Lance Armstrong gets life ban,loses 7 TDF,confesses he doped

1…6162646667…239

Comments

  • slim_boy_fat
    slim_boy_fat Posts: 1,810
    fidgetyphil wrote:
    it would be interesting to know how much, if any, dirt Lance has on Nike. Whether Nike knew all along what the score was with Lance was and whether Lance could prove it just in case he decided to go for the scorched earth approach.
    I'm willing to bet their are an awful lot of people with fingers in all sorts of pies who are praying that Armstrongs pride keeps getting in the way of him spilling all.
  • niedermeyer
    niedermeyer Posts: 1,075
    Timoid. wrote:
    andy_wrx wrote:
    iainf72 wrote:
    Hein says there is no evidence Lance tested positive.


    Different arguments. All the above you mention show that he doped. Hein is stating the he never tested positive. If he tested positive and Hein took a bribe to make it go away, then Hein is screwed.

    All we have to go on the positive test is Landis' statement. And he is the most unreliable of all 20 odd witnesses due to his previous falsehoods and difficult relationship with Armstrong.

    You are ignoring the 1999 samples tested by Malabry as revealed by L'equipe. Only the most preposterous sophistry can argue that not being prima facie evidence.
    _________________________
    Well son, you tried your best and you failed. Let that be a lesson. Never try.
  • oneof1982
    oneof1982 Posts: 703
    Google translate:
    Hein Verbruggen: Who is this?

    Hein Hans Ruggenberg: Hi Hein. Hans Ruggenberg of the Telegraph. Called you with a view to the latest developments.

    Hein Verbruggen: Hello Hans, given the madness and nonsense, I decided not to give interviews or statements before eea is quieter. But if you want an off the record dann info please call. I'm in China.

    H Hans Ruggenberg: Okay Hein understandable. Wild indeed a response to the newspaper. Off the record information is difficult in this case, as you can imagine. Let me know if you want to give a statement ... success.

    Hans Hein Verbruggen: All I can say is that there are many, many stories and suspicions, but no trace of PROOF. There is not. LA was never tested positive, even by USADA. And who knows the control procedures also know that there is nothing to arrange, etc etc. But I am "tired" stage already slightly over. Beautiful night!

    Hein Hans Ruggenberg: Pity the newspaper tomorrow is already gone. Will be for the next day along. Again luck with everything and thanks for your comment. Greetings

    Hans Hein Verbruggen: Beautiful. H

    No doubt someone can tidy up.
  • Richmond Racer
    Richmond Racer Posts: 8,561
    All of this really is going to be the gift that never stops giving...
  • frenchfighter
    frenchfighter Posts: 30,642
    lancenike.jpg
    tumblr_mc2b62VSTR1qhc7qwo1_500.jpg
    tumblr_mc1rnrTtOg1rikssjo1_500.png
    Contador is the Greatest
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,253
    niedermeyer wrote:
    Timoid. wrote:
    andy_wrx wrote:
    iainf72 wrote:
    Hein says there is no evidence Lance tested positive.


    Different arguments. All the above you mention show that he doped. Hein is stating the he never tested positive. If he tested positive and Hein took a bribe to make it go away, then Hein is screwed.

    All we have to go on the positive test is Landis' statement. And he is the most unreliable of all 20 odd witnesses due to his previous falsehoods and difficult relationship with Armstrong.

    You are ignoring the 1999 samples tested by Malabry as revealed by L'equipe. Only the most preposterous sophistry can argue that not being prima facie evidence.
    He's not ignoring them. They weren't positive tests because they weren't proper tests. They were done purely for research purposes and not according to the required protocols. Evidence of doping - yes, admissible evidence of doping - no. So not a proper positive test.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • frenchfighter
    frenchfighter Posts: 30,642
    Guys, give it a rest on Dennis. No need to pick on him. Yes he can be annoying in the past but no need to lay it on thick. There is also the possibility to simply not read his posts - it's pretty simple; I do it for quite a few people.

    Just contribute as best you can to the discussion and leave the personal issues aside unless there is due need for it.

    Thanks.
    Contador is the Greatest
  • nweststeyn
    nweststeyn Posts: 1,574
    Frenchie in mod self-nomination shocker?

    I'd vote for you dude!
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    frenchfighter wrote:
    Guys, give it a rest on Dennis. No need to pick on him. Yes he can be annoying in the past but no need to lay it on thick. There is also the possibility to simply not read his posts - it's pretty simple; I do it for quite a few people.

    Just contribute as best you can to the discussion and leave the personal issues aside unless there is due need for it.

    Thanks.

    Indeed.
    _
  • nathancom
    nathancom Posts: 1,567
    frenchfighter wrote:
    Guys, give it a rest on Dennis. No need to pick on him. Yes he can be annoying in the past but no need to lay it on thick. There is also the possibility to simply not read his posts - it's pretty simple; I do it for quite a few people.

    Just contribute as best you can to the discussion and leave the personal issues aside unless there is due need for it.

    Thanks.
    Let him say something useful and relevant then instead of the bullsh1t he spews out all the rest of the time. He has no argument other than 'yeah this doesn't really change my life so why do you care?' That is the most apathetic rubbish I have heard, like someone who is just about to end it all because it is too boring. Give it a rest please, I prefer hearing Lance news, not the state-of-dennis-mind news.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    nathancom wrote:
    frenchfighter wrote:
    Guys, give it a rest on Dennis. No need to pick on him. Yes he can be annoying in the past but no need to lay it on thick. There is also the possibility to simply not read his posts - it's pretty simple; I do it for quite a few people.

    Just contribute as best you can to the discussion and leave the personal issues aside unless there is due need for it.

    Thanks.
    Let him say something useful and relevant then instead of the bullsh1t he spews out all the rest of the time. He has no argument other than 'yeah this doesn't really change my life so why do you care?' That is the most apathetic rubbish I have heard, like someone who is just about to end it all because it is too boring. Give it a rest please, I prefer hearing Lance news, not the state-of-dennis-mind news.

    French is right. If you don't like it, and can't stay reasonably reasoned and swear free then best to avoid it.

    As much as you find his opinion infuriating it's a valid one to have. If you don't like engaging with him in argument, don't.
    _
  • tailwindhome
    tailwindhome Posts: 19,439
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    frenchfighter wrote:
    Guys, give it a rest on Dennis. No need to pick on him. Yes he can be annoying in the past but no need to lay it on thick. There is also the possibility to simply not read his posts - it's pretty simple; I do it for quite a few people.

    Just contribute as best you can to the discussion and leave the personal issues aside unless there is due need for it.

    Thanks.

    Indeed.


    Hmmm.

    Dunno, the mob are pretty worked up...

    Faces.jpg
    “New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!
  • ratsbeyfus
    ratsbeyfus Posts: 2,841
    frenchfighter wrote:
    Guys, give it a rest on Dennis. No need to pick on him. Yes he can be annoying in the past but no need to lay it on thick. There is also the possibility to simply not read his posts - it's pretty simple; I do it for quite a few people.

    Just contribute as best you can to the discussion and leave the personal issues aside unless there is due need for it.

    Thanks.

    Could someone tell me what this says because I personally never read Frenchie's posts.

    I had one of them red bikes but I don't any more. Sad face.

    @ratsbey
  • nathancom
    nathancom Posts: 1,567
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    nathancom wrote:
    frenchfighter wrote:
    Guys, give it a rest on Dennis. No need to pick on him. Yes he can be annoying in the past but no need to lay it on thick. There is also the possibility to simply not read his posts - it's pretty simple; I do it for quite a few people.

    Just contribute as best you can to the discussion and leave the personal issues aside unless there is due need for it.

    Thanks.
    Let him say something useful and relevant then instead of the bullsh1t he spews out all the rest of the time. He has no argument other than 'yeah this doesn't really change my life so why do you care?' That is the most apathetic rubbish I have heard, like someone who is just about to end it all because it is too boring. Give it a rest please, I prefer hearing Lance news, not the state-of-dennis-mind news.

    French is right. If you don't like it, and can't stay reasonably reasoned and swear free then best to avoid it.

    As much as you find his opinion infuriating it's a valid one to have. If you don't like engaging with him in argument, don't.
    French is not right - Dennis is deliberately trolling this thread and you stand up for his right to troll while telling everyone else to accept the trolling. Sounds stupid to me.
  • Richmond Racer
    Richmond Racer Posts: 8,561
    Alright. Sorry I referred to Dennis's little legs.

    Back to Lance then....
  • symo
    symo Posts: 1,743
    Looking at this; Lance hasn't got many places to shift blame to. Apart from converting to religion and asking for forgiveness of his sins from the US public (because they love that), there is only one course of action for him:

    BLAME WIGGLE
    +++++++++++++++++++++
    we are the proud, the few, Descendents.

    Panama - finally putting a nail in the economic theory of the trickle down effect.
  • disgruntledgoat
    disgruntledgoat Posts: 8,957
    nathancom wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    nathancom wrote:
    frenchfighter wrote:
    Guys, give it a rest on Dennis. No need to pick on him. Yes he can be annoying in the past but no need to lay it on thick. There is also the possibility to simply not read his posts - it's pretty simple; I do it for quite a few people.

    Just contribute as best you can to the discussion and leave the personal issues aside unless there is due need for it.

    Thanks.
    Let him say something useful and relevant then instead of the bullsh1t he spews out all the rest of the time. He has no argument other than 'yeah this doesn't really change my life so why do you care?' That is the most apathetic rubbish I have heard, like someone who is just about to end it all because it is too boring. Give it a rest please, I prefer hearing Lance news, not the state-of-dennis-mind news.

    French is right. If you don't like it, and can't stay reasonably reasoned and swear free then best to avoid it.

    As much as you find his opinion infuriating it's a valid one to have. If you don't like engaging with him in argument, don't.
    French is not right - Dennis is deliberately trolling this thread and you stand up for his right to troll while telling everyone else to accept the trolling. Sounds stupid to me.

    Chuffs sake, it's only the internet.
    "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
  • Nick Fitt
    Nick Fitt Posts: 381
    symo wrote:
    Looking at this; Lance hasn't got many places to shift blame to. Apart from converting to religion and asking for forgiveness of his sins from the US public (because they love that), there is only one course of action for him:

    BLAME WIGGLE

    Not sure what wiggle is but, I am farkling certain he will go on a big TV show, confess, cry, find God, start a new team (with Garmin) and ride for God, ('Godstrong Garmin team GG', Ive not checked but I think the URLs are still free)

    He will either get away with this or go to Jail IMHO.
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 43,463
    nathancom wrote:
    French is not right - Dennis is deliberately trolling this thread and you stand up for his right to troll while telling everyone else to accept the trolling. Sounds stupid to me.

    Why do you think he is trolling? As long as I have used this forum Dennis' view on doping matters has basically been "OK, they doped but does it really affect YOUR life?". I don't agree with his point of view and it becomes tedious and preachy at times (and uses block capitals far too often) but it is as valid an argument as anyone else's on here. No-one on here can provide a view that's contrary to the consensus without being accused of trolling, knowing nothing or being a fanboi and yet it would be a boring place if everyone just did a +1 to the original post on a thread. If you disagree fundementally with another poster and find their posts wind you up then just take Frenchie's advice and ignore that person (or add them as a foe so that their posts aren't even visible to you). As for the people who are accusing Dennis of making the thread about him then just don't reply to his posts - if you reply taking a differing point of view then surely he has a right-to-reply?
  • Richmond Racer
    Richmond Racer Posts: 8,561
    ok, latest is Brad McGee's leaving Saxi-Tinki and pro cycling to take up role with NSW Institute of Sport.

    McGee getting himself out of the escalating conflagration?
  • disgruntledgoat
    disgruntledgoat Posts: 8,957
    Richmond Racer wrote:
    ok, latest is Brad McGee's leaving Saxi-Tinki and pro cycling to take up role with NSW Institute of Sport.

    McGee getting himself out of the escalating conflagration?

    Him and Cooke are two I always wonder about. McGee was always inviting journos to live with him to attest to his cleanliness and Cooke never got the contracts or results his 2003 Green Jersey would suggest he should have had.
    "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
  • greasedscotsman
    greasedscotsman Posts: 6,962
    Pross wrote:
    nathancom wrote:
    French is not right - Dennis is deliberately trolling this thread and you stand up for his right to troll while telling everyone else to accept the trolling. Sounds stupid to me.

    Why do you think he is trolling? As long as I have used this forum Dennis' view on doping matters has basically been "OK, they doped but does it really affect YOUR life?". I don't agree with his point of view and it becomes tedious and preachy at times (and uses block capitals far too often) but it is as valid an argument as anyone else's on here. No-one on here can provide a view that's contrary to the consensus without being accused of trolling, knowing nothing or being a fanboi and yet it would be a boring place if everyone just did a +1 to the original post on a thread. If you disagree fundementally with another poster and find their posts wind you up then just take Frenchie's advice and ignore that person (or add them as a foe so that their posts aren't even visible to you). As for the people who are accusing Dennis of making the thread about him then just don't reply to his posts - if you reply taking a differing point of view then surely he has a right-to-reply?

    +1 :wink:
  • nathancom
    nathancom Posts: 1,567
    Pross wrote:
    nathancom wrote:
    French is not right - Dennis is deliberately trolling this thread and you stand up for his right to troll while telling everyone else to accept the trolling. Sounds stupid to me.

    Why do you think he is trolling? As long as I have used this forum Dennis' view on doping matters has basically been "OK, they doped but does it really affect YOUR life?". I don't agree with his point of view and it becomes tedious and preachy at times (and uses block capitals far too often) but it is as valid an argument as anyone else's on here. No-one on here can provide a view that's contrary to the consensus without being accused of trolling, knowing nothing or being a fanboi and yet it would be a boring place if everyone just did a +1 to the original post on a thread. If you disagree fundementally with another poster and find their posts wind you up then just take Frenchie's advice and ignore that person (or add them as a foe so that their posts aren't even visible to you). As for the people who are accusing Dennis of making the thread about him then just don't reply to his posts - if you reply taking a differing point of view then surely he has a right-to-reply?
    Ok, he is deliberately taking a stance designed to infuriate other posters so as to become the centre of attention in the life of a forum thread. The stance taken has no value beyond its ability to cause the desired affect in other posters. The nature of the discussion is different from the normal arguments that may exist between posters, who, however divergent their perspectives, share a common interest in the topic. The troll's posts display no shared interest, in fact they take up a position outside the community formed within the thread in order to engender as much response from the other members as possible, to maintain the troll's place at the centre of the discussion.

    It is also hard to ignore it when multiple posts get taken up by the troll and the reaction he causes. If this was not the case then the trolling would have failed. Sorry to feed the troll further but he is trolling.
  • disgruntledgoat
    disgruntledgoat Posts: 8,957
    nathancom wrote:
    Pross wrote:
    nathancom wrote:
    French is not right - Dennis is deliberately trolling this thread and you stand up for his right to troll while telling everyone else to accept the trolling. Sounds stupid to me.

    Why do you think he is trolling? As long as I have used this forum Dennis' view on doping matters has basically been "OK, they doped but does it really affect YOUR life?". I don't agree with his point of view and it becomes tedious and preachy at times (and uses block capitals far too often) but it is as valid an argument as anyone else's on here. No-one on here can provide a view that's contrary to the consensus without being accused of trolling, knowing nothing or being a fanboi and yet it would be a boring place if everyone just did a +1 to the original post on a thread. If you disagree fundementally with another poster and find their posts wind you up then just take Frenchie's advice and ignore that person (or add them as a foe so that their posts aren't even visible to you). As for the people who are accusing Dennis of making the thread about him then just don't reply to his posts - if you reply taking a differing point of view then surely he has a right-to-reply?


    It is also hard to ignore it when multiple posts get taken up by the troll and the reaction he causes. If this was not the case then the trolling would have failed. Sorry to feed the troll further but he is trolling.


    So what?
    "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
  • nathancom
    nathancom Posts: 1,567
    disgruntledgoat wrote:



    So what?
    Your point? Telling people to ignore a troll when they take up pages of a thread is dumb. I read about 4 pages of this particular troll telling everyone how they had no right to an opinion and got bored of the troll's behaviour then read some other poster telling everyone to be nice to the troll and laughed...
  • disgruntledgoat
    disgruntledgoat Posts: 8,957
    I just don't understand why people get so upset about internet "trolling". He's not being abusive or threatening, he isn't bullying anyone. He's either on the windup or consistent in a view. Either way, you don't have a right not to be irritated.
    "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
  • nathancom
    nathancom Posts: 1,567
    disgruntledgoat wrote:
    I just don't understand why people get so upset about internet "trolling". He's not being abusive or threatening, he isn't bullying anyone. He's either on the windup or consistent in a view. Either way, you don't have a right not to be irritated.
    No but I have the right to be irritated and express it if I wish without French trying to make people play nice like a kindergarten. To be honest, that annoyed me multiple times more than Dennis ever does. After that I was just defending my claim that he is a troll, which he is.
  • disgruntledgoat
    disgruntledgoat Posts: 8,957
    You don't have the right for people not to tell you to play nice.

    What harm does it do to keep things civil?
    "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
  • nathancom
    nathancom Posts: 1,567
    You don't have the right to expect this forum always to be perfectly civil.

    This game could go on forever ;)
  • BillyMansell
    BillyMansell Posts: 817
    disgruntledgoat wrote:
    I just don't understand why people get so upset about internet "trolling". He's not being abusive or threatening, he isn't bullying anyone. He's either on the windup or consistent in a view. Either way, you don't have a right not to be irritated.
    You have to remember that this thread is dominated by people choosing to be upset about something that doesn't directly affect their lives and over which they have no control so choosing to get upset by, and be abusive to, someone on the internet just because they hold a different view is par for the course.

Categories