You Speculate - Lemond - 1998 Tour Stage 17

[Zam_Olyas]

Yes normal Cheshire/Merseyside boundary, not not normal.

If you want a not normal accent, check out the brilliant Robert Millar after he had lived in
France for a few years. Fantastic Glaswegian/Francophile mix.

Steve Mclaren speaking in dutch accent was ridiculous.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ZnoP4sUV90

 

[Caruut]

Yesh. It ish Arshenal.

 

[thehog]

Steve Mclaren speaking in dutch accent was ridiculous.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ZnoP4sUV90

There's good reason for doing it. Joey Barton would do the same when speaking to the French.

He locals actually understand it better. You don't get misquoted.

 

[babastooey]

I did love Julich's comments. Suggesting that this would never occur in America as there would be law suits.

Funny.

I was actually motivated to post this topic after hearing Julich's interview. I thought his comments were funny too, but only in light of his later revelations about 1998.

So here is the thing. A lot of guys in that Tour were probably paniagua (bread and water meaning no doping). Tyler said that in 1998 he was essentially forced to ride the Tour paniagua because USPS didn't have a Plan B. In a panic they had flushed everything down the RV toilet. He didn't write anything about the protest on stage 17.

I think there were a lot of guys in that Tour in his position. Yes, the police were really pulling some strong arm tactics, and it isn't hard to find that distasteful, but lets face it, by striking the riders pushed back, and it allowed the doping to continue for almost another 10 years, whereas it could have pretty much ended right there.

The strike appears to have been led by Jalabert and perhaps Leblanc, and Pantani and Ullrich were right on board. Riis I think was the one who was trying to get everyone to stay in the race, because I think the whole lot of the big name agitators were considering getting into the cars and going home, which is what Jalabert did.

The paniagua guys sat on the road because it is probably what they were told to do. From reading Tyler's book, I have to blame two things, mostly....management pressure and peer pressure.

Imagine, if you will, if a peloton boss would have sided with clean sport, and would have provided cover for a lot of the guys who were pawns in the whole thing. Imagine, if you will, someone like Greg Lemond.

I'm saying that if one person, the right person, had been there in 1998, it wouldn't have taken 10 years to clean up the sport. I think it was a turning point for the worse.

So, I decided to post the topic and see what you guys had to say about it. It has been interesting reading (at least from the people who actually care about using a message board as a place for real discussion -- although the comments about accents are alright -- at least they stemmed from watching the video -- but its not my area of expertise).

 

[thehog]

I was actually motivated to post this topic after hearing Julich's interview. I thought his comments were funny too, but only in light of his later revelations about 1998.

So here is the thing. A lot of guys in that Tour were probably paniagua (bread and water meaning no doping). Tyler said that in 1998 he was essentially forced to ride the Tour paniagua because USPS didn't have a Plan B. In a panic they had flushed everything down the RV toilet. He didn't write anything about the protest on stage 17.

I think there were a lot of guys in that Tour in his position. Yes, the police were really pulling some strong arm tactics, and it isn't hard to find that distasteful, but lets face it, by striking the riders pushed back, and it allowed the doping to continue for almost another 10 years, whereas it could have pretty much ended right there.

The strike appears to have been led by Jalabert and perhaps Leblanc, and Pantani and Ullrich were right on board. Riis I think was the one who was trying to get everyone to stay in the race, because I think the whole lot of the big name agitators were considering getting into the cars and going home, which is what Jalabert did.

The paniagua guys sat on the road because it is probably what they were told to do. From reading Tyler's book, I have to blame two things, mostly....management pressure and peer pressure.

Imagine, if you will, if a peloton boss would have sided with clean sport, and would have provided cover for a lot of the guys who were pawns in the whole thing. Imagine, if you will, someone like Greg Lemond.

I'm saying that if one person, the right person, had been there in 1998, it wouldn't have taken 10 years to clean up the sport. I think it was a turning point for the worse.

So, I decided to post the topic and see what you guys had to say about it. It has been interesting reading (at least from the people who actually care about using a message board as a place for real discussion -- although the comments about accents are alright -- at least they stemmed from watching the video -- but its not my area of expertise).

It's more like the French police were going in to he ghettos and arresting all the users and leaving the dealers on the streets.

The riders were more protesting that the UCI & ASO knew full well about the doping and they wanted some protection.

They wanted LeBlanc to contact the head of police and promise no more raids.

LeBlanc didn't have that much pull in the police and that's why some went home.

Lucky Lance was part of the Tour of redemption the following year

 

[Race Radio]

It's more like the French police were going in to he ghettos and arresting all the users and leaving the dealers on the streets.

The riders were more protesting that the UCI & ASO knew full well about the doping and they wanted some protection.

They wanted LeBlanc to contact the head of police and promise no more raids.

LeBlanc didn't have that much pull in the police and that's why some went home.

Lucky Lance was part of the Tour of redemption the following year

Yup. The protest was more about the treatment then the doping.

Even Greg thought the treatment was wrong. He said so at the time.

 

[JPM London]

I'm not sure the question makes too much sense really...

When Lemond pulled out of the Tour in 94 with the words "this is not what I signed up for" I do appreciate he wasn't fully aware of what went on, but he was aware enough that it was down to more than his own form. Lemond pulled out because he was not able to race for the win. Even a Lemond in the best of form wouldn't have been able to compete for much other than lanterne rouge in 98.

So I think the answer is that he would not be in the race to begin with or already have pulled out by then and so would still not have been faced with the dilemma...

 

[thehog]

Yup. The protest was more about the treatment then the doping.

Even Greg thought the treatment was wrong. He said so at the time.

I think I saw the subtitle "witch hunt" at one point.

Good word