I have been saying since this witch hunt began: **** Pound, WADA, the French laboratory, the French Ministry of Sport, L'Equipe and the Tour de France organizers ... have been out to discredit and target me without any basis and falsely accused me of taking performance-enhancing drugs in 1999....

Vrijman said Wednesday his report "exonerates Lance Armstrong completely with respect to alleged use of doping in the 1999 Tour de France."

The official statement:

Mr. Armstrong has now been vindicated on three different occasions in three different countries by independent, impartial judges, arbitrators and investigators


4. It's all about me - the Ponzi scheme

Armstrong went after Frankie Andreu and his wife and a masseuse named Emma O’Reilly with everything he had, and if their character and reputation had to be savaged in the name of his own greater good, that was just the cost of doing business. And Armstrong did everything possible to destroy the reputation of a former Tour de France champion from this country named Greg LeMond. He went after LeMond and his wife Kathy and reporters and other cyclists and he sued newspapers for libel and won.

People now want this to be some kind of referendum on what you think about drugs in sports, as if somehow that is the real issue here. No it is not, that is just more cheap enabling for Lance Armstrong. The issue is the lying.

The other cyclists didn’t force him to lie, the media sure didn’t force him to lie, the anti-doping agencies didn’t force him to lie. Armstrong, Big Tex, did that all by himself, with this amazing, elaborate athletic Ponzi scheme.

...


My prediction: Following the Oprah show, Lance and/or Herman will announce that he has been vindicated.

Again.

Dave.

 

[blackcat]

My prediction: Following the Oprah show, Lance and/or Herman will announce that he has been vindicated.

Again.

Dave.

tis a nice drop