Armstrong & peeps on t'internet
So there's a massive storm outside and my TV won't work so I've been reading stuff on Facebook and blogs etc.
Now all the news reports and sensible people have been reporting what has happened, Lance won't be fighting the charges and so has been stripped of his titles yada yada yada. Not exactly the actions of an innocent man.
However
The majority of the responses from Joe public are strongly defending Armstrong calling the whole thing a witch hunt and swearing lots about the USADA.
What gives? As they would say in the US of A?
If he was innocent he would fight this with every last breath. Surely It's as simple as that. Why are so many people defending him?
Now all the news reports and sensible people have been reporting what has happened, Lance won't be fighting the charges and so has been stripped of his titles yada yada yada. Not exactly the actions of an innocent man.
However
The majority of the responses from Joe public are strongly defending Armstrong calling the whole thing a witch hunt and swearing lots about the USADA.
What gives? As they would say in the US of A?
If he was innocent he would fight this with every last breath. Surely It's as simple as that. Why are so many people defending him?
0
Comments
-
Cos they are deluded innit0
-
Don't think many people are that bothered as its a minority sport and he's beaten cancer, done so much in the 'war' against this disease and been such a bloody good egg. Who cares if he took a few pills to win a bike race. They're all at it anyway aren't they?0
-
Cos he's an all american hero!!! (not my opinion btw)0
-
Heavymental wrote:Don't think many people are that bothered as its a minority sport
Yeah but it was all over the real news today, 6 o'clock and everything
It would appear that a large portion of the public are on his side.... why?0 -
Because they have been taken in by Pharmstrong and his spin. You can't kid a kidder!!0
-
PeteMadoc wrote:Heavymental wrote:Don't think many people are that bothered as its a minority sport
Yeah but it was all over the real news today, 6 o'clock and everything
It would appear that a large portion of the public are on his side.... why?
There's a lot of stories on the news people aren't that bothered about. How many of the general public are pricking up their ears when the latest from Syria comes on? It's a big story but of little consequence to most people.
Like I said, I think most people think he's the icon for cancer fighters (which he is for many) and so they think any trifling story about doping is just not necessary. They won't see the bigger picture about doping and its wider implications.0 -
Its because the TV mainly today has not given a proper picture of the whole story.0
-
PeteMadoc wrote:Heavymental wrote:Don't think many people are that bothered as its a minority sport
Yeah but it was all over the real news today, 6 o'clock and everything
It would appear that a large portion of the public are on his side.... why?
What LARGE portion are on his side ???? - why dont you read the other topics on this page and try and look up quotes from Bernard Hinault, Kathy LeMond , Gilbert Duclos Lasalle.....Yes there are a handful of "Fanboys" on here with their usual shyte "500 clean tests pish" - even they are getting fed up listening to that old clap trap.0 -
Gazzetta67 wrote:PeteMadoc wrote:Heavymental wrote:Don't think many people are that bothered as its a minority sport
Yeah but it was all over the real news today, 6 o'clock and everything
It would appear that a large portion of the public are on his side.... why?
What LARGE portion are on his side ???? - why dont you read the other topics on this page and try and look up quotes from Bernard Hinault, Kathy LeMond , Gilbert Duclos Lasalle.....Yes there are a handful of "Fanboys" on here with their usual shyte "500 clean tests pish" - even they are getting fed up listening to that old clap trap.
I'm not talking about the people on this forum, who generally seem well informed, its Facebook and comments on news articles, which seems to include lots of cycling fans..0 -
Apologies to the bike radar faithful for creating yet another Armstrong thread....
But it is the biggest bust in cycling history...... and my TV won't work grrrr0 -
Sorry you did say blogs as well...i thought you meant on here as well no worries.0
-
Heavymental wrote:Like I said, I think most people think he's the icon for cancer fighters (which he is for many) and so they think any trifling story about doping is just not necessary. They won't see the bigger picture about doping and its wider implications.
What "the bigger picture" is depends on your perspective on life. Because of his image as the icon for cancer fighters he's helped raise hundreds of millions of dollars, to anyone except bike geeks that's the bigger picture.
I'm not saying you're wrong, his cheating may have affected people in ways I don't understand but compared to his charity fund raising it's pretty insignificant to most people.0 -
ThePeoplesChamp wrote:Heavymental wrote:Like I said, I think most people think he's the icon for cancer fighters (which he is for many) and so they think any trifling story about doping is just not necessary. They won't see the bigger picture about doping and its wider implications.
What "the bigger picture" is depends on your perspective on life. Because of his image as the icon for cancer fighters he's helped raise hundreds of millions of dollars, to anyone except bike geeks that's the bigger picture.
I'm not saying you're wrong, his cheating may have affected people in ways I don't understand but compared to his charity fund raising it's pretty insignificant to most people.
Well, there's certainly a discussion on morality concerning the balancing of good acts against bad to be had there. His millions of dollars raised for the cancer cause and the hope he has given is unquestionably valuable. And yes, the harm to cycling is trivial in many eyes. Its only cycling after all. A few careers damanged. A few fans deceived. But... he hasn't exactly cured cancer. Would the fight against cancer be any less advanced without him? Would all those people have been better finding another hero in their fight. After all, it's now clear he doped from the start. Is it not morally wrong to have put himself on a pedestal knowing there was always a risk he would crumble under the weight of his own wrongdoing? How much money does he need to have been responsible for rasing before his sporting crimes are forgiven?0 -
I like the idea that some people talk of a conspiracy against Armstong, when he's been done for conspiracy to dope and cover it up
. 0 -
Heavymental wrote:ThePeoplesChamp wrote:Heavymental wrote:Like I said, I think most people think he's the icon for cancer fighters (which he is for many) and so they think any trifling story about doping is just not necessary. They won't see the bigger picture about doping and its wider implications.
What "the bigger picture" is depends on your perspective on life. Because of his image as the icon for cancer fighters he's helped raise hundreds of millions of dollars, to anyone except bike geeks that's the bigger picture.
I'm not saying you're wrong, his cheating may have affected people in ways I don't understand but compared to his charity fund raising it's pretty insignificant to most people.
Well, there's certainly a discussion on morality concerning the balancing of good acts against bad to be had there. His millions of dollars raised for the cancer cause and the hope he has given is unquestionably valuable. And yes, the harm to cycling is trivial in many eyes. Its only cycling after all. A few careers damanged. A few fans deceived. But... he hasn't exactly cured cancer. Would the fight against cancer be any less advanced without him? Would all those people have been better finding another hero in their fight. After all, it's now clear he doped from the start. Is it not morally wrong to have put himself on a pedestal knowing there was always a risk he would crumble under the weight of his own wrongdoing? How much money does he need to have been responsible for rasing before his sporting crimes are forgiven?
Just as important is that when money is raised for cancer, people see this and nothing else.
But. What about Livestrong and Armstrong?
Well, for some its awkward, but there is some criticism here. Its widely reported that the running costs including big legal costs are very high for Livestrong, and higher than so so many other charities.
When people donate to charity they'd surely like that charity to be run as efficiently as possible so the maximum % of their donations go to the cause they are supporting. That pretty much goes without saying Id hope.
We all know Livestrong long stopped giving a single dollar to Cancer Research, and it sets about Cancer Awareness (to make people aware cancer is not contagious - in countries where some people believe this) and in supporting people with Cancer providing information. How efficiently it does this, well, I think its fair to say its questionable, very questionable if nothing else.
Then we get to a few things we can pick off... what about when Livestrong took legal proceedings against Barkstrong, the dog charity, for infringing copyright on its name? The Charity, or the for-profit .com could have funded the legal proceedings, but which one did it? The charity, from the donations. Surely the hugely profitable .com could have funded this??
Then you have the massive appearance fees LA/Livestrong charged an Australian cancer charity to appear, which they paid for LA to appear. That seems a bit 'off', but also, when he travelled to Australia for it, what did he do as a multi-millionaire, buy his own ticket to go appear?? No. Get Livestrong to make a massive payment to Mellow Johnny's Aviation, his company that he used to run his private jet, and travelled on that.
Sometimes there's more to a charity than meets the eye.
If it wasn't for the fact he'd had cancer himself, I do wonder if he was a businessman or something that was involved in the running of a charity in that manner, he might well get a lot of stick.
(some of the finer points of the above please feel free to look up, Im sure some people will have links saved for these events).
As an end-note. Don't get me wrong. I know the charity does achieve a lot of good too.0 -
I am utterly astounded at how many on here are still 'keeping the faith'.
Most of us have known for years that it's over. But now it's well and truly OVER.
What's the matter with you people, you brainwashed or what?
Strangely, this takes nothing away (for me) from all the crazy stuff he was able to do whilst under the influence of all the gear, as we all know they all were. Hautacam, Alpe d'Huez, descent into Gap etc etc etc etc.
But let's not pretend for even one second that he wasn't totally off his head. He was.0 -
This pretty much explains for me why he won't fight it, admit wrong-doing or say sorry.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0fLckfvCac0 -
Le Commentateur wrote:This pretty much explains for me why he won't fight it, admit wrong-doing or say sorry.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0fLckfvCac
Fascinating. That was probably a hundred quids worth of 'on-the-couch' in Harley Street.
If I followed it correctly, it seemed to expand upon, say, Greg Lemond's pithy assertion that Lance Armstrong "does not possess a conscience"."Lick My Decals Off, Baby"0 -
LA is a fraud. And like a lot of frauds he is often plausible. Some people still want to believe in him. Leave 'em to it, I say.Ecrasez l’infame0
