Armstrong Ban

2»

Comments

  • popsider wrote (see)
     Plus the way he treated Simeoni for talking about doping.   

    That's always grated with me TBH, it said more about him as a person than any of the denials.  I've never realy understood why he would behave like that when he knew the cameras were on him.

    Plus he overtook me once at the Boston Marathon, obviously due to performance-enhancing stimulants.  Deserves all he gets I say.

  • Cheerful Dave wrote (see)
    popsider wrote (see)
     Plus the way he treated Simeoni for talking about doping.   

    That's always grated with me TBH, it said more about him as a person than any of the denials.  I've never realy understood why he would behave like that when he knew the cameras were on him.

     

    Me too.  I thought that was completely appalling behaviour, and showed his true colours.

    Opinions will vary on whether he doped, but that behaviour proved he is a complete shit.

  • fat buddhafat buddha ✭✭✭

    I don't think LA is any more arrogant than many other top sportspeople with lots of money - think of the multi-millionaire shits who play wendyball and their utter arrogance.

    it's almost a given that you have to be a twat at the highest sporting excellence whether that's the way you treat other people, the way you conduct your life, the way you deny taking drugs etc etc etc

    of course, that's a sweeping generalisation - there are many humble ones as well - but you rarely hear of them.

  • i dont give a poo image

    tbh watching cycling, swimming or running on TV bores me after 30 minutes, triathlons can hold me for maybe an hour. I love the events that I enter and the events that people I know take place in but apart from that - no thanks - Am I alone in this point view or do most of you follow everything tri related?

  • I love watching cycling and have done for years, I feel that most fans understand that at some point the whole peleton were on the gear....even today i bet the line between legal or not is constantly being tested.

    The whole LA thing is sad purely from the Livestrong charity side...if he cheated to win TdeF then strip him, void that year and move on, don't bother giving to someone else now.

    But if this turn out to be BS and he is cleared again..then please can this be the end of it.

  • Doner Kebab wrote (see)

    i dont give a poo image

    tbh watching cycling, swimming or running on TV bores me after 30 minutes, triathlons can hold me for maybe an hour. I love the events that I enter and the events that people I know take place in but apart from that - no thanks - Am I alone in this point view or do most of you follow everything tri related?

    I don't watch sport either, of any kind. 

    Watching a bunch of strangers do sport doesn't do it for me, but I read, and Bad Blood (about the TdF) was very interesting.

  • I have always wondered if maybe he didn't dope but clearly was taking drugs during his cancer treatment - at least I assume he was. That treatment, clearly medically required, may have had some long term benefits. At the very least it may change his perception of pain threshold.

    This latest bout is pathetic, one sample that 'may' be suspect but even the lab won't stand behind the sample.

    Given the amount of attempts they have all had at pinning something on him and failed I think WTC should allow him to race. If it proves positive, which is unlikely, then strip him.

    WTC should admit there may be a case to answer and state that if guilty then he will be dishonourably discharged and kicked in the nuts. Until then race away.

    To be honest I suspect that many of the triathlon pros may take banned substances in the future (given flu remedy is on the banned list) and therefore shouldn't be allowed to race ever - ban all the pros!!

    M.eface

    Now for the silly bit.

    May favorite bit is the British Triathlon Federation ban anything that is performance enhancing which always makes me laugh. TT bikes are performance enhancing, as is a good diet, and even training. The Brownlees have even gone on record to say they have trained - it is clearly perfromance enhancing so ban them.

     

  • That's ok then. I haven't got a TT bike, my diet is crap and my training is even worse , I'm their model triafleet
  • I didn't realise that the USADA have only charged him and don't have the power to ban him from competing...so it looks like the IM france lot have taking that decision and excluded him from their race....does seem rather odd

  • m.eface wrote (see)
    May favorite bit is the British Triathlon Federation ban anything that is performance enhancing which always makes me laugh. TT bikes are performance enhancing, as is a good diet, and even training. The Brownlees have even gone on record to say they have trained - it is clearly perfromance enhancing so ban them.

    The triathlon magazines are chock full of adverts for gels, supplements, drinks etc all sold on the basis that they'll improve performance or aid recovery.  Which is exactly what the banned stuff is supposed to do.  The line has to be drawn somewhere, it just seems a bit arbitrary sometimes.  I mean, caffeine is OK (up to a point) but LSD isn't?

    Flat Foo.ted wrote (see)

    I didn't realise that the USADA have only charged him and don't have the power to ban him from competing...so it looks like the IM france lot have taking that decision and excluded him from their race....does seem rather odd

    It's the WTC that have banned him from all of their events rather than the IMFr organisers specifically.  Perhaps he'll come & race the Outlaw instead.

  • fat buddhafat buddha ✭✭✭

    DV - the charge against the doctors has been there from the start if you look at the document leaked by the NY Times.  essentially USADA are charging key figures in what was the old US Postal Team - that includes LA, Johann Bruyneel (team manager) and the quacks - which was party government funded.   that's the nub if USADA's charges

    FF - WTC have a clause in their pro contracts (which LA is racing IM events under) which bans any athlete "under investigation" from racing in their events - although there is a rider that states "and is subject to review" which could allow him back in.   UCI/ITU/USAT rules allow athletes to continue racing while under investigation - the ban only comes when they are proven guilty and can be retrospective (as per Contador etc) but of course LA isn't racing their events.

    there is a curious parellel with Marion Jones who was always suspected of doping but always tested clean - she only got banned on her own admission of doing so and through that she helped finger a large number of others involved in supplying and cover up.

    IF LA was to do the same, assuming of course he DID dope (let the jury decide), then it might help clear the sport clean up but at the same time he has so much to lose, let alone credibility.

  • fat buddhafat buddha ✭✭✭

    and if you haven't seen this you should do so 

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ia6dV_G5UxE&feature=player_embedded

    it's very very funny - Hitler replies to the LA ban

  • Excellent FB!! Very amusing!

  • Interesting interview with one of the blokes who began the EPO testing and his 'interpretation' of LA's test results.  It's long and rather uncomfortable reading for LA supporters, like me!

    http://nyvelocity.com/content/interviews/2009/michael-ashenden

  • E mmyE mmy ✭✭✭

    Prince Siegfried - that certainly is an interesting article... It's amazing how fluffy they were at the start of the testing procedures for EPA. I do wonder about the element of manipulation that's possible after a race with samples from the runners.

  • Now he's been charged 

  • What I think is wrong is that he's not allowed access to the documents because of fear of intimidation to those making the charge or assisting the defence.

    How can you prepare for that ?

  • And what's happened to the US Jeopardy Law, once you've been charged and found Not Guilty how can they file the same charges again for the same offenses.

  • popsiderpopsider ✭✭✭

    Presumably it's being conducted in accordance with normal US legal procedures - it's no use us bitching about it - as he's nailed on guilty why would you be worried about it being unfair anyway.   

  • RicFRicF ✭✭✭

    If Armstrong is found guilty after a fair trial its odds on he will be jailed along with the 90% of defendants who end up in court. One in every hundred people in the US is currently in jail.

  • Jeesus - people are really still unsure?  He beat everyone else who were doping for that long without doping himself?  That's like Usain Bolt having only one arm. Have a look at this to see how come it's all quiet and why so many people have so much to lose if Armtrong goes down.  You'll notice the two tw@ts from TV coverage on there.  Probably explains the comment just now that Contador is serving a ban for 'Clenbuterol' (no he's serving a ban for failing a drugs test but then we don't want to talk about that now do we?) and apparently 'it's believed that this was due to a food supplement' with the implication it's unjust and accidental and not part of any widerspread doping issue - at which AC is without a shadow of a doubt central.  Believed by who?  Certainly not those two berks who must have a lot more knowledge than the armchair fan.  Crikey they're so far up LA's @rse they could probably see Bruyneel's feet - who could probably see Pat Macquaid's!

    As you were.

  • RicFRicF ✭✭✭

    Contador is a cycling dinosaur. He simply didn't get the message that for drugs in cycling it was all over.

  • Couldn't Run A Bath wrote (see)

    Jeesus - people are really still unsure?  He beat everyone else who were doping for that long without doping himself?  That's like Usain Bolt having only one arm. Have a look at this to see how come it's all quiet and why so many people have so much to lose if Armtrong goes down.  You'll notice the two tw@ts from TV coverage on there.  Probably explains the comment just now that Contador is serving a ban for 'Clenbuterol' (no he's serving a ban for failing a drugs test but then we don't want to talk about that now do we?) and apparently 'it's believed that this was due to a food supplement' with the implication it's unjust and accidental and not part of any widerspread doping issue - at which AC is without a shadow of a doubt central.  Believed by who?  Certainly not those two berks who must have a lot more knowl

    that pdf does enhance the experience of listening to the itv commentators reading out the marketing collateral for whatever region the tour is passing through

2»
Sign In or Register to comment.