Lance Armstrong gets life ban,loses 7 TDF,confesses he doped
Comments
-
0
-
Richmond Racer wrote:oh do stop being silly just for the satisfaction of your need to argue all the time, and read Pross's post above.
In the meantime, back to those people who are really interested in the continuing developments
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/lausann ... ays-tygart
eeek....
trrrng trrrrng trrrng trrnnnggg
"Hello, Lance Armstrong speaking"
"oh hi Lance, you are awesome. By the way, you nearly almost did fail an EPO test"
"huh! whaada ya mean"
"Duh, your tests came back, well, you know, kinda not good"
"sheeeiit, Ive never tested positive"
"No worries Lance, you made some simple boo boo's, nothing to be too worried about, lets meet up and Ill show you what went wrong, c'mon Lance, buck up you are supposed to be good at this shit"
Lance Chuckles
"Hey yeah, you are right, I guess we all have off days, see you soon and hey man, thanks for keeping it clean, whats your favourite charity, Ill make a donation for you to keep up the good work"0 -
Richmond Racer wrote:oh do stop being silly just for the satisfaction of your need to argue all the time, and read Pross's post above.
In the meantime, back to those people who are really interested in the continuing developments
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/lausann ... ays-tygart
eeek....
'YOU say "being silly" without KNOWING I be silly. And what is "satisfaction" - and HOW do you know I are be? You WANT I be "argue all the time", but how can I be "argue all the time" if I ask you questions that you still cannot seem to answer? Give me concrete facts then I might go away.'
With that, Dennis gently pushed the keyboard away and crossed his arms; confident that he'd utterly dispatched Richmond Racer and his puny pleading.
Warm waves of smugness coursed their way to every part of his being, pushing out those freezing Toledo winds: for he is the Crack-Whore of Aggravated Confusion, and he'd just had another fix.0 -
Richmond Racer wrote:
In the meantime, back to those people who are really interested in the continuing developments
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/lausann ... ays-tygart
eeek....
Remember when Ashenden quit the UCI biopassport panel last April, citing problems such as confidentiality orders and inconsistencies in the biopassport process?
Have a guess which lab runs the Athlete Passport Management Unit (APMU)?'This week I 'ave been mostly been climbing like Basso - Shirley Basso.'0 -
Richmond Racer wrote:Will Fotheringham must have seen the script in advance. Reckon he's spot on:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/20 ... intcmp=239
This ^Kev
Summer Bike: Colnago C60
Winter Bike: Vitus Alios
MTB: 1997 GT Karakorum0 -
0
-
Paying money to the UCI, trying to do that with USADA...if he can't bully you, he will buy you.
Do you think he stays up at night muttering, "I should've given Landis a job."0 -
The Mad Rapper wrote:
Shall we hug now? It has to happen along those lines, that's the sad thing, 100% of US viewers on the Oprah show will buy his hard luck story and that's that. And then Robin Williams will come out in support :roll:0 -
Nick Fitt wrote:The Mad Rapper wrote:
Shall we hug now? It has to happen along those lines, that's the sad thing, 100% of US viewers on the Oprah show will buy his hard luck story and that's that. And then Robin Williams will come out in support :roll:
Then they could do a show together and call it Torque and Mindy
8)0 -
Richmond Racer wrote:Nick Fitt wrote:The Mad Rapper wrote:
Shall we hug now? It has to happen along those lines, that's the sad thing, 100% of US viewers on the Oprah show will buy his hard luck story and that's that. And then Robin Williams will come out in support :roll:
Then they could do a show together and call it Torque and Mindy
8)
Ha ha, I thank you!
I recall from Bad Blood (I think) Robin Williams was an $$$ investor in Lances cycling project. I always had too hold my anger when he would be ponceing around the Champs Elysée saying how much he loved the Tour, when did he last visit I wonder?0 -
0
-
Richmond Racer wrote:
I see Travis Tygart confirmed on 60 minutes he has met Lance to discuss ways to redemption0 -
“Once he makes a statement — what they say on the old police shows: can and will be used against you in a court of law. There’s no immunity in confessing to Oprah. There are people out there who I think feel pretty strongly that they’ve been wronged by Lance Armstrong,” Stichel said. “But I think it’s going to be hard. First, he’s going to fight hard. Second, I think there are significant limitations issues out there … It’s a fascinating case. From someone who has an interest in litigation and legal things, seeing his lawyers in action, seeing what they do, is always interesting. They’re innovative. They’re good. It’s going to be fun to watch.”
This statement sums up how I feel quite well. I am fairly certain he will get off comparatively scott free, it will be fascinating to watch though. I am certain the show will be purely for public opinion. Nothing major regards admitting cheating. Something else I thought about is if he uses the show to call the UCIs bluff. Also, as he was living in Spain, I wonder if he is 'attackable' under Spanish laws. Or if he will get pulled into the Italian investigation0 -
dennis keeps trying to bring some sanity to the forum and he did say in one post that he is on our "Anti LA" side now.dennisn wrote:
I'm thinking this is more of an Oprah idea. Even if nothing of substance gets discussed or no confession is forthcoming it's basically a win win for both. She gets what I'm sure will be a very highly rated show and that's her win. LA gets sort of absolved by her as she always forgives everyone(she's very magnanimous in that respect - bestowing forgiveness) and that's the win for LA. Although it seems to be a kind of prerequisite that all people seeking her blessing must shed a tear or two. Sniff, sniff break out the hankies.ThomThom wrote:You didn't think Oprah was a random pick, did you? lance is a cunning little fella.
I read him now as a former fanboy that has come to realise the truth about the scumbag but will still get you on a "Wind Up".
Not like some on this forum who still love their fanboy.
dennis is right with this one.From Texas Monthly wrote:And then, the inevitable crash of reality. The string of rumors that stuck to his cycling cleats eventually pulled the fabric of his legend apart and we were left with nothing more than what appeared to be a just another greedy, lying,intimidating bully who didn’t care what or who stood in the way of him getting his. Truly heartbreaking for those who wanted to believe that he could be a clean champion in a dark age of doping.
Myself ;- I hope he becomes a very close neighbour of OJ Simpson.dennisn wrote:If true and you can prove it then you should take action to help bring him to justice. It's actually your duty to do so, but this is a forum and not a court of law. No action will ever come of all this banter. Go to the authorities with your evidence. That's the way things get accomplished. You dream of seeing him in jail? Work toward that goal. I just doubt you'll find any evidence here or floating around on other forums. Speculation and more questions is all that's here.
I have no problem with anyone being made to answer for crimes committed.Organiser, National Championship 50 mile Time Trial 19720 -
BBC Radio 2 Jeremy Vine show from this afternoon on Lance Armstrong "Listen Again"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01pmfgs0 -
Nick Fitt wrote:The Mad Rapper wrote:
Shall we hug now? It has to happen along those lines, that's the sad thing, 100% of US viewers on the Oprah show will buy his hard luck story and that's that. And then Robin Williams will come out in support :roll:
That's assuming that he and Oprah decide to go with a hard luck story. There are other possibilities. Truth for example.
I'm thinking though that the poor, poor pitiful me story is pretty much the standard on Oprah. I see this one running true to most other Oprah shows. A bit of confession, a bit of sad tale of woe, a few tears, a bit of groveling, and bingo Oprah anoints him a "survivor". All is then good with the world and the evil Aztec calendar turns out to be only an Oreo cookie that was misunderstood.0 -
deejay wrote:Not like some on this forum who still love their fanboy.From Texas Monthly wrote:And then, the inevitable crash of reality. The string of rumors that stuck to his cycling cleats eventually pulled the fabric of his legend apart and we were left with nothing more than what appeared to be a just another greedy, lying,intimidating bully who didn’t care what or who stood in the way of him getting his. Truly heartbreaking for those who wanted to believe that he could be a clean champion in a dark age of doping.
I don't read much fanboy into the Texas Monthly thing. Sounds more like a realistic view. Or did I take your intent wrongly?0 -
Nick Fitt wrote:“Once he makes a statement — what they say on the old police shows: can and will be used against you in a court of law. There’s no immunity in confessing to Oprah. There are people out there who I think feel pretty strongly that they’ve been wronged by Lance Armstrong,” Stichel said. “But I think it’s going to be hard. First, he’s going to fight hard. Second, I think there are significant limitations issues out there … It’s a fascinating case. From someone who has an interest in litigation and legal things, seeing his lawyers in action, seeing what they do, is always interesting. They’re innovative. They’re good. It’s going to be fun to watch.”
This statement sums up how I feel quite well. I am fairly certain he will get off comparatively scott free, it will be fascinating to watch though. I am certain the show will be purely for public opinion. Nothing major regards admitting cheating. Something else I thought about is if he uses the show to call the UCIs bluff. Also, as he was living in Spain, I wonder if he is 'attackable' under Spanish laws. Or if he will get pulled into the Italian investigation
Tygart let slip at the end of his 60 minutes interview the other night that he had very recently met Lance Armstrong to discuss his "road to redemption". At the least Lance has gone into a sit down meet with Travis this past week or two and said "if I confess to X, Y and Z, will you remove my life ban ?" and Travis has said "yes". So, at the very least, Lance has explored what it will take to get the life ban undone. I can't see how he will jeopardize any tentative agreement he has with Travis by telling half truths on TV when he's going to get outed by Travis as part of a plea bargain which will contradict the Oprah story and have Betsy and so and so saying he lied on Oprah. He may be vague on Oprah but I think he will also go far in naming names and confirming what team mates said, but he will be careful with the timeline. It seems people wanting to sue Lance has some considerable legal hurdles such as SOLs. I could be wrong...but think the plea bargain will weigh heavily on his mind when he answers Oprah's questions. It also sounds like she will ask any question unscripted.0 -
Dave_1 wrote:Nick Fitt wrote:“Once he makes a statement — what they say on the old police shows: can and will be used against you in a court of law. There’s no immunity in confessing to Oprah. There are people out there who I think feel pretty strongly that they’ve been wronged by Lance Armstrong,” Stichel said. “But I think it’s going to be hard. First, he’s going to fight hard. Second, I think there are significant limitations issues out there … It’s a fascinating case. From someone who has an interest in litigation and legal things, seeing his lawyers in action, seeing what they do, is always interesting. They’re innovative. They’re good. It’s going to be fun to watch.”
This statement sums up how I feel quite well. I am fairly certain he will get off comparatively scott free, it will be fascinating to watch though. I am certain the show will be purely for public opinion. Nothing major regards admitting cheating. Something else I thought about is if he uses the show to call the UCIs bluff. Also, as he was living in Spain, I wonder if he is 'attackable' under Spanish laws. Or if he will get pulled into the Italian investigation
Tygart let slip at the end of his 60 minutes interview the other night that he had very recently met Lance Armstrong to discuss his "road to redemption". At the least Lance has gone into a sit down meet with Travis this past week or two and said "if I confess to X, Y and Z, will you remove my life ban ?" and Travis has said "yes". So, at the very least, Lance has explored what it will take to get the life ban undone. I can't see how he will jeopardize any tentative agreement he has with Travis by telling half truths on TV when he's going to get outed by Travis as part of a plea bargain which will contradict the Oprah story and have Betsy and so and so saying he lied on Oprah. He may be vague on Oprah but I think he will also go far in naming names and confirming what team mates said, but he will be careful with the timeline. It seems people wanting to sue Lance has some considerable legal hurdles such as SOLs. I could be wrong...but think the plea bargain will weigh heavily on his mind when he answers Oprah's questions. It also sounds like she will ask any question unscripted.
I will believe it when i see it Dave. - You will have the lawyer sitting in the front row "head shaking" a yay or nay to any questions asked. It will prob go along the lines of. Hi lance lovely day outside...pretty trees plants etc :roll:0 -
Dave_1 wrote:It also sounds like she will ask any question unscripted.
I don't know. Call me untrusting, call me paranoid, call me overly skeptical, or call me a nutso conspiracy theorist but I just can't buy the "unscripted" thing. It's a noble idea and I see Oprah using that term a lot. What bothers me is that Oprah is a television entertainment program and she is not about to go on air without knowing what's going to happen. Much like the lawyers code of not asking any question that you don't already know the answer to she wants to be in control and as I see it will not deviate from what works. And that means knowing the answers before she asks the questions.
Unscripted, no, way too big of a risk. Here you have two people, both with massive egos that need to be fed and that's why I don't buy them "just winging it". Saying it will be unscripted is like saying pro wrestling or reality TV is unscripted. I see it being scripted to look unscripted. Something like the President giving a speech. He want's people to think everything he says is his idea and not written by a speech writter.
IMHO anyway0 -
dennisn wrote:Dave_1 wrote:It also sounds like she will ask any question unscripted.
I don't know. Call me untrusting, call me paranoid, call me overly skeptical, or call me a nutso conspiracy theorist but I just can't buy the "unscripted" thing. It's a noble idea and I see Oprah using that term a lot. What bothers me is that Oprah is a television entertainment program and she is not about to go on air without knowing what's going to happen. Much like the lawyers code of not asking any question that you don't already know the answer to she wants to be in control and as I see it will not deviate from what works. And that means knowing the answers before she asks the questions.
Unscripted, no, way too big of a risk. Here you have two people, both with massive egos that need to be fed and that's why I don't buy them "just winging it". Saying it will be unscripted is like saying pro wrestling or reality TV is unscripted. I see it being scripted to look unscripted. Something like the President giving a speech. He want's people to think everything he says is his idea and not written by a speech writter.
IMHO anyway
fair enough...but Tygart will likely be watching and listening for discrepancy between the plea bargain he and Lance likely neogtiated last week and what he says on TV, so wonder if Lance will feel he must be as candid as with Travis even if vague and also asking for forgiveness during the 90 minute interview0 -
A plea bargain for what? He's already been banned for life.Dave_1 wrote:
fair enough...but Tygart will likely be watching and listening for discrepancy between the plea bargain he and Lance likely neogtiated last week and what he says on TV, so wonder if Lance will feel he must be as candid as with Travis even if vague and also asking for forgiveness during the 90 minute interviewTwitter: @RichN950 -
RichN95 wrote:
A plea bargain for what? He's already been banned for life.Dave_1 wrote:
fair enough...but Tygart will likely be watching and listening for discrepancy between the plea bargain he and Lance likely neogtiated last week and what he says on TV, so wonder if Lance will feel he must be as candid as with Travis even if vague and also asking for forgiveness during the 90 minute interview
Tygart alluded to having met Lance Armstrong and WADA said there is precedent to reopen cases. In my opinion the banned for life thing will be undone with a full confession and facts are Tygart-LA have met to discuss terms, and official comment is case can be reopened and esp to help Tygart in other 3 cases
Lance Armstrong recently met with the head of the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency to explore a ''pathway to redemption,'' according to a report Wednesday night on ''60 Minutes Sports'' dealing with the investigation that cost the cyclist his Tour de France titles.
LATEST ON LANCE
Report: Lance seeks path to redemption
Scheck doubts full Lance confession
Lance to talk PEDs with Oprah
USADA CEO: Lance tried to donate $$$
UK newspaper suing Armstrong
BBC strips Armstrong of award
USADA CEO Travis Tygart, in an interview that aired Wednesday night during the show's premiere on Showtime, didn't discuss the meeting on camera and provided no details, including when it was held and where. The only mention, with no elaboration, came at the end of the segment.
http://msn.foxsports.com/cycling/story/ ... ion-010913
Howman said USADA, not WADA, would have the authority to decide whether to reopen the case if Armstrong were to present new information. "It's [USADA's] issue, although they could come to us to ask for guidance or advice," he said.
Speaking in general terms and not specifically about the Armstrong case, Howman said new information that might merit revisiting a case could pertain to the individual defendant or shed light on others involved in doping offenses. He said there is precedent for cases to be reopened and it would be "nonsensical" to close off that possibility.
Read more at http://www.espn.co.uk/cycling/sport/sto ... EbLFlep.99
http://www.espn.co.uk/cycling/sport/story/186822.html0 -
lest face it with the programme being recorded in advance anything LA doesn't like can just be cut. As far s I know Oprah isn't a cycling fan and so there will have to be researchers that come up with the questions and if that happens then i'm sure LA will know what they are in advance, maybe even Fabiani has already written the questions and fed them to Oprah0
-
dennisn wrote:Dave_1 wrote:It also sounds like she will ask any question unscripted.
I don't know. Call me untrusting, call me paranoid, call me overly skeptical, or call me a nutso conspiracy theorist but I just can't buy the "unscripted" thing. It's a noble idea and I see Oprah using that term a lot. What bothers me is that Oprah is a television entertainment program and she is not about to go on air without knowing what's going to happen. Much like the lawyers code of not asking any question that you don't already know the answer to she wants to be in control and as I see it will not deviate from what works. And that means knowing the answers before she asks the questions.
Unscripted, no, way too big of a risk. Here you have two people, both with massive egos that need to be fed and that's why I don't buy them "just winging it". Saying it will be unscripted is like saying pro wrestling or reality TV is unscripted. I see it being scripted to look unscripted. Something like the President giving a speech. He want's people to think everything he says is his idea and not written by a speech writter.
IMHO anyway
Having been interviewed on BBC Radio 4, I also agree that it would be too risky to run a 90 minute live, prime time, and unscripted TV program without careful planning and a lot of research.
My interview which was not live had about 10 minute air time, however to achieve this there was 2 hours studio time booked and the interviewer herself put in about two day planning and research.0 -
I think it would be very odd if his ban was lifted, or shortened significantly to what end? So he can go and dope in triathlons so he can feel like a man?
What could he offer? Governing body? Great, but is that new? Organisers? That would be leftfield
If he confesses if only benefits him so why should he be rewarded for that?Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
iainf72 wrote:I think it would be very odd if his ban was lifted, or shortened significantly to what end? So he can go and dope in triathlons so he can feel like a man?
What could he offer? Governing body? Great, but is that new? Organisers? That would be leftfield
If he confesses if only benefits him so why should he be rewarded for that?
I think that the ban on competing for him as a life long athlete (cheat aside) is akin to a life prison sentence. Whether he deserves it is another thing, I say he does.
It seems to me that a great many of the perjury claims will fail due to statute of limitations. So the butchers list of lawsuits etc can be cut down quite significantly and quite quickly. I think his lawyers will work with USPS to prove there was no misuse of funds. And I think with USADA/WADA, they will try to get LA the ability to compete at an amateur level based upon his assistance in cleaning up US sport, I don't think he will do anything about the UCI nor they he.
Equally, the precedent has been set where cheats only receive a 2 year ban, we know this. So, because he was so public in aggressively bullying anyone who said he cheated, he gets the life ban. So, lawyers deal with the 'big guys', he deals with the public, he will come close to an apology, pay people back (Times etc) and in a few years, he'll be back on his bike again but not over here I hope.0 -
I think the Oprah interview will prove that he is innocent.0
-
LOL0
