Let it go Lance

dennisn

Wow. 8 pages and no mention of Nazi's yet.

moray_gub

Blazing Saddles wrote:

Moray Gub wrote:

But saying he had a lot to learn was not a snipe more like a pertinent observation at the time and he lost a prestigious stage race as a result. It works both ways you see after all posters in here are saying Bertie personal comments after the Tour were not sniping...........yea yea i know ridiculous but still you know what they are like in here.

When is a pertinent observation, not a personal comment?
Lance criticised, incorrectly as it turned out, Berto's tactical maturity.
To me, it's both, at best. At worst, it's a barb.

Contador's remark simply states that the two aren't on friendly terms.
In specific terms, it almost equates to no comment.
Very, very restrained, given the obvious tension at the Tour.
Personal? Surely, but also an observation.

Of course, the other thing is this.
If Lance is replying to this comment, why wait 5 months to do so and in this fashion?

Sorry to interrupt the forum's own personal war of words.

Firstly feel free to interject into the forums war of words the more against me the better Right to the point at hand saying you have no respect for a rival as a person hardly equates to no comment does it. If i knew you personally and said i have no respect for you as a person that is being very very personal is it not ?

moray_gub

calvjones wrote:

But I have just told you that if its the same deleted post we're talking about, it was nothing to do with Yates. So if thet's the case, either I'm lying (for no discernible reason I can fathom) or you are.. wait for it... the W word,,,



You forgot the 'so THERE. NAH!' at the end by the way.

You dont get this do you i am not interested in what you and he said to each other in your pm all i know is he made a comment re : Sean Yates and it was deleted .

calvjones

Did you see/remember the original post?

I asked afx what the post was about the day it disappeared. He PMd and told me. So you're suggesting that all those weeks ago he lied to me on the PM using his Psychic knowledge that you'd randomly bring it up in an unrelated discussion the following year. Right.

Or maybe he and I are telling the truth, and it wasn't about Yates but in fact another DS (a non Brit). I just fail to understand why you can't just accept you may have been wrong.

Unless, of course you SAW the post on Yates doping, and afx had two posts deleted on that thread. Is that what happened? If so, fair enough.

moray_gub

calvjones wrote:

Did you see/remember the original post?

I asked afx what the post was about the day it disappeared. He PMd and told me. So you're suggesting that all those weeks ago he lied to me on the PM using his Psychic knowledge that you'd randomly bring it up in an unrelated discussion the following year. Right.

Or maybe he and I are telling the truth, and it wasn't about Yates but in fact another DS (a non Brit). I just fail to understand why you can't just accept you may have been wrong.

Unless, of course you SAW the post on Yates doping, and afx had two posts deleted on that thread. Is that what happened? If so, fair enough.

I didnt randomly bring it up in this thread he did , i dont know how many posts he has had deleted and i dont really care but he definately had one deleted about Yates indeed iirc that guy Jeff Jones made comment about it. As for admitting i am wrong why on earth would i do that ?

afx237vi

Moray Gub wrote:

calvjones wrote:

Did you see/remember the original post?

I asked afx what the post was about the day it disappeared. He PMd and told me. So you're suggesting that all those weeks ago he lied to me on the PM using his Psychic knowledge that you'd randomly bring it up in an unrelated discussion the following year. Right.

Or maybe he and I are telling the truth, and it wasn't about Yates but in fact another DS (a non Brit). I just fail to understand why you can't just accept you may have been wrong.

Unless, of course you SAW the post on Yates doping, and afx had two posts deleted on that thread. Is that what happened? If so, fair enough.

I didnt randomly bring it up in this thread he did , i dont know how many posts he has had deleted and i dont really care but he definately had one deleted about Yates indeed iirc that guy Jeff Jones made comment about it. As for admitting i am wrong why on earth would i do that ?

Because you are.

moray_gub

afx237vi wrote:

i am wrong why on earth would i do that ?[/b]

Because you are.[/quote]

I am not in the habit of saying i am wrong when i am clearly right. I know what you posted and so do you. So if you are happy to put up a smokescreen then theres not much more to be said.

afx237vi

Moray Gub wrote:

afx237vi wrote:

Because you are.

I am not in the habit of saying i am wrong when i am clearly right. I know what you posted and so do you. So if you are happy to put up a smokescreen then theres not much more to be said.

If you really do know what I said, then you'd know how wrong you are.

micron

The fact is, Contador is in the delicious position of being able to beat Armstrong all ends up without having to resort to psyops and therefore winning the race both on and off the road. If you read some of Contador's interviews (remembering they're in translation) his remarks seem entirely prescient and hardly those of some peasant from the pueblo. Saying that the situation at Astana could be complicated by Armstrong's arrival turned out to be absolutely true http://velonews.competitor.com/2008/09/ ... rong_83526 Is that sniping? Or simply intelligently reading the situation. It's certainly a far cry from childish insults like 'King of Spain' - clearly, after all these years, Armstrong hasn't moved on from such infantile jibes as Elefantino.

afx, with MG I think it's enough that you know the truth of what you've said - and remember to say 'bah'

moray_gub

micron wrote:

The fact is, Contador is in the delicious position of being able to beat Armstrong all ends up without having to resort to psyops and therefore winning the race both on and off the road. If you read some of Contador's interviews (remembering they're in translation) his remarks seem entirely prescient and hardly those of some peasant from the pueblo. Saying that the situation at Astana could be complicated by Armstrong's arrival turned out to be absolutely true http://velonews.competitor.com/2008/09/ ... rong_83526 Is that sniping? Or simply intelligently reading the situation. It's certainly a far cry from childish insults like 'King of Spain' - clearly, after all these years, Armstrong hasn't moved on from such infantile jibes as Elefantino.

afx, with MG I think it's enough that you know the truth of what you've said - and remember to say 'bah'

amazing the difference 13 days can make to a mans viewpoint

Sept 10

“I would welcome (Armstrong) into the team with open arms because a cyclist like him would fit in anywhere,” Contador said on September 10. “I have always had the highest regard for him and would be delighted to be in the same team as him.”

Fast forward to Sept 23rd

"Alberto Contador, who won the Vuelta a España on Sunday, hinted he may quit the Astana team if it hires Lance Armstrong, "“It would be quite complicated. I think I’ve earned the right to be the leader of a team without having to fight for it,” he said in the interview published Tuesday. “And with Armstrong, there could be difficult situations in which the team would put him first and that would harm me.”

Good ol Bertie always ready to change his mind depending on who is interviewing him note he has a little pop at Levi too...........but hey AC doesnt snipe does he

SpaceJunk

Moray:

Sept 10

“I would welcome (Armstrong) into the team with open arms because a cyclist like him would fit in anywhere,” Contador said on September 10. “I have always had the highest regard for him and would be delighted to be in the same team as him.”

Fast forward to Sept 23rd

"Alberto Contador, who won the Vuelta a España on Sunday, hinted he may quit the Astana team if it hires Lance Armstrong, "“It would be quite complicated. I think I’ve earned the right to be the leader of a team without having to fight for it,” he said in the interview published Tuesday. “And with Armstrong, there could be difficult situations in which the team would put him first and that would harm me.”



Good ol Bertie always ready to change his mind depending on who is interviewing him note he has a little pop at Levi too...........but hey AC doesnt snipe does he

Moray - where exactly is AC sniping LA here?

Sure, AC has changed his mind and his opinion on LA. But are you now trying to say that constitutes a snipe???

Let's use the good old 'MG' train of logic here:

Has AC even changed his mind in the space of 2 weeks?

Originally he said that he would welcome Lance with open arms into his team. 13 days later (after wining another GT) he said that Lance being in the team would be complicated and could cause some difficult situations. But that doesn't mean he still wouldn't want LA into his team. How do we not know that AC would love LA is his team IF he was working for Alberto. (That's got to be better than having LA as a rival on the road).

But does AC say he doesn't want LA in the team? And although the reporter has said he has hinted he might leave Astana, Contador's comments themselves don't necessarily suggest this, does it?

The media love to make a story out of nothing. A lot of people on this forum believe that is also the case with LA quotes. The media try and turn them into something they are not. So how do we know that the reporter in the second article wasn't just trying to make a headline / story out of an isolated quote?


Gee, that AC is one compulsive sniper, that's for sure.

blazing_saddles

Besides, his change of mind isn't a personal comment against a third party, but a pertinent self observation, which time showed to be right on the money.

le_patron

Sure there are examples of what could be perceived as sniping from both sides, but for me the major difference is intent.

I get the feeling that there is no ulterior motive with Contador. As micron says, he doesn’t need a psyops front at all, he has nothing to gain from hacking Armstrong off and his legs are all that is required right now.

In contrast you get the feeling that everything LA says is a calculated move in his wider chess game, the hope being Contador is ganged-up on by as many people as can influenced, on and off the bike. The problem is psyops didn’t work last year and there is nothing to suggest they will this year. It’s the clash of Texan steamroller with an almost faultless record in psyching people out v the largely indifferent non-english speaking rider who gives the impression he couldn’t care less and has a faultless track record in not being psyched out by LA that I find fascinating.

Lots of comment on each-other too, it would be nice if they were both as keen to talk about and criticise the side of the sport that never gets commented on.

calvjones

le patron wrote:

Sure there are examples of what could be perceived as sniping from both sides, but for me the major difference is intent.

I get the feeling that there is no ulterior motive with Contador. As micron says, he doesn’t need a psyops front at all, he has nothing to gain from hacking Armstrong off and his legs are all that is required right now.

In contrast you get the feeling that everything LA says is a calculated move in his wider chess game, the hope being Contador is ganged-up on by as many people as can influenced, on and off the bike. The problem is psyops didn’t work last year and there is nothing to suggest they will this year. It’s the clash of Texan steamroller with an almost faultless record in psyching people out v the largely indifferent non-english speaking rider who gives the impression he couldn’t care less and has a faultless track record in not being psyched out by LA that I find fascinating.

Lots of comment on each-other too, it would be nice if they were both as keen to talk about and criticise the side of the sport that never gets commented on.

+1

It will be interesting to see if LA has any influence over the peloton compared to a rider who'll be dominant for the next 5 years.

Dgh

AC is a rider who would've given LA problems even at his peak, so having them on the same team with the same objective was always going to be problematical - might've been different if LA had targeted the giro or vuelta. LA's comments re most of AC's teammates leaving do have a point - why has AC allowed this to happen? That then invites the bigger question, why stay with Astana instead of going to a team with a positively clean reputation like Garmin? These raise questions about AC's judgment, but on the bike he's better than LA, and he's gonna get better whereas LA isn't.

Might've been better for LA's reputation to have targeted something he hasn't alredy done though, perhaps an MTB XC World Cup or rainbow jersey.

micron

Contador was entirely prescient in pinpointing the potential management problems at Astana - problems that Bruyneel himself has confirmed.

As for Armstrong & Bruyneel poaching teammates for a team that didn't exist from a team that was hamstrung by the UCI refusing to make a decision on whether they had a PT licence or not - I don't really see where that's AC's fault. In fact wouldn't you be glad to see the back of them knowing that their allegiance didn't lie with you? Surely better to start afresh and build a team with riders you want who will ride for you? AC thanked his teammates each night for their efforts - have you ever heard a similar story about LA?

The 'I'd be looking in the mirror if all my teammates left' story is one of the nastiest in that interview and part of the ongoing effort to reframe history and Contador's character. I presume most here didn't see the press conferences he gave post Tour that were widely televised on European news media? Didn't see the crowds, the smiles, the handshakes, the spirit in which his success was dealt with? Contador will always suffer in translation but there's no missing the intent with Armstrong - he really hated to lose and can't help but show it in a series of petty, mean little snipes. Contrast with the quiet, polite, smiling charm of Contador - and I don't imagine for a minute he's had extensive media training. I appreciate that someone like Armstrong doesn't like to lose but he could surely do it with better grace?

zippypablo

Moray Gub wrote:

uot;]

micron wrote:

The fact is, Contador is in the delicious position of being able to beat Armstrong all ends up without having to resort to psyops and therefore winning the race both on and off the road. If you read some of Contador's interviews (remembering they're in translation) his remarks seem entirely prescient and hardly those of some peasant from the pueblo. Saying that the situation at Astana could be complicated by Armstrong's arrival turned out to be absolutely true http://velonews.competitor.com/2008/09/ ... rong_83526 Is that sniping? Or simply intelligently reading the situation. It's certainly a far cry from childish insults like 'King of Spain' - clearly, after all these years, Armstrong hasn't moved on from such infantile jibes as Elefantino.

afx, with MG I think it's enough that you know the truth of what you've said - and remember to say 'bah'

amazing the difference 13 days can make to a mans viewpoint

Sept 10

“I would welcome (Armstrong) into the team with open arms because a cyclist like him would fit in anywhere,” Contador said on September 10. “I have always had the highest regard for him and would be delighted to be in the same team as him.”

Fast forward to Sept 23rd

"Alberto Contador, who won the Vuelta a España on Sunday, hinted he may quit the Astana team if it hires Lance Armstrong, "“It would be quite complicated. I think I’ve earned the right to be the leader of a team without having to fight for it,” he said in the interview published Tuesday. “And with Armstrong, there could be difficult situations in which the team would put him first and that would harm me.”

Good ol Bertie always ready to change his mind depending on who is interviewing him note he has a little pop at Levi too...........but hey AC doesnt snipe does he

but a lot can change in 2 weeks e.g. Lance going for the Giro and then deciding to do the Tour as well

mfin

micron wrote:

Contador was entirely prescient in pinpointing the potential management problems at Astana - problems that Bruyneel himself has confirmed.

As for Armstrong & Bruyneel poaching teammates for a team that didn't exist from a team that was hamstrung by the UCI refusing to make a decision on whether they had a PT licence or not - I don't really see where that's AC's fault. In fact wouldn't you be glad to see the back of them knowing that their allegiance didn't lie with you? Surely better to start afresh and build a team with riders you want who will ride for you? AC thanked his teammates each night for their efforts - have you ever heard a similar story about LA?

The 'I'd be looking in the mirror if all my teammates left' story is one of the nastiest in that interview and part of the ongoing effort to reframe history and Contador's character. I presume most here didn't see the press conferences he gave post Tour that were widely televised on European news media? Didn't see the crowds, the smiles, the handshakes, the spirit in which his success was dealt with? Contador will always suffer in translation but there's no missing the intent with Armstrong - he really hated to lose and can't help but show it in a series of petty, mean little snipes. Contrast with the quiet, polite, smiling charm of Contador - and I don't imagine for a minute he's had extensive media training. I appreciate that someone like Armstrong doesn't like to lose but he could surely do it with better grace?

That's a 'dead on' post, although Im sure LA has thanked his teammates for their efforts time and time again though, as would any GC contender. The 'mirror' comment was exactly what you said as I see it too "one of the nastiest in that interview and part of the ongoing effort to reframe history and Contador's character" ...perfectly put.

Im sure all this wont affect any of the racing at all going forward, the 2009 result and whatever happens next year will define it all. Only one of them can win their battle even if someone else gets the GC.

Lot of passion from MG for LA's defence as soon as anything's said about him anyway which was all a bit entertaining to smile at.

moray_gub

mfin wrote:

Lot of passion from MG for LA's defence as soon as anything's said about him anyway which was all a bit entertaining to smile at.

Defending lance ? why would i do that i know he can be a cock no this thread for me was exposing the double standards when it comes to LA and Bertie. Bertie has almost reached sainthood now in here.

The Prodigy

Maybe people wouldn't be so set on seeing Bertie as a saint if others weren't set on the opposite

timoid.

Moray Gub wrote:

mfin wrote:

Lot of passion from MG for LA's defence as soon as anything's said about him anyway which was all a bit entertaining to smile at.

Defending lance ? why would i do that i know he can be a fool no this thread for me was exposing the double standards when it comes to LA and Bertie. Bertie has almost reached sainthood now in here.

You have a point. Sort of. People are very quick to point the finger at Armstrong/Bruyneel doping practices, but don't seem quite so quick to mention Contador in the same context (despite the added Manolo Saiz bonus).

But thinking that Contador is as abrasive and argumentative as Armstrong is just plain wrong.

le_patron

I guess the only counter to that, and is MG’s point I guess, is that because of behavioural history of LA, he cannot say anything without it being immediately put in the mindgames/bad grace bucket. A bit like a footballer with a reputation fouling someone, immediately being given a yellow card.

Whereas AC can say anything and it's automatically assumed to be innocent.

However, on balance agree, there's a reason LA has this reputation and recent comments are evidence of it. I don't think AC or anyone coveting their career in cycling would ever have made that mirror comment about LA.
Anyway, regardless of anything Contador has done, this behaviour is an example of exactly what LA said he wouldn’t be doing back in Sept ’08. But it’s in his DNA, he can’t help it, the day he actually calms down is the day he stops being competitive on a bike.

Being beaten in the tour has really really pi$$ed him off, it was never the in the plan and Contador is a huge fly in the ointment. But that’s good in my book. A wounded ex-champion used to ruling the roost throwing all his energy into trying to beat the latest and greatest from the next generation is a fantastic storyline for any sport, let alone cycling. It could be so much duller.

blazing_saddles

For every action, there is a reaction.
I think a lot of folks are just responding to what they perceive as an imbalance, with Contador choosing to remain mostly mute.
It does tend to look as if Contador has become the new poster boy of the anti Lance movement.

However, when you get crap like this,

http://www.versus.com/nw/article/view/8 ... b_roll.tpl

posted by a supposedly credible source, it is difficult for many, not to sense the injustice and react accordingly.

dennisn

Blazing Saddles wrote:

For every action, there is a reaction.
I think a lot of folks are just responding to what they perceive as an inbalance, with Contador choosing to remain mostly mute.
It does tend to look as if Contador has become the new poster boy of the anti Lance movement.

However, when you get crap like this,

http://www.versus.com/nw/article/view/8 ... b_roll.tpl

posted by a supposedly credible source, it is difficult for many, not to sense the injustice and react accordingly.

What's the big deal??? Seriously, what's the big deal???? I'm sure that you disagree with him, but, so what???? He can't have an opinion??? You say he's not credible, I say maybe you're not credible. I've got to really try and give up posting on anything that mentions Lances. You guys(the anti lance brigade) are way too anal on the subject..

calvjones

"..ever since its inception in 2006 following the scandalous collapse of the Spanish team Liberty Seguros. I’m not sure if anyone recalls when Liberty Seguros Team Manager, Manolo Saiv was arrested while buying bags of blood"

Does this guy really not understand the irony of this line of argument in defending Johan's fantastic successes?

Unless Manolo Saiv is someone else?

Garry H

dennisn wrote:

What's the big deal??? Seriously, what's the big deal???? I'm sure that you disagree with him, but, so what???? He can't have an opinion??? You say he's not credible, I say maybe you're not credible. I've got to really try and give up posting on anything that mentions Lances. You guys(the anti lance brigade) are way too anal on the subject..

Love is blind

calvjones

"The aforementioned stars of Team Astanas 2009 Tour de France winning effort will now become a truly fiercesome enemy"

FEARSOME for fks sake. I wouldn't mind this one-eyed bollox if it wasn't so poorly researched and written or the guy could fcking SPELL!!! Don't you have spellcheckers of any 'caliber' in the States?

[/rant]

andyp

Bob Roll is MG and I claim my five pounds.

Bob Roll wrote:

The division within Team Astana never became apparent during the Tour and Contador was supported by the strongest team in the Tour. It was not until after the Tour de France that the simmerring animosity that Contador felt for his teammates came to light. It was no surprise there after that Alberto Contador was not included in the RadioShack roster.

iainf72

andyp wrote:

Bob Roll is MG and I claim my five pounds.

Bob Roll wrote:

The division within Team Astana never became apparent during the Tour and Contador was supported by the strongest team in the Tour. It was not until after the Tour de France that the simmerring animosity that Contador felt for his teammates came to light. It was no surprise there after that Alberto Contador was not included in the RadioShack roster.

Ahhh, Bob Roll, proving the rule that rednecks are stupid.

blazing_saddles

dennisn wrote:

What's the big deal??? Seriously, what's the big deal???? I'm sure that you disagree with him, but, so what???? He can't have an opinion??? You say he's not credible, I say maybe you're not credible. I've got to really try and give up posting on anything that mentions Lances. You guys(the anti lance brigade) are way too anal on the subject..

Errrr, no Dennis. No sarcasm or cynicism implied.
Unfortunately, Bob Roll is considered credible, at least, in the US. That's what I said.
The content, however, I find just a teeny, weeny tad subjective. (now, that is me being sarcastic)