USADA files doping charges against Lance
Comments
-
It's even worse than this. They don't just put a star next to someone's name. They erase them from history. Here, for example are the results of the "Chaingate" stage in the 2010 TDF.dennisn wrote:ratherbeintobago wrote:Stripping him of those wins would always have been nonsensical given that many of the runners-up were on the hot sauce; better to leave the results in place and starred. Did anyone (including Schleck) think that giving Schleck the 2010 TdF win was anything other than farcical?
I don't really think that putting a "star" next to someones name means anything. Who will see it and even if someone does see it, who will care? The thing is, the vast majority of the human race simply doesn't care what happens. Why would they?
I do like the nonsensical and farcial comments though. Just not in the way you would think. It's becoming a bit funny to read this forum what with all the WADA, CAS, UCI,
USADA, IOC, ASO, etc.
http://www.letour.fr/2010/TDF/LIVE/us/1 ... index.html
Contador wasn't there, apparently. The whole dynamic of that stage depends on the results being accurate. A star would be much better.
See also here: http://www.letour.fr/2010/TDF/LIVE/us/1 ... index.html
Andy Schleck's solo win on the tourmalet. Hmm.0 -
The difference with the 2010 result is Contador failed a test during the tour, it just took over a year for the verdict to come out. This is going back over 10 years and as they showed with Riis he kept his win and I don't even remember them asking for the money backavoidingmyphd wrote:
It's even worse than this. They don't just put a star next to someone's name. They erase them from history. Here, for example are the results of the "Chaingate" stage in the 2010 TDF.dennisn wrote:ratherbeintobago wrote:Stripping him of those wins would always have been nonsensical given that many of the runners-up were on the hot sauce; better to leave the results in place and starred. Did anyone (including Schleck) think that giving Schleck the 2010 TdF win was anything other than farcical?
I don't really think that putting a "star" next to someones name means anything. Who will see it and even if someone does see it, who will care? The thing is, the vast majority of the human race simply doesn't care what happens. Why would they?
I do like the nonsensical and farcial comments though. Just not in the way you would think. It's becoming a bit funny to read this forum what with all the WADA, CAS, UCI,
USADA, IOC, ASO, etc.
http://www.letour.fr/2010/TDF/LIVE/us/1 ... index.html
Contador wasn't there, apparently. The whole dynamic of that stage depends on the results being accurate. A star would be much better.
See also here: http://www.letour.fr/2010/TDF/LIVE/us/1 ... index.html
Andy Schleck's solo win on the tourmalet. Hmm.0 -
Is there any possible set of circumstances where USADA would be able to ban McQuaid and Verbruggen?0
-
avoidingmyphd wrote:
It's even worse than this. They don't just put a star next to someone's name. They erase them from history. Here, for example are the results of the "Chaingate" stage in the 2010 TDF.dennisn wrote:ratherbeintobago wrote:Stripping him of those wins would always have been nonsensical given that many of the runners-up were on the hot sauce; better to leave the results in place and starred. Did anyone (including Schleck) think that giving Schleck the 2010 TdF win was anything other than farcical?
I don't really think that putting a "star" next to someones name means anything. Who will see it and even if someone does see it, who will care? The thing is, the vast majority of the human race simply doesn't care what happens. Why would they?
I do like the nonsensical and farcial comments though. Just not in the way you would think. It's becoming a bit funny to read this forum what with all the WADA, CAS, UCI,
USADA, IOC, ASO, etc.
http://www.letour.fr/2010/TDF/LIVE/us/1 ... index.html
Contador wasn't there, apparently. The whole dynamic of that stage depends on the results being accurate. A star would be much better.
See also here: http://www.letour.fr/2010/TDF/LIVE/us/1 ... index.html
Andy Schleck's solo win on the tourmalet. Hmm.
That's the way it should be IMO. Get rid of the cheating vermin0 -
derbygrimpeur wrote:avoidingmyphd wrote:
It's even worse than this. They don't just put a star next to someone's name. They erase them from history. Here, for example are the results of the "Chaingate" stage in the 2010 TDF.dennisn wrote:ratherbeintobago wrote:Stripping him of those wins would always have been nonsensical given that many of the runners-up were on the hot sauce; better to leave the results in place and starred. Did anyone (including Schleck) think that giving Schleck the 2010 TdF win was anything other than farcical?
I don't really think that putting a "star" next to someones name means anything. Who will see it and even if someone does see it, who will care? The thing is, the vast majority of the human race simply doesn't care what happens. Why would they?
I do like the nonsensical and farcial comments though. Just not in the way you would think. It's becoming a bit funny to read this forum what with all the WADA, CAS, UCI,
USADA, IOC, ASO, etc.
http://www.letour.fr/2010/TDF/LIVE/us/1 ... index.html
Contador wasn't there, apparently. The whole dynamic of that stage depends on the results being accurate. A star would be much better.
See also here: http://www.letour.fr/2010/TDF/LIVE/us/1 ... index.html
Andy Schleck's solo win on the tourmalet. Hmm.
That's the way it should be IMO. Get rid of the cheating vermin
It's a noble sentiment and I agree completely but is it possible? I think not. Where big money is involved there will ALWAYS be people who will try to get some edge over the "system". You can shoot them, arrest them, hang them, ban them, disgrace them, imprison them, fine them, and tell the world about them but will you stop cheating and or criminal activity? No, not by a long shot. Very few, if any, people who plan to cheat or otherwise engage in illegal activities pay much attention to the penalties of their actions(i.e. what happened to the last guy who tried this). For money, there are plenty of people out there willing to give their shady ideas a try. IMHO I'm thinking that all this banning, so called disgrace, and erasing your name for some book doesn't mean a thing to people looking for devious ways to get their share of the big money. Why would it? It's about money, not a name in some book. Some of you seem to be counting on the shady riders "seeing the light and thinking twice". OH, I believe they will think twice or even three times and then go ahead on their cheating ways. People who cheat don't believe they will get caught. Ya want a clean sport? Try swimming. At least the body gets resonably clean.0 -
Ther was a Scottish Crime Author (Something beginning with C. Brookmyer..?)I was quite in to a few years back who was writing about the moment the character gets arrested and it went something like -
It does nt matter what prison sentence or what punishment there is in the law books, it ll never make any difference because NO BUGGER EVER THINKS HE'S GONNA GET CAUGHT!We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
- @ddraver0 -
Completely agree with all you've said, but still think they should be wiped from the record books if found guilty. Even if that means a rider gets artifically promoted that there are still question marks over. Would rather have an unproven dodgy name than a proven dodgy name on a results sheet.0
-
On a practical note, what happens when you discover that the "unproven dodgy name" is confirmed as a doper? Take the title off him as well and give it to another "unproven dodgy name". where does it end?derbygrimpeur wrote:Completely agree with all you've said, but still think they should be wiped from the record books if found guilty. Even if that means a rider gets artifically promoted that there are still question marks over. Would rather have an unproven dodgy name than a proven dodgy name on a results sheet.
USADA have already said that between 1999 and 2005 there's only Armstrong and 1 other rider on the podium that haven't been confirmed as dopers. How long Armstrong retains that status is very questionable now.
I read earlier that during (one of) those years you would have to go to 8th place to find a rider that hasn't been subsequently been found doping. That, of course doesn't mean that they were "clean". It's a bit of a hornets nest!0 -
Dave_1 wrote:iainf72 wrote:Dave_1 wrote:
Likely USADA will have its way, retain jurisdiction and ban Armstong who won't contest it, but the UCI will not recognise it and will not carry it out, nor will ASO erase the wins so LA keeps his 7 wins and Bruyneel will continue in the sport.
The UCI will have no choice in the matter. Cycling is signed up to the WADA code and if they ignored ruling by an ADA they would be in violation of the code.
I think we need to separate out the UCI from Pat and Hein here. These guys are going to be put in a very awkward position soon.
if the UCI refuse to recognise the jurisdiction of USADA then likely they will not be willing to carry out the banning so USADA will take UCI to CAS where there is a chance CAS rules in UCI's favour.
The UCI does not adjudicate. It only refers cases to either national federation or CAS. The UCI’s proposal is that they’ll set up a independent commission to decide whether there is sufficient evidence for a referral.
It really is silly. If UCI are successful in jurisdiction by their own rules they’d refer straight back to USADA.
They have no business in claiming jurisdiction. There is no such thing as jurisdiction. The Valverde case is a perfect example. Referred to the Spanish Federation. Once they cleared him the UCI referred to CAS. The UCI are in no position to deliberate on a doping case – passport included.
The UCI only want to see the evidence and whom are the witnesses. As this would go straight back to Armstrong to initiate “Project Terrorise”.
The witnesses are not all cyclists if that makes it easier for people to understand the actions of the UCI/Armstrong.0 -
thees case is the case that keeps on giving.
Ave GOLDEN calves0 -
whiteboytrash wrote:Dave_1 wrote:iainf72 wrote:Dave_1 wrote:
Likely USADA will have its way, retain jurisdiction and ban Armstong who won't contest it, but the UCI will not recognise it and will not carry it out, nor will ASO erase the wins so LA keeps his 7 wins and Bruyneel will continue in the sport.
The UCI will have no choice in the matter. Cycling is signed up to the WADA code and if they ignored ruling by an ADA they would be in violation of the code.
I think we need to separate out the UCI from Pat and Hein here. These guys are going to be put in a very awkward position soon.
if the UCI refuse to recognise the jurisdiction of USADA then likely they will not be willing to carry out the banning so USADA will take UCI to CAS where there is a chance CAS rules in UCI's favour.
The UCI does not adjudicate. It only refers cases to either national federation or CAS. The UCI’s proposal is that they’ll set up a independent commission to decide whether there is sufficient evidence for a referral.
It really is silly. If UCI are successful in jurisdiction by their own rules they’d refer straight back to USADA.
They have no business in claiming jurisdiction. There is no such thing as jurisdiction. The Valverde case is a perfect example. Referred to the Spanish Federation. Once they cleared him the UCI referred to CAS. The UCI are in no position to deliberate on a doping case – passport included.
The UCI only want to see the evidence and whom are the witnesses. As this would go straight back to Armstrong to initiate “Project Terrorise”.
The witnesses are not all cyclists if that makes it easier for people to understand the actions of the UCI/Armstrong.
Hate to say it but I think you guys are in one of the smallest minorities in the world.
That being the people who care what happens to athletes who dope. After reading this particular post it occured to me that I have yet to talk to anyone, cyclist or civilian, who could tell me anything(much) about the UCI, USADA, CAS, etc. Finding someone who even has an opinion about these organizations is difficult. Have I encountered anyone who is "outraged"(to use a popular newscast word) one way or another about the LA thing? No. Have I encountered anyone who follows it at all? Not really. Oh, you see headlines of course but very few people that I've talked to get past
the large print. In short I believe that the only thing that's happening on this forum is everyone is preaching to the choir.0 -
dennisn wrote:In short I believe that the only thing that's happening on this forum is everyone is preaching to the choir.
And one bored irascible old American who keeps stoking the flames.It's a little like wrestling a gorilla. You don't quit when you're tired. You quit when the gorilla is tired.0 -
dennisn wrote:... In short I believe that the only thing that's happening on this forum is everyone is preaching to the choir.
But the mumbled words are comforting and help us keep the faith.
--
Burls Ti Tourer for Tarmac, Saracen aluminium full suss for trails0 -
dennisn wrote:whiteboytrash wrote:Dave_1 wrote:iainf72 wrote:Dave_1 wrote:
Likely USADA will have its way, retain jurisdiction and ban Armstong who won't contest it, but the UCI will not recognise it and will not carry it out, nor will ASO erase the wins so LA keeps his 7 wins and Bruyneel will continue in the sport.
The UCI will have no choice in the matter. Cycling is signed up to the WADA code and if they ignored ruling by an ADA they would be in violation of the code.
I think we need to separate out the UCI from Pat and Hein here. These guys are going to be put in a very awkward position soon.
if the UCI refuse to recognise the jurisdiction of USADA then likely they will not be willing to carry out the banning so USADA will take UCI to CAS where there is a chance CAS rules in UCI's favour.
The UCI does not adjudicate. It only refers cases to either national federation or CAS. The UCI’s proposal is that they’ll set up a independent commission to decide whether there is sufficient evidence for a referral.
It really is silly. If UCI are successful in jurisdiction by their own rules they’d refer straight back to USADA.
They have no business in claiming jurisdiction. There is no such thing as jurisdiction. The Valverde case is a perfect example. Referred to the Spanish Federation. Once they cleared him the UCI referred to CAS. The UCI are in no position to deliberate on a doping case – passport included.
The UCI only want to see the evidence and whom are the witnesses. As this would go straight back to Armstrong to initiate “Project Terrorise”.
The witnesses are not all cyclists if that makes it easier for people to understand the actions of the UCI/Armstrong.
Hate to say it but I think you guys are in one of the smallest minorities in the world.
That being the people who care what happens to athletes who dope. After reading this particular post it occured to me that I have yet to talk to anyone, cyclist or civilian, who could tell me anything(much) about the UCI, USADA, CAS, etc. Finding someone who even has an opinion about these organizations is difficult. Have I encountered anyone who is "outraged"(to use a popular newscast word) one way or another about the LA thing? No. Have I encountered anyone who follows it at all? Not really. Oh, you see headlines of course but very few people that I've talked to get past
the large print. In short I believe that the only thing that's happening on this forum is everyone is preaching to the choir.
Maybe you're right on some accounts there about who cares and who doesn't BUT... if the case goes through and he gets his titles stripped and is officially labelled as a doper then it would be my guess, depending on the day's other news, world war's etc, that it will make front page news along the lines of 'the greatest sporting swindle of modern times'.... and include the word 'disgraced/disgraced' a few times.0 -
mfin wrote:Maybe you're right on some accounts there about who cares and who doesn't BUT... if the case goes through and he gets his titles stripped and is officially labelled as a doper then it would be my guess, depending on the day's other news, world war's etc, that it will make front page news along the lines of 'the greatest sporting swindle of modern times'.... and include the word 'disgraced/disgraced' a few times.
I think you make too much of it. Most people will simply look upon it as another athlete
who got caught doping and most likely not read past the headline. You give LA way too uch credit as being some hero / diety to people and his downfall will crush everyones spirit. Not true. If things happen as you hope they do it's only "..the greatest sporting swindle.." to a select few cyclists. Other than yours, and a few others, this whole thing won't affect many peoples lives. It would appear that some on this forum are thinking or hoping that the whole world will condemn this man to a deep dark dungeon. Sorry to inform you but other than yourself and a few others it just doesn't mean that much to people. He's not anywhere near as important in most peoples lives as he seems to be in some of the forumites.0 -
dennisn wrote:mfin wrote:Maybe you're right on some accounts there about who cares and who doesn't BUT... if the case goes through and he gets his titles stripped and is officially labelled as a doper then it would be my guess, depending on the day's other news, world war's etc, that it will make front page news along the lines of 'the greatest sporting swindle of modern times'.... and include the word 'disgraced/disgraced' a few times.
I think you make too much of it. Most people will simply look upon it as another athlete
who got caught doping and most likely not read past the headline. You give LA way too uch credit as being some hero / diety to people and his downfall will crush everyones spirit. Not true. If things happen as you hope they do it's only "..the greatest sporting swindle.." to a select few cyclists. Other than yours, and a few others, this whole thing won't affect many peoples lives. It would appear that some on this forum are thinking or hoping that the whole world will condemn this man to a deep dark dungeon. Sorry to inform you but other than yourself and a few others it just doesn't mean that much to people. He's not anywhere near as important in most peoples lives as he seems to be in some of the forumites.
Your commenting on a forum for p/cyc fans about the reaction of non p/cyc fans to a p/cyc news story ... wow only on the net folks :roll:'Do not compare your bike to others, for always there will be greater and lesser bikes'0 -
dennisn wrote:mfin wrote:Maybe you're right on some accounts there about who cares and who doesn't BUT... if the case goes through and he gets his titles stripped and is officially labelled as a doper then it would be my guess, depending on the day's other news, world war's etc, that it will make front page news along the lines of 'the greatest sporting swindle of modern times'.... and include the word 'disgraced/disgraced' a few times.
I think you make too much of it. Most people will simply look upon it as another athlete
who got caught doping and most likely not read past the headline. You give LA way too uch credit as being some hero / diety to people and his downfall will crush everyones spirit. Not true. If things happen as you hope they do it's only "..the greatest sporting swindle.." to a select few cyclists. Other than yours, and a few others, this whole thing won't affect many peoples lives. It would appear that some on this forum are thinking or hoping that the whole world will condemn this man to a deep dark dungeon. Sorry to inform you but other than yourself and a few others it just doesn't mean that much to people. He's not anywhere near as important in most peoples lives as he seems to be in some of the forumites.
I think mfin is right but the day after, it ll be replaced by whatever shenanegans the coilition are up too that day in the UK or the latest debate on Obama's terrorist leanings in the US (or similar)....
I'm with dennis about cycling being a sh1t-small sport donw by wierdos in lycra who are all on drugs part though. That certainly seems to be most of my non-cycling friends opinions on it anyway. To them it ll be interesteing for an hour or so and then forgetten about.We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
- @ddraver0 -
josame wrote:dennisn wrote:mfin wrote:Maybe you're right on some accounts there about who cares and who doesn't BUT... if the case goes through and he gets his titles stripped and is officially labelled as a doper then it would be my guess, depending on the day's other news, world war's etc, that it will make front page news along the lines of 'the greatest sporting swindle of modern times'.... and include the word 'disgraced/disgraced' a few times.
I think you make too much of it. Most people will simply look upon it as another athlete
who got caught doping and most likely not read past the headline. You give LA way too uch credit as being some hero / diety to people and his downfall will crush everyones spirit. Not true. If things happen as you hope they do it's only "..the greatest sporting swindle.." to a select few cyclists. Other than yours, and a few others, this whole thing won't affect many peoples lives. It would appear that some on this forum are thinking or hoping that the whole world will condemn this man to a deep dark dungeon. Sorry to inform you but other than yourself and a few others it just doesn't mean that much to people. He's not anywhere near as important in most peoples lives as he seems to be in some of the forumites.
Your commenting on a forum for p/cyc fans about the reaction of non p/cyc fans to a p/cyc news story ... wow only on the net folks :roll:
Not really. I'm also thinking that the great majority of Bike Radar forumites don't really give a sh*t either. It's only a few people who's lives seem to hinge on whether LA is thrown to the lions or not. I'm also thinking that these people don't really want to see him "put away". What would they talk about?
:?0 -
Few people actually give a sh!t.
Doesn't mean it doesn't help pass the time when you're f*cking bored in front of a computer connected to the internet.
Anyway, it has sporting implications in practice, and given the time and effort cycling fans invest in watching and enjoying the sport, they have some interest in seeing people who cheat in the sport be brought to justice/ finding out what actually was behind what they were seeing.0 -
Given the UCI is getting involved to stop it, can we assume the UCI stands to lose something if this goes all the way?
If so what? To me it makes the Tour de Suisse positive cover up sound more plausible....0 -
He would be the biggest sporting name in history to be found guilty of doping and would likely eclipse Marion Jones. He is one of those sportsmen who have managed to transcend their sport, like Tiger Woods. People who know nothing about cycling have heard of him.
You say it will have no effect on people's lives but how often do sportsmen have a profound impact in that sense.
I think the interesting question is whether Armstrong will ever admit it even if he is found guilty. I doubt it and will prove more than his actual guilt that he is a scumbag.0 -
Doping in LAs era is a victimless crime in a sporting sense and only in a sporting sense. Witness the indifference of many of the long term regulars on here to various dopers and ex dopers if you want to see what they really think of doping in the 1991-2008 era. I agree with them.dennisn wrote:josame wrote:dennisn wrote:mfin wrote:Maybe you're right on some accounts there about who cares and who doesn't BUT... if the case goes through and he gets his titles stripped and is officially labelled as a doper then it would be my guess, depending on the day's other news, world war's etc, that it will make front page news along the lines of 'the greatest sporting swindle of modern times'.... and include the word 'disgraced/disgraced' a few times.
I think you make too much of it. Most people will simply look upon it as another athlete
who got caught doping and most likely not read past the headline. You give LA way too uch credit as being some hero / diety to people and his downfall will crush everyones spirit. Not true. If things happen as you hope they do it's only "..the greatest sporting swindle.." to a select few cyclists. Other than yours, and a few others, this whole thing won't affect many peoples lives. It would appear that some on this forum are thinking or hoping that the whole world will condemn this man to a deep dark dungeon. Sorry to inform you but other than yourself and a few others it just doesn't mean that much to people. He's not anywhere near as important in most peoples lives as he seems to be in some of the forumites.
Your commenting on a forum for p/cyc fans about the reaction of non p/cyc fans to a p/cyc news story ... wow only on the net folks :roll:
Not really. I'm also thinking that the great majority of Bike Radar forumites don't really give a sh*t either. It's only a few people who's lives seem to hinge on whether LA is thrown to the lions or not. I'm also thinking that these people don't really want to see him "put away". What would they talk about?
:?0 -
nathancom wrote:He would be the biggest sporting name in history to be found guilty of doping and would likely eclipse Marion Jones. He is one of those sportsmen who have managed to transcend their sport, like Tiger Woods. People who know nothing about cycling have heard of him.
You say it will have no effect on people's lives but how often do sportsmen have a profound impact in that sense.
I think the interesting question is whether Armstrong will ever admit it even if he is found guilty. I doubt it and will prove more than his actual guilt that he is a scumbag.
Very well said, up until the very last word. It cancels out any sense of reason you may have been trying to impart and makes the whole post revolve around your hatred of the man. And we have heard that whole bunches of times. Nothing new there.0 -
+1Rick Chasey wrote:Few people actually give a sh!t.
Doesn't mean it doesn't help pass the time when you're f*cking bored in front of a computer connected to the internet.
Anyway, it has sporting implications in practice, and given the time and effort cycling fans invest in watching and enjoying the sport, they have some interest in seeing people who cheat in the sport be brought to justice/ finding out what actually was behind what they were seeing.0 -
If Lance is found to have doped by USADA and given a ban by USADA, it will be one of the top news stories on major news outlets.
Perhaps then folks like Den will care. Or perhaps, much like natural disasters or things outside of Utah, he may just say it doesn't affect him.Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
iainf72 wrote:If Lance is found to have doped by USADA and given a ban by USADA, it will be one of the top news stories on major news outlets.
Perhaps then folks like Den will care. Or perhaps, much like natural disasters or things outside of Utah, he may just say it doesn't affect him.
I'm sure the headlines will tell the world and everyone will say something to the effect
of "oh yeah, didn't he have cancer?". They will then leave for work, come home, eat, go to bed, and read the next headline, the following day, and say something to the effect of "oh yeah, he's that African dictator who's killing all those people, what a shame" or "damn, housing prices are sure in a slump."
To be honest there is only so much caring that I can invest in the happenings of the world and mostly all I can really muster is "ain't it a shame". About 45 years ago I thought I cared and set off to follow in my fathers footsteps and help save the world. Didn't quite work out that way. These days caring is mostly about family, friends, work, etc. The problems of Pro Cycling and Pro Cyclist's are, at best, interesting and somewhat Soap Operaish but caring is not something I spend much time with. You guys and your ways of thinking(good and bad) are much more interesting than some dry "courtroom drama" being played out by, of all people, lawyers, clients, and judges.
Snnnnnnnoozer.0 -
Do you really think? Just look at how FIFA is proven corrupt at a senior level, but just plods along regardless, and there's a lot more money at stake there than with the UCI. Isn't part of these organisation being in Switzerland a convenient attitude and legal system that protects privacy and therefore allows these organisations to pretty much continue regardless. Oh, and of a course a nice clean safe place to live for the overpaid execsRick Chasey wrote:Given the UCI is getting involved to stop it, can we assume the UCI stands to lose something if this goes all the way?
If so what? To me it makes the Tour de Suisse positive cover up sound more plausible....
0 -
I'm pretty sure a lot of Americans with cancer will care. That may not be a lot of people percentage wise, but it will be pretty devastating for people who are low already.
So, yes, given that us cycling fans are small percentage of total population, cancer victims and family may outnumber us.--
Burls Ti Tourer for Tarmac, Saracen aluminium full suss for trails0 -
So you are apathetic about anything beyond your daily personal life. So a sizeable proportion of the population is similarly apathetic. On this basis, the rest of us should also not care about anything that happens?dennisn wrote:iainf72 wrote:If Lance is found to have doped by USADA and given a ban by USADA, it will be one of the top news stories on major news outlets.
Perhaps then folks like Den will care. Or perhaps, much like natural disasters or things outside of Utah, he may just say it doesn't affect him.
I'm sure the headlines will tell the world and everyone will say something to the effect
of "oh yeah, didn't he have cancer?". They will then leave for work, come home, eat, go to bed, and read the next headline, the following day, and say something to the effect of "oh yeah, he's that African dictator who's killing all those people, what a shame" or "damn, housing prices are sure in a slump."
To be honest there is only so much caring that I can invest in the happenings of the world and mostly all I can really muster is "ain't it a shame". About 45 years ago I thought I cared and set off to follow in my fathers footsteps and help save the world. Didn't quite work out that way. These days caring is mostly about family, friends, work, etc. The problems of Pro Cycling and Pro Cyclist's are, at best, interesting and somewhat Soap Operaish but caring is not something I spend much time with. You guys and your ways of thinking(good and bad) are much more interesting than some dry "courtroom drama" being played out by, of all people, lawyers, clients, and judges.
Snnnnnnnoozer.
Personally, I think it is a good thing that cheats are not allowed to just sit back safe and I think a lot of people think likewise otherwise they wouldn't be excited by athletes like Usain Bolt who has shown the true limits of human sporting achievement. When I watch videos of Lance and Ullrich now they just look ridiculous going up mountains like on rocket fuel and it is hard to take it seriously.
And, there are very good reasons to think Armstrong in a scumbag, encouraging others to dope, the way he has tried to enforce the silence, buying off and corrupting further the UCI, hounding cyclists out of the sport whilst all the time hiding behind his charity. If you put your apathy aside for a moment (which isn't strong enough to stop you posting) and read up on him, it will be clear why so many dislike what he stands for.0
