Ullrich speaks up for Armstrong

2

Comments

  • deejay
    deejay Posts: 3,138
    Paul 8v wrote:
    UJlrich does have a point about the DQ being treated differently, how come in other cases such as Contador it was awarded to the second place rider but in the Armstrong case it was entered as "No winner" Now I realise that in some cases the second, third, 4th placed riders are convicted dopers but it is odd the way they have done that.

    I don't personally think he should be reinstated though.
    This is a point of view about possible reasons.
    The Armstrong Void TDF's being awarded elsewhere would mean finding extra prize money again after the budget accounts have been settled and filed away.
    It is the long drawn out procedure to get the original prize money from Texas because you know he will object.
    Void is the quick answer to those problems.

    Did they award the prize money to Contador or was it withheld. ??
    With the Contador problem, the prize money may have been repaid or the ASO could deduct it from future earnings.

    Will Ullrich and Zabel return their prize money to make them believable in what they say. :shock:
    Organiser, National Championship 50 mile Time Trial 1972
  • paulcuthbert
    paulcuthbert Posts: 1,016
    Joelsim wrote:
    In truth I don't believe he should be made the scapegoat even though he created and abused his power. IMO he should be given the titles back. Then every rider Including mr nice who has been caught should then just have an asterisk next to the name whether 1st, 2nd, 3rd, Lanterne or KOM or whatever in every single race for the period of the offence whether it be the Tour of a classic or whatever.

    Good point
    The most painful climb in Northern Ireland http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc1/hs200.snc1/6776_124247198694_548863694_2335754_8016178_n.jpg
  • tailwindhome
    tailwindhome Posts: 19,310
    It's not last year already is it?
    “New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!
  • morstar
    morstar Posts: 6,190
    Vino'sGhost wrote:
    here we go again, another thread where anyone who has a different view (based on nothing less legitimate than the fan boy massiv's own frothings ) is shot down as having mental problems. or dismissed as a troll.

    But the venom in the attacks suggests lack of confidence, an indefensible position and the need for aggression to distract from the facts which are that Sky is just as likely to be doping on an organised scale as any other team. Armstrong was a a nasty piece of sh it but could possibly have been treated more harshly than others. (unless his crimes were so heinous he should have a set of sanctions just for himself to appease the frothings) and that Crankbrothers view is as legitimate as anyone elses.
    I take issue with cb because he does exactly what I have accused him of. He directly responded to one of my posts in another thread inferring all sorts of nationalist fervour that simply wasn't there. I see him/her do it repeatedly all over these boards. Inferring facts / opinions that aren't evident. I suggest in my post that constructive argument is good. His arguments are dogmatic and involve creative interpretation of others posts.
    As for LA. I am glad he got busted but no, he hasn't been treated consistently. This is a problem. I agree.
    As for Sky. It is not a fact that they are as likely to be doping as any other team. It is a statistical probability. Subtle but significant difference.
  • Richmond Racer
    Richmond Racer Posts: 8,561
    deejay wrote:
    Paul 8v wrote:
    UJlrich does have a point about the DQ being treated differently, how come in other cases such as Contador it was awarded to the second place rider but in the Armstrong case it was entered as "No winner" Now I realise that in some cases the second, third, 4th placed riders are convicted dopers but it is odd the way they have done that.

    I don't personally think he should be reinstated though.
    This is a point of view about possible reasons.
    The Armstrong Void TDF's being awarded elsewhere would mean finding extra prize money again after the budget accounts have been settled and filed away.
    It is the long drawn out procedure to get the original prize money from Texas because you know he will object.
    Void is the quick answer to those problems.

    Did they award the prize money to Contador or was it withheld. ??
    With the Contador problem, the prize money may have been repaid or the ASO could deduct it from future earnings.

    Will Ullrich and Zabel return their prize money to make them believable in what they say. :shock:


    Nope - money was never got back from Contador AFAIK - pretty certain no attempt was made to request that he reimburse it)
  • ddraver
    ddraver Posts: 26,661
    Genuinely think Ulle's got a point!

    Jail him, fine him, remove his other ball for the bullying, intimidation, threats and witness tampering but the sport punishment for doping should be the same as Pantani's, Ullrich's, Zabel's, Vino's Bertie's etc etc...
    We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
    - @ddraver
  • Richmond Racer
    Richmond Racer Posts: 8,561
    ddraver wrote:
    Genuinely think Ulle's got a point!

    Jail him, fine him, remove his other ball for the bullying, intimidation, threats and witness tampering but the sport punishment for doping should be the same as Pantani's, Ullrich's, Zabel's, Vino's Bertie's etc etc...


    Oh noes, we're not going to see a Lance Fairness Fund started up are we? Mind you, the Cyclismas lot are very experienced now in running funds. Might even have learned how PayPal works..
  • josame
    josame Posts: 1,162
    We can stop now he's gone...
    'Do not compare your bike to others, for always there will be greater and lesser bikes'
  • josame
    josame Posts: 1,162
    We can stop now he's gone...
    'Do not compare your bike to others, for always there will be greater and lesser bikes'
  • ddraver
    ddraver Posts: 26,661
    Richmond Racer wrote:
    ddraver wrote:
    Genuinely think Ulle's got a point!

    Jail him, fine him, remove his other ball for the bullying, intimidation, threats and witness tampering but the sport punishment for doping should be the same as Pantani's, Ullrich's, Zabel's, Vino's Bertie's etc etc...


    Oh noes, we're not going to see a Lance Fairness Fund started up are we? Mind you, the Cyclismas lot are very experienced now in running funds. Might even have learned how PayPal works..

    Would be mildly hilarious...
    We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
    - @ddraver
  • thomthom
    thomthom Posts: 3,574
    Nah, giving him his titles back would just be the start for him being granted invitations to competitions again as well.

    I eat a cake every time he whines about being banned from competing in triathlons etc.

    I'll keep eating until he stops being a cnut. And that won't happen. Lance, 'the poor victim'..
  • Paul 8v
    Paul 8v Posts: 5,458
    Haha, you gonna get FAT! :-)
    Road
    MTB
    NEW Cross
    Track/Grass Track/Winter bike
  • morstar
    morstar Posts: 6,190
    ThomThom wrote:
    being banned from competing in triathlons etc.

    I feel his ban is totally appropriate due to his being a facilitator and ring leader in the doping.

    However, I think the victor or no victor debate over the tours is actually slightly more complex due to the whole issue of who was clean out of the key protagonists. In this respect, Armstrong is no worse than the others just because he was very organised. Ullrich and Riis still won TDF's and Zabel lots of green jerseys.
  • Anonymous
    Anonymous Posts: 79,667
    lostboysaint wrote:
    Crankbrother wrote:
    So is it an equal playing field now?

    SKY use all the resources of British Cycling ... Do Euskatel (for example) get that same level of access to facilities?

    Should the 2 most recent TdF winners be removed from the records as well?

    It just means that Sky and British Cycling have got their act together and the other nations haven't.

    You really are a sad little man aren't you.


    TBH I thought he was being sarcastic
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    ThomThom wrote:
    I eat a cake every time he whines about being banned from competing in triathlons etc.

    I'll keep eating until he stops being a cnut. And that won't happen. Lance, 'the poor victim'..

    I can't help but think that you have hit upon the reason for all this LA hatred. It really isn't about doping. It's about your, and many others, preception of him as an evil, scary man. Since being an evil, scary man isn't actually illegal you can't really use that excuse to hate him so you use the next excuse available, and that's doping. I also wonder why most of you seem afraid of him? :wink:
  • greasedscotsman
    greasedscotsman Posts: 6,962
    dennisn wrote:
    ThomThom wrote:
    I eat a cake every time he whines about being banned from competing in triathlons etc.

    I'll keep eating until he stops being a cnut. And that won't happen. Lance, 'the poor victim'..

    I can't help but think that you have hit upon the reason for all this LA hatred. It really isn't about doping. It's about your, and many others, preception of him as an evil, scary man. Since being an evil, scary man isn't actually illegal you can't really use that excuse to hate him so you use the next excuse available, and that's doping. I also wonder why most of you seem afraid of him? :wink:

    No, it's about cake!
  • rayjay
    rayjay Posts: 1,384
    Postals were almost comical in their doping. They were nowhere near as sophisticated as other teams.
    Do you think some of the other team leaders were nicer than Armstrong? He did what he had to do. He never put a gun to anyones head. If you don't like it leave. Thats the way cycling was and still is IMO. People behave in a selfish way when they are focused on winning. Nearly all athletes have this nature. Thats how they win. Self-focus.
    Armstrong was the greatest rider of his era and you can't pick and choose who keeps their tour wins because you don't like them. Do you think WIggins is any nicer than Armstrong? How do you know? You dont. Look at Nichole Cookes retirement speech. Nicole was one of my fav riders but she has not retired at 29 because she is injured.
    Tygart has totally ruined our sports image. Only a few dreamers would have believed that riders are winning tours clean. It was no shock to me. I saw Armstring and co quite a few times riding the tour. The effects of doping are different for each person but Armstrong was easily the strongest rider doped or not doped. Factoid.
    Well done Jan for telling it like it is. I don't care if riders dope or not. It doesn't effect me in any way. I would prefer that if sportsman are going to dope then they can do it safely. Im off to Scotland for the next 3 weeks to do some training up some very tough mountains. I love cycling.

    I
  • Richmond Racer
    Richmond Racer Posts: 8,561
    As far as we know Wiggins hasnt sued the arse off all and sundry. Nor has he made sure that a former team mate got fired from their jobs as as a DS and then as a tv commentator a la Frankie Andreu. Nor publicly put around that the same guy's wife was fit for a mental institute a la Betsy Andreu. Nor made sure that someone's business failed a la Lemond. Nor blackened a former team swanny's name by claiming that they'd whored themselves around the team a la Emma O'Reilly (as well as bringing a lawsuit against her)

    But apart from that...
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    Richmond Racer wrote:
    As far as we know Wiggins hasnt sued the ars* off all and sundry. Nor has he made sure that a former team mate got fired from their jobs as as a DS and then as a tv commentator a la Frankie Andreu. Nor publicly put around that the same guy's wife was fit for a mental institute a la Betsy Andreu. Nor made sure that someone's business failed a la Lemond. Nor blackened a former team swanny's name by claiming that they'd whored themselves around the team a la Emma O'Reilly (as well as bringing a lawsuit against her)

    But apart from that...

    This post sort of plays into my theory that it isn't about the doping. It's about how he is / was perceived by by the LA haters. It's not unusual for people to dislike / hate someone because of any number of wrongs that they may, or at least you think, they have done to you or someone you admire. Strong personalities can instill a certain fear in people with weaker personalities and this fear often turns to hatred and loathing, not only for the object of your rage but also of yourself for letting a person bother you that much. You hate them for them making you feel insecure.
    Is doping really the issue with LA?
  • Richmond Racer
    Richmond Racer Posts: 8,561
    How's life, dennis?

    How's the MLB-Biogenesis news going down over there?
  • mike6
    mike6 Posts: 1,199
    Dont feed the troll.
  • Richmond Racer
    Richmond Racer Posts: 8,561
    mike6 wrote:
    Dont feed the troll.


    I actually wasnt! Genuine question.
  • greasedscotsman
    greasedscotsman Posts: 6,962
    mike6 wrote:
    Dont feed the troll.

    Unless it's with cake...
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    Richmond Racer wrote:
    How's life, dennis?

    How's the MLB-Biogenesis news going down over there?

    Over here that MLB thing is just another news item. Are some people upset? Sure, there will always be crazies on both sides of the question. They are in a very small minority it would seem. Not too many people going to spend their days obsessing over whether or not some rich ball player did or did not use drugs. ESPN is, of course, covering the "situation"
    on a 24 hour a day basis. They have brought in experts to talk about it for hours. I can't imagine myself, or anyone, being that wrapped up in it to follow every little development. Talk about boring television. Snooooooozer. Jesus, just put a game on.

    In other words no one, and I mean no one, has mentioned it to me or commented on it. A fair share of people talking about the Tigers and Indians at a breakfast joint I ate at this morning but didn't hear A-Rod mentioned.
  • ddraver
    ddraver Posts: 26,661
    And what happened when you pulled your head out of the sand dennis? ;)
    We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
    - @ddraver
  • thomthom
    thomthom Posts: 3,574
    dennisn wrote:
    ThomThom wrote:
    I eat a cake every time he whines about being banned from competing in triathlons etc.

    I'll keep eating until he stops being a cnut. And that won't happen. Lance, 'the poor victim'..

    I can't help but think that you have hit upon the reason for all this LA hatred. It really isn't about doping. It's about your, and many others, preception of him as an evil, scary man.
    DING DING DING!! Bingo, dennis! As i've said to you several times, his doping is a very little part of the reason of my hatred towards this fella'.
    dennisn wrote:
    Since being an evil, scary man isn't actually illegal you can't really use that excuse to hate him so you use the next excuse available, and that's doping. I also wonder why most of you seem afraid of him? :wink:
    That makes no sense at all.

    So threats and intimidations aren't illegal? Alrighty, then..

    And all the other bullying crap he did, which you justify by saying; it's not illegal, should therefore not be an excuse for hating him? Of course it bloody should.

    You are talking nonsense. As usual.
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    ThomThom wrote:
    dennisn wrote:
    ThomThom wrote:
    I eat a cake every time he whines about being banned from competing in triathlons etc.

    I'll keep eating until he stops being a cnut. And that won't happen. Lance, 'the poor victim'..

    I can't help but think that you have hit upon the reason for all this LA hatred. It really isn't about doping. It's about your, and many others, preception of him as an evil, scary man.
    DING DING DING!! Bingo, dennis! As i've said to you several times, his doping is a very little part of the reason of my hatred towards this fella'.
    dennisn wrote:
    Since being an evil, scary man isn't actually illegal you can't really use that excuse to hate him so you use the next excuse available, and that's doping. I also wonder why most of you seem afraid of him? :wink:
    That makes no sense at all.

    So threats and intimidations aren't illegal? Alrighty, then..

    And all the other bullying crap he did, which you justify by saying; it's not illegal, should therefore not be an excuse for hating him? Of course it bloody should.

    You are talking nonsense. As usual.

    I applaud you for admitting why you really don't like him. Didn't think I'd ever hear someone say that on this forum.
    My apology for implying otherwise. :oops:
  • Crankbrother
    Crankbrother Posts: 1,695
    Sometimes I wonder if I've stumbled upon a WWE forum by mistake ... Certainly plenty marks on here ...
  • deejay
    deejay Posts: 3,138
    Crankbrother wrote:
    Sometimes I wonder if I've stumbled upon a WWE forum by mistake ... Certainly plenty marks on here ...
    But the Smell here is awful.
    Like a rotten carcass that was put down some months ago.
    Organiser, National Championship 50 mile Time Trial 1972
  • Tom Butcher
    Tom Butcher Posts: 3,830
    dennisn wrote:
    I applaud you for admitting why you really don't like him. Didn't think I'd ever hear someone say that on this forum.
    My apology for implying otherwise. :oops:


    Really ? Plenty of people have expressed pretty much the same opinion as ThomThom for years.
    it's a hard life if you don't weaken.

Categories