Paul Kimmage rattles Laid back Lance!!

NaB · February 2009

don key wrote:

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.

That hits the nail on the head for me I don't 'hate' Lance as as has been implied...its not about him its what he represents - we are all cheated by the doping culture and those who make excuses for the cheats. To accuse Kimmage of writing a book about doping as a 'career move' is pathetic..he was frozen out of pro cycling as a consequence and many tried to discredit him for telling the truth. The truth is something that is sadly lacking in all the pro-Lance posts - there's no anger about the fact that doping was/is endemic and is brushed under the carpet. Don't any of you realise what this does for the credibility of the sport???

Meds1962 · February 2009

Kimmage was clearly looking for an argument but got firmly put in his place. I don't understand the Sunday Times hailing Lance as the best rider ever one minute and sending Kimmage to goad him the next.

camerone · February 2009

NaB wrote:

don key wrote:

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.

That hits the nail on the head for me I don't 'hate' Lance as as has been implied...its not about him its what he represents - we are all cheated by the doping culture and those who make excuses for the cheats. To accuse Kimmage of writing a book about doping as a 'career move' is pathetic..he was frozen out of pro cycling as a consequence and many tried to discredit him for telling the truth. The truth is something that is sadly lacking in all the pro-Lance posts - there's no anger about the fact that doping was/is endemic and is brushed under the carpet. Don't any of you realise what this does for the credibility of the sport???

There isn't only anti or pro LA. Personally I have watched drug scandal after drug scandal, pre-LA era, during LA era and post LA era. I get angry for the damage it does to the sport I love to watch and follow Where I have an issue is people who single out LA as number one enemy to cycling. there are endless cyclists past and present to whom the vitriol could also be directed, yet it doesn't happen. I understand Lance puts himself in the media and public eye more than most, but that in itself doesn't make him more of an enemy to cycling than the other dopers.

don key · February 2009

Meds1962 wrote:

Kimmage was clearly looking for an argument but got firmly put in his place. I don't understand the Sunday Times hailing Lance as the best rider ever one minute and sending Kimmage to goad him the next.

You don't have to be a genies nuts to figure that out but after two wishes hes short on hardware and speaking highly of himself.

NaB · February 2009

camerone wrote:

[Where I have an issue is people who single out LA as number one enemy to cycling. there are endless cyclists past and present to whom the vitriol could also be directed, yet it doesn't happen. I understand Lance puts himself in the media and public eye more than most, but that in itself doesn't make him more of an enemy to cycling than the other dopers.

The reason is that for a lot of non-cycling people he IS the sport! What does it say about our sport when its biggest star has a long record of bullying and deriding others who have spoken out about doping...why do that if you have nothing to hide about doping???

I'll say it again what about the testimony of Frankie Andreu and his wife?? Is everyone really just a 'Lance hater'..did they perjure themselves when they gave their sworn testimony in court :shock: ...I think not...

moray_gub · February 2009

NaB wrote:

I'll say it again what about the testimony of Frankie Andreu and his wife?? Is everyone really just a 'Lance hater'..did they perjure themselves when they gave their sworn testimony in court :shock: ...I think not...

So do you think Stephanie McIlvain perjured herself ?

MG

NaB · February 2009

Moray Gub wrote:

NaB wrote:

I'll say it again what about the testimony of Frankie Andreu and his wife?? Is everyone really just a 'Lance hater'..did they perjure themselves when they gave their sworn testimony in court :shock: ...I think not...

So do you think Stephanie McIlvain perjured herself ?

MG

Erm employee of key sponsor...no I'm sure she wasn't being economical with the actualite :roll: What would be Andreu's motive for lying in court??????
...and Mcilvain is alleged to have given a different version of events to Greg Lemond but then I suppose he's classed as just another 'hater' .
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5508863

camerone · February 2009

NaB wrote:

camerone wrote:

[Where I have an issue is people who single out LA as number one enemy to cycling. there are endless cyclists past and present to whom the vitriol could also be directed, yet it doesn't happen. I understand Lance puts himself in the media and public eye more than most, but that in itself doesn't make him more of an enemy to cycling than the other dopers.

The reason is that for a lot of non-cycling people he IS the sport! What does it say about our sport when its biggest star has a long record of bullying and deriding others who have spoken out about doping...why do that if you have nothing to hide about doping???

I'll say it again what about the testimony of Frankie Andreu and his wife?? Is everyone really just a 'Lance hater'..did they perjure themselves when they gave their sworn testimony in court :shock: ...I think not...

is there also an element of him using the sport to gain profile for future political career? I'm trying to get a handle here, i'm not new to supporting cycling i'm new to the debates on the forum and am putting out the feelers if you like. for what its worth i agree that he has bullied and derided and i can see how that looks to non cycling fans looking in on the whole doping issue. As to the Andreu's, no-one knows but it seems highly illogical that they wouldnt be telling the truth in court.

Ciaran Hampson · February 2009

Paul Kimmage is a guy who never made it as a pro, he lives and breathes on doping stories, he is one of the guys who believes than you are guilty until proved innocent.

As a journalist i have no time or respect for him. This thread seems to be focused on LAnce, Paul has nothing to do with Lance he wants everyone to be caught doping he will be happy then.

He wrote an Article about three years ago in the Sunday times basically ridiculing all the amateurs that rode up Alp d huez timing themselves, he is not a cyclist and most certainly not a journalist

NaB · February 2009

camerone wrote:

is there also an element of him using the sport to gain profile for future political career? I'm trying to get a handle here, i'm not new to supporting cycling i'm new to the debates on the forum and am putting out the feelers if you like. for what its worth i agree that he has bullied and derided and i can see how that looks to non cycling fans looking in on the whole doping issue. As to the Andreu's, no-one knows but it seems highly illogical that they wouldnt be telling the truth in court.

I personally don't think he is using his comeback as a launching pad for a political career...after all there are more straightforward ways to get into politics. In my view Lance's behaviour is pathological. The bigger the lie the more necessary it becomes to convince yourself that it is the truth and everyone else just doesn't understand or hates/envies your success.

NaB · February 2009

Ciaran Hampson wrote:

Paul Kimmage is a guy who never made it as a pro, he lives and breathes on doping stories, he is one of the guys who believes than you are guilty until proved innocent.

As a journalist i have no time or respect for him. This thread seems to be focused on LAnce, Paul has nothing to do with Lance he wants everyone to be caught doping he will be happy then.

He wrote an Article about three years ago in the Sunday times basically ridiculing all the amateurs that rode up Alp d huez timing themselves, he is not a cyclist and most certainly not a journalist

Judging by your comments I think Kimmage probably forgot more about cycle sport than you'll ever know...never made it as a pro indeed.

Don't you think its in fact rational to assume that everyone is doping at the top level until proved otherwise? Have all the stories from the last few years passed you by...how many more discredited tour winners/team managers/doctors etc etc is it going to take??

moray_gub · February 2009

NaB wrote:

Moray Gub wrote:

NaB wrote:

I'll say it again what about the testimony of Frankie Andreu and his wife?? Is everyone really just a 'Lance hater'..did they perjure themselves when they gave their sworn testimony in court :shock: ...I think not...

So do you think Stephanie McIlvain perjured herself ?

MG

Erm employee of key sponsor...no I'm sure she wasn't being economical with the actualite :roll: What would be Andreu's motive for lying in court??????
...and Mcilvain is alleged to have given a different version of events to Greg Lemond but then I suppose he's classed as just another 'hater' .

I am just making the point that not verything is as clear cut as you think when it comes to the Andreus'. This word hater seems to be getting used more and more by the baying mob of the anti Lance brigade.

MG

moray_gub · February 2009

NaB wrote:

Ciaran Hampson wrote:

Paul Kimmage is a guy who never made it as a pro, he lives and breathes on doping stories, he is one of the guys who believes than you are guilty until proved innocent.

As a journalist i have no time or respect for him. This thread seems to be focused on LAnce, Paul has nothing to do with Lance he wants everyone to be caught doping he will be happy then.

He wrote an Article about three years ago in the Sunday times basically ridiculing all the amateurs that rode up Alp d huez timing themselves, he is not a cyclist and most certainly not a journalist

Judging by your comments I think Kimmage probably forgot more about cycle sport than you'll ever know...never made it as a pro indeed.

Don't you think its in fact rational to assume that everyone is doping at the top level until proved otherwise? Have all the stories from the last few years passed you by...how many more discredited tour winners/team managers/doctors etc etc is it going to take??

He was an average domestique nothing more . Do you actually enjoy watching pro level cycling ? if you do how does that sit with your all riders are on the juice line of thought ?

MG

NaB · February 2009

Moray Gub wrote:

NaB wrote:

Moray Gub wrote:

NaB wrote:

I'll say it again what about the testimony of Frankie Andreu and his wife?? Is everyone really just a 'Lance hater'..did they perjure themselves when they gave their sworn testimony in court :shock: ...I think not...

So do you think Stephanie McIlvain perjured herself ?

MG

Erm employee of key sponsor...no I'm sure she wasn't being economical with the actualite :roll: What would be Andreu's motive for lying in court??????
...and Mcilvain is alleged to have given a different version of events to Greg Lemond but then I suppose he's classed as just another 'hater' .

I am just making the point that not verything is as clear cut as you think when it comes to the Andreus'. This word hater seems to be getting used more and more by the baying mob of the anti Lance brigade.

MG

I like it in true Lance style you respond to a question with a criticism rather than a direct answer! Why are you so keen to give him the benefit of the doubt anyway? :roll:

There is a real body of evidence which implicates Armstrong and other top level riders in a culture of lies and doping...or am I just making that up???

moray_gub · February 2009

NaB wrote:

I like it in true Lance style you respond to a question with a criticism rather than a direct answer! Why are you so keen to give him the benefit of the doubt anyway? :roll:

There is a real body of evidence which implicates Armstrong and other top level riders in a culture of lies and doping...or am I just making that up???

Sure there is some evidence some concrete some circumstantial and some just plain ol bullshit, but to say all top level cyclist are on drugs ........So Mark Cavendish is a drugs cheat according to you ?

MG

colint · February 2009

NaB wrote:

To accuse Kimmage of writing a book about doping as a 'career move' is pathetic..he was frozen out of pro cycling as a consequence and many tried to discredit him for telling the truth.

It's not pathetic, its a fact. He was finished as a cyclist, even after replicating the dopers and finding he still couldn't hack it at the top level. Don't be naiive enough to think his glittering career was cut short because of his "revelations". He was going nowhere so carved a new career as a journo who murders our sport whilst kissing the ass of others to get a nice spread in the Times.

NaB · February 2009

Moray Gub wrote:

NaB wrote:

I like it in true Lance style you respond to a question with a criticism rather than a direct answer! Why are you so keen to give him the benefit of the doubt anyway? :roll:

There is a real body of evidence which implicates Armstrong and other top level riders in a culture of lies and doping...or am I just making that up???

Sure there is some evidence some concrete some circumstantial and some just plain ol bullshit, but to say all top level cyclist are on drugs ........So Mark Cavendish is a drugs cheat according to you ?

MG

I sincerely hope not...the point I'm making is that doping and denial of doping is part and parcel of top level cycling..the fact that some riders like Cavendish reject it is heartening but that doesn't do anything about the laissez faire attitude towards drugs which is a distinctive aspect of professional cycling. This sickness...whatever you want to call it...has always been there in the sport but that doesn't make it right does it?

Arkibal · February 2009

[quote=

There is a real body of evidence which implicates Armstrong and other top level riders in a culture of lies and doping...or am I just making that up???[/quote]

Such as?
Funny the guy is back after RETIREMENT, not after a doping sanction....
This debate is pointless. Some are willing to crucify athletes based on rumors and innuendo, other want concrete proof, meaning a positive A and B sample, or, like in Millars case, being caught red handed.
Innocent until proven guilty still works for me, so I rest my case.

NaB · February 2009

Arkibal wrote:

[quote=

There is a real body of evidence which implicates Armstrong and other top level riders in a culture of lies and doping...or am I just making that up???

Such as?
Funny the guy is back after RETIREMENT, not after a doping sanction....
This debate is pointless. Some are willing to crucify athletes based on rumors and innuendo, other want concrete proof, meaning a positive A and B sample, or, like in Millars case, being caught red handed.
Innocent until proven guilty still works for me, so I rest my case.[/quote]
I hate to keep repeating myself (no really

) but don't you think cycling has something of an image problem when it comes to drugs...don't you care that the majority of the public think that it is a completely tarnished sport?? I wouldn't call court testimony rumours and innuendo either....

colint · February 2009

Our sport is tarnished, but maybe if people like Kimmage had the balls to ask questions of other athletes whom he has access to, we wouldn't be seen as the pariahs of the sporting world. Unless of course he just goes after the easy target because it'sa good earner of course......

micron · February 2009

I think what disturbs some people is the extraordinary unfairness/corruption/arbitrariness of the anti doping system that sees Armstrong walk away from a positive test for corticoids with a backdated TUE in 99 but sees Mayo pursued and crucified for an extremely dubious 'b' test. It seems that large 'donations' to the UCI can buy certain privileges.

You cite the Millar case, Arkibal, but, to quote the mantra, he never tested positive unlike, for example, Floyd Landis.

I appreciate your standpoint, but it seems that there is one standard of proof for Ricco, Pantani, Mayo et al and quite another for the sport's greatets cash cow.

don key · February 2009

Under Pances watch we have witnessed many unexplained stains on his whiter than s**t* virtuosity, some dogs do but I have no idea what they are on.

It's all there in the thread title.

To imagine the Kimmage rimmage image with Armsthong would surely raise the sports profile as well as the blud pressure of a few real fans.

dave_1 · February 2009

on the other hand...has Kimmage any interest in writing about the race itself? Or will his only writing be doping related? I guess he has only come to the race for one story. But still...he has been proven correct in the last 20 years

don key · February 2009

It might just be that a lot of us are bitter and twisted but I
cant help thinking that he might be twitter and busted.

Just a fraught thought brought to you freely and of the goodness of my arts.

They told us he was the Shimanoc scorcerer but I saw through the blouse arouse techniques which challenged all those less endowed than the eyebrows welded together hero and I am now firmly Campagnostic . It is indeceivable that this great man would lie
willingly so he started on a sawdust chowder diet and the brain developed as panned. The evil weavels were rooted in and the plan took off but due to an oversight while leading the bunch he was called back for his bicycle. His doctor is full of admiration, saying publicly that he bleeds beautifully. Honest hospital John, who said he was in the womb when it happened, has gone on to self employed stardom at the clank winic. if you don't believe me then ask someone who doesn't know and remember I said it worst.

claudb · February 2009

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.

Yes I have just watched it too and feel exactly the same. I was very impressed with the way LA dealt with what was a very inflammatory situation. It has also made me realise that reading what people say about what happened is VERY different to being able to watch it and judge for yourself. Personally, I wish LA had stayed in retirement, and I feel this Cancer Crusade Comeback is a bit hollow, but my opinion of LA was enhanced by watching his response to Kimmage who, I feel, went too far.

I certainly do not condone Doping but I am getting fed-up of all pressure being put on ex-dopers to 'confess'. OK, Dave Millar did, but we don't expect ex-convicts to confess to their crimes. They get a sentence, serve it, then get back into life again. They don't have journalists chasing them trying to get them to 'confess' for the rest of their lives - even when no proven 'crime' has been committed !!!

colint · February 2009

And lets remember Millar confessed in a police station after being hauled there by armed police, hardly an attack of conscience

adeyboy · February 2009

micron wrote:

I think what disturbs some people is the extraordinary unfairness/corruption/arbitrariness of the anti doping system that sees Armstrong walk away from a positive test for corticoids with a backdated TUE in 99 but sees Mayo pursued and crucified for an extremely dubious 'b' test. It seems that large 'donations' to the UCI can buy certain privileges.quote]

The corticoids test was not in the positive range. End of. Red herring.

And once again, why, when people were caught before, during and after Lance's time winning le Tour is it impossible for some people to accept he was clean? by which I mean, the anti-doping tests were clearly working... even if a bit slowly.

SpaceJunk · February 2009

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?

Dennis Noward

Dennis I have no problem with either my friends, my wife or my peers being critical. You know I am a human, I make mistakes, I make bad decisions just like everyone else.

I can handle being told when I get it / do it wrong.

I'm judging by your response above that you on the other hand think that no one likes receiving criticism???

If LA can't handle Millar's comments then that is his problem. But then again I struggle to recall too many instances where LA has admitted to making a mistake.

leguape · February 2009

micron wrote:

Sylvanus & Scammers I really couldn't agree more. The assumption that Armstrong speaks for everyone in the cancer community, that his is the only way to survive, that you have to 'fight' cancer and if you succumb then you obviously weren't trying hard enough - that rhetoric is distasteful and damaging.

Whatever happened to the new ever so 'umble Lance who would answer any question, just pick up the telephone, bring it on (because there was never a blacklist, ever)? Plus ca change, as ever. Which rather begs the question as to what he won't lie about as opposed to what he is truthful about.

As for the Kimmage reply - pure politico speak - Governor of Texas is quite clearly his next port of call

Don't agree about the politico speak. You don't leave questions on your record like that if you have aspirations. A politician would have answered the question "why do you admire dopers?" with the first part of the answer "I don't admire them, but they have served their time and made a decision to return to the sport and face their critics" which is pretty much what Armstrong did. Big mistake was to go on the attack against Kimmage as a preface to it, that's showboating.

As for Kimmage, he didn't ask a tough question, he showboated. It's not tough asking that question in a press conference when everyone knows you are going to ask it. He's a journo, that's what they do, and nobody else was going to upset the pecking order by asking his question for him. I think he undermines his point by getting sucked into the slanging match though.

Rhods · February 2009

I have no issue with sportsmen being asked challenging questions - it makes a change from the usual questions that are asked in every press conference before any race, match etc.

However, you must question certain people's motives and not just take it on face value and say that it's a tough question and we should welcome more, at any cost. There's certainly an argument that such blatant "in-fighting" is causing further damage.

Those are just my views, however I think Kimmage's comparison of Armstrong to cancer was disgraceful and quite frankly, not journalism in the slightest, but rather a cheap shot.

Paul Kimmage rattles Laid back Lance!!

Comments

Categories