USADA files doping charges against Lance

1…3435373940…77

Comments

  • dommccabe17
    dommccabe17 Posts: 56
    iainf72 wrote:
    http://abcnews.go.com/US/lance-armstrong-anti-doping-agency-starts-formal-proceedings/story?id=16682619

    Looks like Lance is keeping it classy

    best bit were the comments underneath the article. Idiot yanks blaming the French for it all!
  • dougzz
    dougzz Posts: 1,833
    andrew_s wrote:
    Apparently Bernie was banned because he'd previously been banned when posting as Aurelio, and had reregistered under a new name. Once Future discovered BB was the same person the previous ban kicked in.
    Like he hadn't been posting as Bernie for ages. What's the Statue of limitations on dodgy ID's :)
    It smacks of find a reason because we've decided we don't like him. Not having a pop at you for saying, just at the laughable banning. Plenty of personal insults in these boards go ignored by mods, and plenty of people have one overriding agenda in any thread. I think the banning of Bernie does these boards no credit.
  • andrew_s
    andrew_s Posts: 2,511
    dougzz wrote:
    Plenty of personal insults in these boards go ignored by mods, and plenty of people have one overriding agenda in any thread. I think the banning of Bernie does these boards no credit.
    There's a long history of this sort of thing at Future. Back on the old C+ forum bannings that were widely viewed as unjustified resulted in exoduses that were a significant factor in getting Cyclechat and (Y)ACF past the critical poster threshold that makes a viable forum.
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    dougzz wrote:
    andrew_s wrote:
    Apparently Bernie was banned because he'd previously been banned when posting as Aurelio, and had reregistered under a new name. Once Future discovered BB was the same person the previous ban kicked in.
    Like he hadn't been posting as Bernie for ages. What's the Statue of limitations on dodgy ID's :)
    It smacks of find a reason because we've decided we don't like him. Not having a pop at you for saying, just at the laughable banning. Plenty of personal insults in these boards go ignored by mods, and plenty of people have one overriding agenda in any thread. I think the banning of Bernie does these boards no credit.

    Let me get this straight. Bernie and Lance are both being dragged over the coals by a system without mercy or both getting what they deserve or either or depending on your point of view. The word irony comes to mind.
  • Yellow Peril
    Yellow Peril Posts: 4,466
    dennisn wrote:
    dougzz wrote:
    andrew_s wrote:
    Apparently Bernie was banned because he'd previously been banned when posting as Aurelio, and had reregistered under a new name. Once Future discovered BB was the same person the previous ban kicked in.
    Like he hadn't been posting as Bernie for ages. What's the Statue of limitations on dodgy ID's :)
    It smacks of find a reason because we've decided we don't like him. Not having a pop at you for saying, just at the laughable banning. Plenty of personal insults in these boards go ignored by mods, and plenty of people have one overriding agenda in any thread. I think the banning of Bernie does these boards no credit.

    Let me get this straight. Bernie and Lance are both being dragged over the coals by a system without mercy or both getting what they deserve or either or depending on your point of view. The word irony comes to mind.

    Anyone following the current Lance line of defence could be forgiven for believing that he himself is behind BB's banning. 20 years from now there will be a conspiracist theory documentary all about this. :lol:
    @JaunePeril

    Winner of the Bike Radar Pro Race Wiggins Hour Prediction Competition
  • sherer
    sherer Posts: 2,460
    can we keep the talk about BB to the BB thread that was setup and keep this one on topic please.

    Seems even the BBC are bashing Lance now

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/18666839

    Saw a tweet from Lance saying he was just trying to get on with his life and ignore this.

    One thing I wonder is will they call Pat or the UCI to talk about the cover up from Tour De Suisse ?
  • Yellow Peril
    Yellow Peril Posts: 4,466
    sherer wrote:
    can we keep the talk about BB to the BB thread that was setup and keep this one on topic please.

    Seems even the BBC are bashing Lance now

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/18666839

    Saw a tweet from Lance saying he was just trying to get on with his life and ignore this.

    One thing I wonder is will they call Pat or the UCI to talk about the cover up from Tour De Suisse ?


    Hmmm...if it's on the BBC then the cracks are beginning to appear. High profile name soon?
    @JaunePeril

    Winner of the Bike Radar Pro Race Wiggins Hour Prediction Competition
  • Jez mon
    Jez mon Posts: 3,809
    sherer wrote:
    can we keep the talk about BB to the BB thread that was setup and keep this one on topic please.

    Seems even the BBC are bashing Lance now

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/18666839

    Saw a tweet from Lance saying he was just trying to get on with his life and ignore this.

    One thing I wonder is will they call Pat or the UCI to talk about the cover up from Tour De Suisse ?

    Might be easier if that thread hadn't been locked. I hardly think the BBC are Lance bashing, just presenting a fairly balanced report of the current stage of the investigation. It's difficult to try and put any pro lance spin on it, just look at what the man himself is doing, choosing to try and undermine the credibility of USADA, rather than any concerted attempt to deal with the allegations.
    You live and learn. At any rate, you live
  • Lichtblick
    Lichtblick Posts: 1,434
    From a paper today:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/others ... harge.html

    "Even if he is cleared by an American tribunal, Armstrong will never convince everybody he did not cheat to win the world’s greatest bike race."




    (Had to laugh at the photo caption: "Lance Armstrong (left)........")
  • iainf72
    iainf72 Posts: 15,784
    http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/usada-h ... quaid-says

    McQuaid comments a bit
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
  • robklancs
    robklancs Posts: 498
    I thought it was the French who hated him so much, why is it that his own country is trying to find him guilty and, according to the bbc, france are not interested
  • dougzz
    dougzz Posts: 1,833
    robklancs wrote:
    I thought it was the French who hated him so much, why is it that his own country is trying to find him guilty and, according to the bbc, france are not interested
    It's not about Lance, it's not personal, it's the job of the USADA to investigate doping amongst American sports people. Don't believe the hype, it's Team Armstrong's agenda to personalise it, to pretend there's an agenda amongst little people to knock over the 'most tested athlete ever', but it's all rubbish, it's just an agency doing their job. The proper picture is Bruyneel, and the doctors, that's the real issue.
  • iainf72
    iainf72 Posts: 15,784
    Dan Benson just tweeted

    Six month ban? That doesn't sound like immunity to me

    Sounds like we might hear a bit more soon
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
  • LangerDan
    LangerDan Posts: 6,132
    Here you go
    'This week I 'ave been mostly been climbing like Basso - Shirley Basso.'
  • davelakers
    davelakers Posts: 762
    LangerDan wrote:
    Here you go

    Boom!!
  • LeicesterLad
    LeicesterLad Posts: 3,908
    What a way to start my Thursday. Bye Bye Lance. :lol:
    http://www.twitter.com/InTheGC http://www.InTheGC.com http://www.facebook.com/intheGC
  • woody1545
    woody1545 Posts: 322
    GAME OVER!!!
  • Greggyr
    Greggyr Posts: 1,075
    AND JV, Van de Velde, The garmin clean team, Levi, gorgeous George.....Boom indeed..
  • sherer
    sherer Posts: 2,460
    I can still see LA fighting this by saying what they did was up to them and he raced clean. We've all seen comments from the Americans on the news websites saying they still believe the story and not sure if this will change it.

    Does seem strange that this has come out mid tour though, i'd either get it out of the way or release the info afterwards. Wonder if the ASO knew about this
  • blazing_saddles
    blazing_saddles Posts: 22,725
    Wooooosh. Well that, appears to be that.
    I wonder if Lance and his legion of lawyers will still try to make that no credibility line fly?
    "Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.
  • LangerDan
    LangerDan Posts: 6,132
    Blazing Saddles wrote:
    Wooooosh. Well that, appears to be that.
    I wonder if Lance and his legion of lawyers will still try to make that no credibility line fly?

    Perhaps not, but they'll now take the approach that if the USADA are giving only 6-month, out-of-season bans for self-admitted dopers, why are they taking such a hard stance on poor Lance? Surely the most he should get is a 6 month ban too?
    'This week I 'ave been mostly been climbing like Basso - Shirley Basso.'
  • ddraver
    ddraver Posts: 26,695
    They have nt bothered so far much, they re trying to discredit USADA instead this time, probably becase they know the former won't fly anymore...

    Excellent News!
    We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
    - @ddraver
  • ddraver
    ddraver Posts: 26,695
    LangerDan wrote:
    Blazing Saddles wrote:
    Wooooosh. Well that, appears to be that.
    I wonder if Lance and his legion of lawyers will still try to make that no credibility line fly?

    Perhaps not, but they'll now take the approach that if the USADA are giving only 6-month, out-of-season bans for self-admitted dopers, why are they taking such a hard stance on poor Lance? Surely the most he should get is a 6 month ban too?

    6 months and an asterix by each tour would do me fine.....
    We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
    - @ddraver
  • bazbadger
    bazbadger Posts: 553
    This is going to get really messy now.

    Mid Tour seems a strange time to name names though. Though it's good for maximum coverage.
    Mens agitat molem
  • greasedscotsman
    greasedscotsman Posts: 6,962
    LangerDan wrote:
    Surely the most he should get is a 6 month ban too?

    That's if he confesses, should be longer if he doesn't. But then as other's have said, don't really think that's the issue.
  • LangerDan
    LangerDan Posts: 6,132
    ddraver wrote:
    6 months and an asterix by each tour would do me fine.....

    Here you go, but I' m not sure what you're going to do with it


    2005 Lance ARMSTRONG
    2004 Lance ARMSTRONG
    2003 Lance ARMSTRONG
    2002 Lance ARMSTRONG
    post-1680-0-45815500-1333947394.png
    2001 Lance ARMSTRONG
    2000 Lance ARMSTRONG
    1999 Lance ARMSTRONG
    'This week I 'ave been mostly been climbing like Basso - Shirley Basso.'
  • blazing_saddles
    blazing_saddles Posts: 22,725
    Given the reputation of these guys, I wonder if any of the twitter riders will swop sides of the fence?
    "Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.
  • disgruntledgoat
    disgruntledgoat Posts: 8,957
    LangerDan wrote:
    Blazing Saddles wrote:
    Wooooosh. Well that, appears to be that.
    I wonder if Lance and his legion of lawyers will still try to make that no credibility line fly?

    Perhaps not, but they'll now take the approach that if the USADA are giving only 6-month, out-of-season bans for self-admitted dopers, why are they taking such a hard stance on poor Lance? Surely the most he should get is a 6 month ban too?

    Time off for confessing without a + test and co-operation? Seems reasonable.
    "In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"

    @gietvangent
  • MrTapir
    MrTapir Posts: 1,206
    greasedscotsman wrote:
    LangerDan wrote:
    Surely the most he should get is a 6 month ban too?

    That's if he confesses, should be longer if he doesn't. But then as other's have said, don't really think that's the issue.

    I agree, I think it would be good just to say 'right Lance was doped when he won the tours, he lied etc. Now we all know.' ANd then make sure none of the other people implicated can work in cycling again, the doctors, Ferrari and Bruyneel. I think this latter one is the most concerning in terms of moving on and sort of cleaning the peloton up if you will.

    P.s. Chapeau LangerDan!
  • MrTapir
    MrTapir Posts: 1,206
    Blazing Saddles wrote:
    Given the reputation of these guys, I wonder if any of the twitter riders will swop sides of the fence?

    And Phil Liggett, i was thinking of that video someone posted of him doing a webcast saying how its all a load of rubbish and Lance never doped and he's amazing etc. If Big George Hincapie is saying he did, I think Phil's head might explode. They'll have to mention it on the ITV4 show i would have thought, maybe just a Ned and Gary segment or something. I think P and P would go quiet though.

Categories