Armstrong Innocent
Comments
-
BikingBernie wrote:
Of course his 7 'wins' are a factor, just as no one likes to see undeserving, corrupt and generally unpleasant individuals reap fantastic rewarded in business and politics whilst the more deserving get nothing.dennisn wrote:Suppose he was / is all those things you attribute to him, would you still be "on his case" if he had never won the tour? Somehow I doubt it, as you've not really "gone after" anyone like him who hasn't won the TDF. So, I'm saying that the 7 wins IS a major factor in your's, and others, opinions.
However, the sort of things I have mentioned are key to the supposed 'dislike' of Armstrong. I have no doubt that if he had won seven Tours whilst being as 'uncontroversial' as, say, Indurain, no one would feel the need to 'go after him', as you put it. Think on, plenty of other riders have been very successful without attracting the criticism that Armstrong does, which indicates that it is something other than him being successful that is at the heart of the 'problem'.
Still don't buy it. Without the success he's just another rider that some people don't like
because of how they view his personality and alleged drug use. Without the wins he
wouldn't be given a second thought by the, so called, Anti Lance Brigade and would simply be a small pebble in your shoe, easily removed, not the inoperable massive tumor
he's made out to be.0 -
BikingBernie wrote:
Of course his 7 'wins' are a factor, just as no one likes to see undeserving, corrupt and generally unpleasant individuals reap fantastic rewarded in business and politics whilst the more deserving get nothing.dennisn wrote:Suppose he was / is all those things you attribute to him, would you still be "on his case" if he had never won the tour? Somehow I doubt it, as you've not really "gone after" anyone like him who hasn't won the TDF. So, I'm saying that the 7 wins IS a major factor in your's, and others, opinions.
However, the sort of things I have mentioned are key to the supposed 'dislike' of Armstrong. I have no doubt that if he had won seven Tours whilst being as 'uncontroversial' as, say, Indurain, no one would feel the need to 'go after him', as you put it. Think on, plenty of other riders have been very successful without attracting the criticism that Armstrong does, which indicates that it is something other than him being successful that is at the heart of the 'problem'.
How is someone of Indurain's height and weight winning 7 GTs in 5 years not controversial, 4 minute thrashings of his GC rivals in TTs...?0 -
As I have said, his success is a factor. However if you want to argue that it is the main, or even only factor, you will have explain why so many riders have been both successful and popular, and why so many people who act in a bullying, obnoxious and egotistical way are often disliked, even if they are unsuccessful...dennisn wrote:Still don't buy it.0 -
The sort of 'controversies' I was thinking of are his bullying of Bassons and Simeoni; his blacklisting of journalists; the disrespect he showed towards other riders even to the extent of calling their Tour win a 'joke' and so on...Dave_1 wrote:How is someone of Indurain's height and weight winning 7 GTs in 5 years not controversial, 4 minute thrashings of his GC rivals in TTs...?0 -
dennisn wrote:BikingBernie wrote:
Of course his 7 'wins' are a factor, just as no one likes to see undeserving, corrupt and generally unpleasant individuals reap fantastic rewarded in business and politics whilst the more deserving get nothing.dennisn wrote:Suppose he was / is all those things you attribute to him, would you still be "on his case" if he had never won the tour? Somehow I doubt it, as you've not really "gone after" anyone like him who hasn't won the TDF. So, I'm saying that the 7 wins IS a major factor in your's, and others, opinions.
However, the sort of things I have mentioned are key to the supposed 'dislike' of Armstrong. I have no doubt that if he had won seven Tours whilst being as 'uncontroversial' as, say, Indurain, no one would feel the need to 'go after him', as you put it. Think on, plenty of other riders have been very successful without attracting the criticism that Armstrong does, which indicates that it is something other than him being successful that is at the heart of the 'problem'.
Still don't buy it. Without the success he's just another rider that some people don't like
because of how they view his personality and alleged drug use. Without the wins he
wouldn't be given a second thought by the, so called, Anti Lance Brigade and would simply be a small pebble in your shoe, easily removed, not the inoperable massive tumor
he's made out to be.
Godwin's Law has arrived.
People don't hate Hitler because he was the leader of Germany, but because of the stuff he did with the power had from being leader of Germany. Lance has gained his power through his wins, and the stuff he's done using that power and fame is why the majority of people who like him think they way they do.0 -
BikingBernie wrote:
As I have said, his success is a factor. However if you want to argue that it is the main, or even only factor, you will have explain why so many riders have been both successful and popular, and why so many people who act in a bullying, obnoxious and egotistical way are often disliked, even if they are unsuccessful...dennisn wrote:Still don't buy it.
Don't know too many people who like "bullying, obnoxious, and egotistical" people.
I don't see any of his peers looking all p*ssed off every time they see him. Usually smiles and, what appears to be, good natured conversation all around. Apparently you see the evil in the world and I see the good. Or something along those lines. Personally I prefer
to look on the bright side of people and I see very few people who aren't smiling when they are around LA. Riders, directors, press, mostly smiles. You sound like you're trying to tell me all this is phony. Now THAT would be a tough act to pull off.0 -
BikingBernie wrote:
The sort of 'controversies' I was thinking of are his bullying of Bassons and Simeoni; his blacklisting of journalists; the disrespect he showed towards other riders even to the extent of calling their Tour win a 'joke' and so on...Dave_1 wrote:How is someone of Indurain's height and weight winning 7 GTs in 5 years not controversial, 4 minute thrashings of his GC rivals in TTs...?
you're being ignorant of objective facts, selecting what's convenient for your partial case...the most shocking drubbing in stage race history and you think his career wasn't contoversial?0 -
Dave_1 wrote:
How is someone of Indurain's height and weight winning 7 GTs in 5 years not controversial, 4 minute thrashings of his GC rivals in TTs...?
I think you are on to something...
answered your own questioned"If I was a 38 year old man, I definitely wouldn't be riding a bright yellow bike with Hello Kitty disc wheels, put it that way. What we're witnessing here is the world's most high profile mid-life crisis" Afx237vi Mon Jul 20, 2009 2:43 pm0 -
redddraggon wrote:dennisn wrote:BikingBernie wrote:
Of course his 7 'wins' are a factor, just as no one likes to see undeserving, corrupt and generally unpleasant individuals reap fantastic rewarded in business and politics whilst the more deserving get nothing.dennisn wrote:Suppose he was / is all those things you attribute to him, would you still be "on his case" if he had never won the tour? Somehow I doubt it, as you've not really "gone after" anyone like him who hasn't won the TDF. So, I'm saying that the 7 wins IS a major factor in your's, and others, opinions.
However, the sort of things I have mentioned are key to the supposed 'dislike' of Armstrong. I have no doubt that if he had won seven Tours whilst being as 'uncontroversial' as, say, Indurain, no one would feel the need to 'go after him', as you put it. Think on, plenty of other riders have been very successful without attracting the criticism that Armstrong does, which indicates that it is something other than him being successful that is at the heart of the 'problem'.
Still don't buy it. Without the success he's just another rider that some people don't like
because of how they view his personality and alleged drug use. Without the wins he
wouldn't be given a second thought by the, so called, Anti Lance Brigade and would simply be a small pebble in your shoe, easily removed, not the inoperable massive tumor
he's made out to be.
Godwin's Law has arrived.
People don't hate Hitler because he was the leader of Germany, but because of the stuff he did with the power had from being leader of Germany. Lance has gained his power through his wins, and the stuff he's done using that power and fame is why the majority of people who like him think they way they do.
And I'm saying that I don't see all this evidence of hate, with the exception of a small group on this forum. I don't see him being shunned by anyone(present company excepted). Where is all this pent up rage and (almost) rock throwing, from his peers and the public? Any public figure will have detractors. I don't care much for Kevin Costner. Some of the people on here happen to be in that small group that, for whatever reasons, can't seem to tolerate Lance. That's their problem, yet the reasons behind it seem to fascinate me.0 -
-
Most people smile and are convivial in the presence of a powerful tyrant, if they know what is good for them.dennisn wrote:I don't see any of his peers looking all p*ssed off every time they see him. Usually smiles and, what appears to be, good natured conversation all around.
0 -
BikingBernie wrote:
Most people smile and are convivial in the presence of a powerful tyrant, if they know what is good for them.dennisn wrote:I don't see any of his peers looking all p*ssed off every time they see him. Usually smiles and, what appears to be, good natured conversation all around.
Even the wicked witch of the west couldn't make everyone smile at her.
Or should I ask "is that what YOU do in the presence of a powerful tyrant?"0 -
dennisn wrote:redddraggon wrote:Godwin's Law has arrived.
People don't hate Hitler because he was the leader of Germany, but because of the stuff he did with the power had from being leader of Germany. Lance has gained his power through his wins, and the stuff he's done using that power and fame is why the majority of people who like him think they way they do.
And I'm saying that I don't see all this evidence of hate, with the exception of a small group on this forum. I don't see him being shunned by anyone(present company excepted). Where is all this pent up rage and (almost) rock throwing, from his peers and the public? Any public figure will have detractors. I don't care much for Kevin Costner. Some of the people on here happen to be in that small group that, for whatever reasons, can't seem to tolerate Lance. That's their problem, yet the reasons behind it seem to fascinate me.
Robert Mugabe was having a grand old time in Johannesburg yesterday, perving over Shakira and watching the football. Do you think anyone went up to him and called him a murderous dictator? What people think and what people say or do are not always the same thing.0
