Paul Kimmage rattles Laid back Lance!!

camerone

Blazing Saddles wrote:

camerone wrote:

just watched the video. have say LA didnt look in the least bit rattled, quite the contrary. i think PK asked a completely irrelevant question which was dismissed with the contempt it deserved. if there was anyone looking like a pr1ck it was kimmage.

As long as individuals who follow the sport, make observations such as this, then attack those who have the guts to put awkward questions to an intimidating person, in a hostile environment, we will continue to get the sport we deserve.
One full of hypocrisy, duplicity and dope fuelled cheating.

camerone wrote:

i think you'll find thats Ex-pals/peers

Then watch the video again and listen to his comments on Millar.

Observer article same date as press conf. also sohf?

off the back

What can I say .... I dont have much time for either of them. The sport has moved on positively I think and I would rather see both of them Kimmage and Lance go away!! The sport is about bike racing and there are +100 guys out there willing to have a go but these two guys have a shed load of axes to grind ... in public

Everybody has their opinion of whether Lance was clean or not and nothing he does now will change anything - esp. after the Catlin fiasco. Kimmage is by all accounts a digruntled bitter guy but he was in a happier place after the tour last year post Vandervelde tour ride. Kimmages cancer remarks were not clever either and prob written at the heat of the moment. I would not be suprised that he even regrets using that anaolgy now if so he should be man enough to admit he over did it. Lance may well have been offended but more than anything it gives him ammo he needs to claim he is been victimised and will turn all the Vanity Fair readers against Kimmage (and anyone in the anti-Lance camp).

carbonfiend

just because a question is awkward and an enviroment is hostile doesn't mean it has merit or substance PK could have asked LA how often he masturbates and that would rank as awkward but has it any value? Lemond asked questions about Power outputs as compared to blood values regards testing procedures to find those who cheat a far more reaching and provoking question - why didn't PK as him about the cancellation of the Catlin testing program. LA also makes a comment about forgiving and forgeting and people making mistakes - said it before but Kimmage admitted to doping yet this is never brought up or thrown in his face and as the rules go and the letter of the UCI/WADA law etc so far PK guilty LA innocent.

NJK

adeyboy wrote:

sylvanus wrote:

Paul Kimmage is a very bitter and twisted man and to make the statement he did about LA is quite possibly one the worst cases of journalism I have ever read

Then I have to say I admire him hugely for his "bitter and twisted" nature. Being willing to look the fool publicly and be shunned by many like you, takes huge courage, There are two few people like Kimmage in the world - I wish we had more. Modern society seems to be collapsing into an infantile and superficial mask of "positivity". There is now no greater sin than being "judgemental". I'm old fashioned in that way, like Kimmage, I believe in honesty and sincerity - strange outmoded concepts like right, wrong and sporting fair-play. In my view Armstrong has neither honesty nor sincerity and in fact it is really he who is "bitter and twisted".

My father has cancer and may soon die from it. May I speak for the cancer-community worldwide in saying that I'm happy to see Lance Armstrong compared to cancer! I think its a brilliant analogy and a sign of Kimmage's erudition that he is able to turn the LA myth against the man himself!

No you may not speak for the cancer community worldwide. you can speak for yourself and not place me under your umbrella of paranoia re the Armstrong 'myth'

Very best wishes for your Father.

Neither can Armstrong and what is this myth you talk about? I hope you not going to mention that he is clean.



It is just a shame for cycling that he chose to comeback. The TOC would be a good race but you Armstrong, Levi, Flandis and Basso. Some serial dopers in there.

Martin Van Nostrand

dennisn wrote:

All good questions.

Dennis Noward

Sure ask a question, then declare it a good question. This is why people hate Americans, they always think they have the moral authority. Keep in mind Dennis, it is Mr. Armstrong who seeks out to say his opinions to the press and enforce his celebrity status.

No Lance fan, but Kimmage was out of order on this one. Too bad, because buried in his words was a good argument that would have made people think of Armstrong's words in a critical manner (currently, few people do this). The cancer tie was just a reason to disregard Kimmage.

All of this conforms that pro cyclists are not the brightest lot, and it only helps Armstrong's career when his public detractors are the likes of Kimmage and Lemond.

Don't blame Millar for fence-sitting, history has shown that active riders detracting Armstrong will have their careers halted immediately. He is a very vindictive man.

scwxx77

carbonfiend wrote:

just because a question is awkward and an enviroment is hostile doesn't mean it has merit or substance PK could have asked LA how often he masturbates and that would rank as awkward but has it any value?

Depends on whether or not it is performance enhancing!

dennisn

Blazing Saddles wrote:

dennisn wrote:

Really can't figure this Lance obsession thing out. Are you all-
Trying to prove to yourselves and / or others that he is NOT a god?
If so, why?
Trying to prove that he is, in fact, an evil demon?
What will you do if you discover that he is a demon?
and-
How is it that rational humans(I use that term loosely) can become so obsessed
with a person that they shadow his/her every move and utterance?
What drives a person to be like this? Envy? Jealousy? Hatred?
Are you trying to prove that YOU can beat the "gods"?
Do you feel that you are better(superior) than these people that you put down daily?
Is it working for you? Does it make you feel better to put down "famous" people?
Do you have low self esteem?
Are you mad because you're not capable of doing what Lance and the pros do?
All of the above?

All good questions.

Dennis Noward

You are clearly obssessed with Armstrong and this one is about Paul Kimmage and his utterances.

No, I'm an obsessive reader. And I know which of you are obsessed with Lance.
It's not hard to tell.
Anyway, why can't I stir the pot every once in a while????
And why won't anyone answer my questions?
Hits a bit too close to home maybe?

Dennis Noward

moray_gub

Martin Van Nostrand wrote:

dennisn wrote:

.

Don't blame Millar for fence-sitting, history has shown that active riders detracting Armstrong will have their careers halted immediately. He is a very vindictive man.

LA has had spats with various riders Kevin Livingstone,Tyler Hamilton,Floyd Landis, Fillipo Simeoni,Marco Pantani to name a few but i cant recall any of there careers being halted immediately. Can you enlighten us to some who have had that misfortune ?

MG

NJK

dennisn wrote:

Blazing Saddles wrote:

dennisn wrote:

Really can't figure this Lance obsession thing out. Are you all-
Trying to prove to yourselves and / or others that he is NOT a god?
If so, why?
Trying to prove that he is, in fact, an evil demon?
What will you do if you discover that he is a demon?
and-
How is it that rational humans(I use that term loosely) can become so obsessed
with a person that they shadow his/her every move and utterance?
What drives a person to be like this? Envy? Jealousy? Hatred?
Are you trying to prove that YOU can beat the "gods"?
Do you feel that you are better(superior) than these people that you put down daily?
Is it working for you? Does it make you feel better to put down "famous" people?
Do you have low self esteem?
Are you mad because you're not capable of doing what Lance and the pros do?
All of the above?

All good questions.

Dennis Noward

You are clearly obssessed with Armstrong and this one is about Paul Kimmage and his utterances.

No, I'm an obsessive reader. And I know which of you are obsessed with Lance.
It's not hard to tell.
Anyway, why can't I stir the pot every once in a while????
And why won't anyone answer my questions?
Hits a bit too close to home maybe?

Dennis Noward

Your questions sound quite obsessive. Are you saying he is a god, because personally i don't, talented athlete with PED's and a big texan mouth maybe.

He is just a complete pain in the arse. Just think every bloody race will have to the be L.A show. Why he didn't run for president i don't know that i believe is his true goal

colint

sylvanus wrote:

Paul Kimmage is a very bitter and twisted man and to make the statement he did about LA is quite possibly one the worst cases of journalism I have ever read

Then I have to say I admire him hugely for his "bitter and twisted" nature. Being willing to look the fool publicly and be shunned by many like you, takes huge courage, There are too few people like Kimmage in the world - I wish we had more.

IMHO Kimmage does this for no other reason than furthering his own career. He's a self confessed doper, and has now built a career out of dragging the sport through the sh1te at every opportunity. He's happy to do cosy interviews with stars from other sports and never mention doping, yet suddenly he gets all evangelical about doping when cyclings involved.

He's a hypocrite, a doper and a coward. If he truly had "courage" he'd ask about doping when interviewing the footballers, rugby players etc etc that he interviews in the Times, but that would jeopordise his contract so he chooses to stick to toadying, sycophantic tosh.

blazing_saddles

camerone wrote:

i dont recall attacking him, just pointed out it was an irrelevant question and it was him that looked the pr1ck. i think i am allowed to put an opinion forth that is different to yours? other posts commented on how rattled LA looked, I disagree and i think I am entitled to that.
I have no issues with awkward questions when relevant, and iain was right his question was much better than PK's. Kimmage was just trying to give it the arent I the tough guy, it will never get anything other than a politicial style response and is hence a wasted question.

I would agree, in so much that Armstrong answered the question as best he could.
However, is the question irrelevant?
Not at this race. Landis is making his comeback, therefore the question regarding Lance's previous statements is pertinent.

Was it the best question he could have come up with?
IMO, I'd have to agree and say no.

However, such questions have to be asked of those who command the media's attention.
I'm afraid that comes to those who court both controversy and publicity.
The old saying is, "If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen."
In that respect, Lance Armstrong is the Gordon Ramsey of cycling.

NaB

colint wrote:

sylvanus wrote:

Paul Kimmage is a very bitter and twisted man and to make the statement he did about LA is quite possibly one the worst cases of journalism I have ever read

Then I have to say I admire him hugely for his "bitter and twisted" nature. Being willing to look the fool publicly and be shunned by many like you, takes huge courage, There are too few people like Kimmage in the world - I wish we had more.

IMHO Kimmage does this for no other reason than furthering his own career. He's a self confessed doper, and has now built a career out of dragging the sport through the sh1te at every opportunity. He's happy to do cosy interviews with stars from other sports and never mention doping, yet suddenly he gets all evangelical about doping when cyclings involved.

He's a hypocrite, a doper and a coward. If he truly had "courage" he'd ask about doping when interviewing the footballers, rugby players etc etc that he interviews in the Times, but that would jeopordise his contract so he chooses to stick to toadying, sycophantic tosh.

Wow the spiteful attitude towards Kimmage is unreal...the stance he takes is a brave one. At the very least the confession heard by Frankie Andreu and his wife at the time Lance entered cancer treatment (later cited in Court testimony)can't be ignored. But then all the fanboys will always believe Lance is more sinned against than sinning. Also what's wrong with Kimmage being 'bitter' after all he was the first to stick his head above the parapet and reveal pro cycling for what it is i.e. a dirty sport....Millar only found acceptance back in the peloton because he didn't name any names....as is pointed out in the 'Bad blood' book the culture of 'omerta' in professional cycling poisons everything.

dennisn

he's just a complete pain in the ars*. :[/quote]

To whom? You? Why? What did he ever do to you? He's not forcing you to do anything.
Ignore him if you wish. Why waste emotion on him at all? Why get all worked up?
Relax and enjoy life. Sounds like Lance is enjoying himself. He's racing, making big bucks,
hanging out with his old pals. Sounds good to me. And you, you sit around and get all worked up about it. Once again, why? This simply fascinates me. This, this, this THING
(I guess) that you guys seem to have for him. You can't seem to break away can you?
You get sucked back in at the very mention of his name. It's crazy.

Dennis Noward

colint

NaB wrote:

colint wrote:

sylvanus wrote:

Paul Kimmage is a very bitter and twisted man and to make the statement he did about LA is quite possibly one the worst cases of journalism I have ever read

Then I have to say I admire him hugely for his "bitter and twisted" nature. Being willing to look the fool publicly and be shunned by many like you, takes huge courage, There are too few people like Kimmage in the world - I wish we had more.

IMHO Kimmage does this for no other reason than furthering his own career. He's a self confessed doper, and has now built a career out of dragging the sport through the sh1te at every opportunity. He's happy to do cosy interviews with stars from other sports and never mention doping, yet suddenly he gets all evangelical about doping when cyclings involved.

He's a hypocrite, a doper and a coward. If he truly had "courage" he'd ask about doping when interviewing the footballers, rugby players etc etc that he interviews in the Times, but that would jeopordise his contract so he chooses to stick to toadying, sycophantic tosh.

Wow the spiteful attitude towards Kimmage is unreal...the stance he takes is a brave one. At the very least the confession heard by Frankie Andreu and his wife at the time Lance entered cancer treatment (later cited in Court testimony)can't be ignored. But then all the fanboys will always believe Lance is more sinned against than sinning. Also what's wrong with Kimmage being 'bitter' after all he was the first to stick his head above the parapet and reveal pro cycling for what it is i.e. a dirty sport....Millar only found acceptance back in the peloton because he didn't name any names....as is pointed out in the 'Bad blood' book the culture of 'omerta' in professional cycling poisons everything.

Please don't give me any of this first to put his head above the parapet crap, he was finished as a cyclist when he wrote his book, after failing to make a success of riding doped. The book was a career choice, nothing wrong with that if thats how he wants to make his living but don't dress it up as somethiong it isn't. He had nothing to lose when he wrote the book, speaking out when still involved a decent level deserves credit, not whinging on about dopers when you doped, discovered you still couldn't beat the other dopers and then retired.

The mans a fraud in my opinion. That doesn't make me a fanboy (sorry if that doesn't fit your neatly arranged stereotype).

Doobz

BenBlyth wrote:

Doobz wrote:

must have been a very funny moment....

Lance Armstrong faced a difficult moment in the Tour of California press conference Thursday in Sacramento, California. The seven-time Tour de France winner responded to Paul Kimmage's question about the return of "non-repentant" dopers.

"You've spoke recently about the return of Ivan Basso and Floyd Landis, who have returned after their suspensions, compared to David Millar – that they should be welcomed back like he was. But there was one obvious difference in that Millar admitted his doping whereas these guys have admitted to nothing. What is it about these guys that you seem to admire so much?" asked Kimmage, a reporter with the Sunday Times of London.

Seventeen riders were present to kick-off the stage race, February 14 to 22. Many of the media's questions were about Armstrong's cancer message or his views on racing in the Tour of California, but the most intense moment came with the second question, from Kimmage

Armstrong prefaced his answer with the following statement: "When I decided to come back, for what I think is a very noble reason, you said, 'The cancer has been in remission for four years, our cancer has now returned' – meaning me, that I am the cancer!

"So it goes without saying, no we are not going to sit down for an interview. You are not worth the chair you are sitting on with a statement like that, with a disease that touches everyone around the world."

Armstrong went on to answer Kimmage's question. "You have to consider what has happened to David [Millar], who I admire a lot [and] who was caught with his hand in the cookie jar. Is it heroic that he has now confessed? Some would say so. I applaud him that he is back and I hope that he is very successful."

"Floyd [Landis], on the other hand, there is a lot of evidence against him and there is a lot of evidence in his favour. Floyd does not believe he is guilty, so to appease people like you he can't confess."

Armstrong explained his admiration for his fellow cyclists as men and that all men make mistakes.

"I'm not sure I will ever forgive you for that statement. And I'm not sure that anybody around the world affected by this disease will forgive you."

Kimmage got Thursday's last word in what will be an ongoing battle.

"You don't have a patent on cancer. I'm interested in the cancer of doping in cycling. That has been my life's work! I raced as a professional and I exposed it. Then you come along and the problem disappears."

Kimmage, a former professional racer from the 1980s, reported extensively on drug use within cycling – including his award-winning book Rough Ride.

I presume you were being sarcastic with that comment. To me that seems a pointless and very childish dig at Armstrong which has backfired by Lance's quite reasonable response. I would actually go as far as to say it is highly offensive and proves Kimmage simple has some personal vendetta.

I am not biased as I actually disagree with Lance supporting Landis etc however holding this up as Lance being rattled is nothing short of embarassing. If the roles were reversed you would be claiming Kimmage had still got one over on Lance. He just can't win.

Why do we have to have these threads trying to slate lance following everything he has said? I have not seen one about Landis or Basso, they are proven cheats. It is so boring after a while.

hmmm ok

iainf72

dennisn wrote:

adeyboy wrote:

Dave_1 wrote:

Millar sits on the fence too much...backs lance IMO...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2009/fe ... ar-cycling

Interesting to see how Lance responds to this - I don't think he likes beng criticised by his pals/peers does he?

Do you?

Being an adult, I don't mind being criticised. It's part of life, isn't it?

don key

rockmount wrote:

Paul Kimmage makes me ashamed to be Irish.

That makes me feel ashamed that you're Irish.

CyclingBantam

Interesting response doobz, thanks.

Why post something contentious if you can't be botherd to respond/try to patronise a differing opinion.

It just seems these threads are a an excuise to bang on about Lance doping. There can never be a reasonable discussion without personal insults or people being dismissed as being 'nieive' etc. :roll:

Doobz

Your welcome BenBlyth, I am glad it prompted you to write another response..

In my judgement Lance seemed a bit rattled and it must have been a bit awkward in that room - That is why I posted it and that's the way I feel..

I am sorry if I have upset any of you if you secretly have a thing for Kimmage or for Lance or even feel that any of them have been victimised..

dennisn

iainf72 wrote:

dennisn wrote:

adeyboy wrote:

Dave_1 wrote:

Millar sits on the fence too much...backs lance IMO...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2009/fe ... ar-cycling

Interesting to see how Lance responds to this - I don't think he likes beng criticised by his pals/peers does he?

Do you?

Being an adult, I don't mind being criticised. It's part of life, isn't it?

Somehow I doubt that you "don't mind". I will agree that it's part of life but can't
see people to many people saying "I don't mind".

Dennis Noward

rockmount

don key wrote:

rockmount wrote:

Paul Kimmage makes me ashamed to be Irish.

That makes me feel ashamed that you're Irish.

How original ... you should become a [Irish] journalist ! :roll:

moray_gub

iainf72 wrote:

[

Being an adult, I don't mind being criticised. It's part of life, isn't it?

Taking into account the question was about being criticised by your peers


So if one of your workmates was giving it laldy about your standard of work then you wouldnt mind ?


MG

camerone

Blazing Saddles wrote:

camerone wrote:

i dont recall attacking him, just pointed out it was an irrelevant question and it was him that looked the pr1ck. i think i am allowed to put an opinion forth that is different to yours? other posts commented on how rattled LA looked, I disagree and i think I am entitled to that.
I have no issues with awkward questions when relevant, and iain was right his question was much better than PK's. Kimmage was just trying to give it the arent I the tough guy, it will never get anything other than a politicial style response and is hence a wasted question.

I would agree, in so much that Armstrong answered the question as best he could.
However, is the question irrelevant?
Not at this race. Landis is making his comeback, therefore the question regarding Lance's previous statements is pertinent.

Was it the best question he could have come up with?
IMO, I'd have to agree and say no.

However, such questions have to be asked of those who command the media's attention.
I'm afraid that comes to those who court both controversy and publicity.
The old saying is, "If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen."
In that respect, Lance Armstrong is the Gordon Ramsey of cycling.

my original point was that i felt he was able to stand the heat in the kitchen as he wasnt rattled. i think there is too much reaction every time he opens his mouth. look at the plus side - i dont remember last years TDU or TOC being on TV, sleepless nights from Saturday night

dennisn

Wait a minute. Am I reading all this right. Now you guys who hate Lance also hate a journalist who hates Lance. This is really getting good(or possibly bad).

Dennis Noward

don key

rockmount wrote:

don key wrote:

rockmount wrote:

Paul Kimmage makes me ashamed to be Irish.

That makes me feel ashamed that you're Irish.

How original ... you should become a [Irish] journalist ! :roll:

I thank you for your most worthy and highly original comment, no one felt the need to say that before, wow.

As to whether it is original or not , that would take a GooGel and my reverses are drained
I cant Fhashe it now. I have jewel nationality as I'm a diamond both shides of the water.

If you can come up with any other massagegotistica I would be moist grateful.

dennisn

don key wrote:

rockmount wrote:

don key wrote:

rockmount wrote:

Paul Kimmage makes me ashamed to be Irish.

That makes me feel ashamed that you're Irish.

How original ... you should become a [Irish] journalist ! :roll:

I thank you for your most worthy and highly original comment, no one felt the need to say that before, wow.

As to whether it is original or not , that would take a GooGel and my reverses are drained
I cant Fhashe it now. I have jewel nationality as I'm a diamond both shides of the water.

If you can come up with any other massagegotistica I would be moist grateful.

I'm not Irish so I got lost in this exchange. But I will ask my Irish wife to translate for me.

Dennis Noward

don key

sylvanus wrote:

Paul Kimmage is a very bitter and twisted man and to make the statement he did about LA is quite possibly one the worst cases of journalism I have ever read

Then I have to say I admire him hugely for his "bitter and twisted" nature. Being willing to look the fool publicly and be shunned by many like you, takes huge courage, There are too few people like Kimmage in the world - I wish we had more. Modern society seems to be collapsing into an infantile and superficial mask of "positivity". There is now no greater sin than being "judgemental". I'm old fashioned in that way, like Kimmage, I believe in honesty and sincerity - strange outmoded concepts like right, wrong and sporting fair-play. In my view Armstrong has neither honesty nor sincerity and in fact it is really he who is "bitter and twisted".

My father has cancer and may soon die from it. May I speak for the cancer-community worldwide in saying that I'm happy to see Lance Armstrong compared to cancer! I think its a brilliant analogy and a sign of Kimmage's erudition that he is able to turn the LA myth against the man himself!

Paul "Serpico" Kimmage needs to change his image, long rough hair, big beard and dungarees." My brother died of cancer, I thought he was a chancer".NMy mother laughed at that when I said it, then I qualified it but she laughed because she found it funny. I never batted an eyelid when I read the online version of Pauls story. We can do, say or write whatever we like about this disease, so can Kimmage, there was so much Machavellian sidestepping in this interview with the "man" that it was, as he is almost always, irritating. He really is the man with no soul.

The book Rough Ride was given to me a few weeks back as a birthday present by a non hyperbolic friend of mine ansd he told me it was unputdownable. He was right and I would probably not like Kimmage but it is the nature of these people who take on the task no one else can hack, that of exposing one of the biggest sporting frauds ever.

He tells us how awful Paul kimmage is and then raises himself above that stuff by giving the answer anyway. He does like to be seen in a certain way, "The Emperor has no Crows" springs to minge. Nance Charmswrong is one of the most under rated liars of all crime.

Everyone seems to have missed out on the big fact that stares out constantly from his fantasytic eyes shadow. He is as mad as a at bat cat dat eat fat gat hat iat jat kat lat mat nat oat pat qat rat sat uat vat wat xat yat zat

afx237vi

camerone wrote:

my original point was that i felt he was able to stand the heat in the kitchen as he wasnt rattled. i think there is too much reaction every time he opens his mouth. look at the plus side - i dont remember last years TDU or TOC being on TV, sleepless nights from Saturday night

The TDU has been on TV for years. In fact, we probably got to see less of the TDU this year because of the 5 minutes we had to waste looking at Lance Armstrong holding a baby kangaroo.

Arkibal

Some excellent posts here, took me awhile to read them all. Please do keep up, and I mean by this not the regulars here(except MG, Rockmount, Dennis and few others)
Feels like fresh air after micron, aurelio, Blaze etc. nonstop vitriol LA posts!

I seriously do wonder if any cyclist (barring Garmin) will give an interview to Kimmage after this?
I have nothing against asking Lance -or any rider- tough questions, but this was embarrassing for Kimmage, and unfortunately for him, everyone saw it.

Saying Lance is the cancer of cycling, not very wise. Like there was no doping when he was gone...
Ridiculous.

camerone

afx237vi wrote:

camerone wrote:

my original point was that i felt he was able to stand the heat in the kitchen as he wasnt rattled. i think there is too much reaction every time he opens his mouth. look at the plus side - i dont remember last years TDU or TOC being on TV, sleepless nights from Saturday night

The TDU has been on TV for years. In fact, we probably got to see less of the TDU this year because of the 5 minutes we had to waste looking at Lance Armstrong holding a baby kangaroo.

fair enough - hopefully there will be no further pointless links involving LA in any more coverage. although what would everyone whine about if he wasnt ever on the TV?, maybe the swamp dwellers just below him, landis basso etc?