Is it time to forgive Lance Armstrong?

supermurph09

No problem with LA myself, sure he cheated, some of antics to others have been pretty horrible but everyone has faults, I just think his were magnified by the position he ended up in. My biggest annoyance about him was that he was in a position to say "right lads, this doping has got to stop, look what it's doing to our health, the risks we take are insane, I want us all to stop and create a clean sport, who's with me?".

Now you could argue (maybe there is no argument) he never did this because it would obviously affect his own position, it would then also be an admission of guilt, both of which given the corner he'd put himself in were going to take some real soul searching to do.

But there are a lot of riders in the sport both past and present who have doped and are still revered and that's what irks me. I don't believe he should have been stripped of the titles, what was the point of that but to give the powers that be a pat on their own backs. Those same people that facilitated and helped create the behemoth that is / was LA.

ugo.santalucia

Supermurph09 wrote:

No problem with LA myself, sure he cheated, some of antics to others have been pretty horrible but everyone has faults, I just think his were magnified by the position he ended up in. My biggest annoyance about him was that he was in a position to say "right lads, this doping has got to stop, look what it's doing to our health, the risks we take are insane, I want us all to stop and create a clean sport, who's with me?".
.

Probably because he is only human and wanted to avoid all sorts of complications. If you knew you had done something wrong and could

a) get away with it, knowing you haven't done any harm to anybody

b) admit to it and have your home repossessed among other things

Which way would you go?

bompington

I think you'll find that it was explained on page 217 of the LA thread. Hang on, maybe it was page 317, or 137. Why don't you all go and read through it, then come back and add something that hasn't already been said a thousand times?

pblakeney

Forgive? No.
Do carry on...

supermurph09

bompington wrote:

I think you'll find that it was explained on page 217 of the LA thread. Hang on, maybe it was page 317, or 137. Why don't you all go and read through it, then come back and add something that hasn't already been said a thousand times?

Do you realise how pathetic that sounds? New debate isn't harmful, not everyone would have been around when that thread started. Those new wheels threads though, I'm with you on that..

fat daddy

without meaning to point out the futility in human emotions etc etc .... whats the point .. I mean if we all forgive him right now, what will happen ? .... will he know ? ... will he care ? .... will it snow tomorrow because of it ?

it doesnt make any difference to anything or anyone other than your own self to whether you forgive him. ..... so if it settles your soul and brings inner peace to for give him, then go ahead.

personally I I didn't give a sh1te in the 1st place so its hard to forgive based purely on not caring enough

danieljwaterhouse

fat daddy wrote:

without meaning to point out the futility in human emotions etc etc .... whats the point .. I mean if we all forgive him right now, what will happen ? .... will he know ? ... will he care ? .... will it snow tomorrow because of it ?

it doesnt make any difference to anything or anyone other than your own self to whether you forgive him. ..... so if it settles your soul and brings inner peace to for give him, then go ahead.

personally I I didn't give a sh1te in the 1st place so its hard to forgive based purely on not caring enough

Sadly LA and Livestrong were synonymous with each other. Through the destruction of LA the UCI and others have destroyed a 500 million dollar cancer trust. I think it's time that we as the cycling community help rebuild that.

LA had been disproportionately punished in both the media and the cycling community. He was just better than everyone else at everything he did. Even now he's managed to manoeuvre himself out of court and into settlements. The guy is a force of nature however you look at him. When finally he settles all the disgruntled parties, then we will see the real truth come out. LA will have the last laugh and he will expose the hypocrisy through his whole ordeal. If I was the UCI I'd be very worried.

bompington

Supermurph09 wrote:

bompington wrote:

I think you'll find that it was explained on page 217 of the LA thread. Hang on, maybe it was page 317, or 137. Why don't you all go and read through it, then come back and add something that hasn't already been said a thousand times?

Do you realise how pathetic that sounds?

No, I don't. The whole thing has been done to death, and just because an LA fan pops up to eulogise his idol doesn't mean there's anything new to be said.

He was just better than everyone else at everything he did! Swoon!

kingstongraham

danieljwaterhouse wrote:

He was just better than everyone else at everything he did.

Hahahahahahahaha.

How on earth do you know?

flasher

danieljwaterhouse wrote:

Sadly LA and Livestrong were synonymous with each other. Through the destruction of LA the UCI and others have destroyed a 500 million dollar cancer trust. I think it's time that we as the cycling community help rebuild that.

I'm sure the money is still donated, just elsewhere.

dennisn

Imposter wrote:

briantrumpet wrote:

Where's dennism?

Undergoing extraordinary rendition, hopefully...

I don't think I am? No, just sort of chuckling on this new posting. I never cared about him one way or the other. Still don't.
You guys seem to not be able to let it go, for whatever reason.

meanredspider

I'm conflicted about LA - the doping is just what loads of riders have done but what he did to bully others was pretty terrible.

That said, I find it hard to separate that man from the one that helped me through my son's cancer and has clearly helped thousands of others.

And he clearly cares about cancer. I did the Dornoch Twitter ride with him (and several hundred other people). I wanted to get "It's Not About the Bike" signed by him and was in the crowd waiting when he set off to leave. I called out to him, saying that it was for my son suffering from cancer. He turned straight around, came over, signed the book and wished my son well, then left.

StillGoing

meanredspider wrote:

I wanted to get "It's Not About the Bike" signed by him and was in the crowd waiting when he set off to leave. I called out to him, saying that it was for my son suffering from cancer. He turned straight around, came over, signed the book and wished my son well, then left.

I'm sure you can get something to cove the offending signature.

mamba80

meanredspider wrote:

I'm conflicted about LA - the doping is just what loads of riders have done but what he did to bully others was pretty terrible.

That said, I find it hard to separate that man from the one that helped me through my son's cancer and has clearly helped thousands of others.

And he clearly cares about cancer. I did the Dornoch Twitter ride with him (and several hundred other people). I wanted to get "It's Not About the Bike" signed by him and was in the crowd waiting when he set off to leave. I called out to him, saying that it was for my son suffering from cancer. He turned straight around, came over, signed the book and wished my son well, then left.

that last paragraph says more about LA then any number of threads on doping etc, human beings should not defined by one aspect of their character.
there are 2 sides to every story and our opinions on the bullying etc are what we ve read in the media and are not unbiased points of view, however, it is not the UCIs job to punish people for character flaws.

few keen cyclists would nt have looked on in awe of the Pantani/Ullrich/LA battles, yet also turned a blind eye to the obvious, these guys gave us what we wanted and we lapped it up.

bigmitch41

Don't dope, you wont cope!

debeli

I didn't really get the worship of Armstrong when he was winning, nor the vilification when he fell.

It seemed clear from his re-emergence from his grave illness that he was among those who prepared properly. Many did - and many of those are still on my 'list of heroes'.

I find the classics and the GTs extremely entertaining and have always accepted that those who flourish and those who propel them there are likely to have prepared properly.

I have a high regard for Indurain, Cadel Evans, Pantani, Wiggins, Ulrich, Virenque, Voeck;er and many others, despite the impression or in most cases the clear fact that they prepared properly.

Some people have it in for Lance because of his unpleasant treatment of others. Certainly, it was horrible. But I read the works of Damon Runyon and enjoy them despite his having been - by all accounts - a rather unpleasant man with deep prejudices.

I watched and followed Armstrong because of his cycling. I did the same for Fignon, Wiggins, Vino, Vogt and many others. Doping was everywhere in the sport from before my birth.... I still find the sport compelling and still find Armstrong a fascinating character.

I don't feel the need to forgive a man I never really worshipped and never really condemned.

kingstongraham

He doesn't want forgiveness as an abstract concept. He wants to be allowed to compete. At something.

timothyw

KingstonGraham wrote:

He doesn't want forgiveness as an abstract concept. He wants to be allowed to compete. At something.

Perhaps Wiggo can get him drafted as a late entry?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/38508669

kingstongraham

TimothyW wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

He doesn't want forgiveness as an abstract concept. He wants to be allowed to compete. At something.

Perhaps Wiggo can get him drafted as a late entry?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/38508669

This thread's going downhill fast etc etc

svetty

The Rookie wrote:

Lets be honest here, the UCI and all the controlling organisations needed a scapegoat, they dropped the ball so badly practically - if not all of - the entire peloton was doping to some extent or another (be it actual drugs or blood manipulation which was legal for part of that time anyway), they don't want to admit that publicly.

It was seen at the time more like getting caught was the crime, not the doping itself.

Yes Lance and US postal MAY have been better at it than everyone else, who knows, but they certainly weren't in a minority for most of that period.

Is Lance a convenient scapegoat, yes, did he do wrong and deserve to be punished, yes. Is the punishment (in my opinion) disproportionate based on that handed to other competitors for similar wrongdoing (both in cycling and other sports), yes. Lance seems to have been punished more due to his continued denial, but put that against the backdrop of the effect an admission would have had on both his and his charity's finances versus how it would impact other people and its understandable.

Spot on!

kingstongraham

Svetty wrote:

The Rookie wrote:

Lets be honest here, the UCI and all the controlling organisations needed a scapegoat, they dropped the ball so badly practically - if not all of - the entire peloton was doping to some extent or another (be it actual drugs or blood manipulation which was legal for part of that time anyway), they don't want to admit that publicly.

It was seen at the time more like getting caught was the crime, not the doping itself.

Yes Lance and US postal MAY have been better at it than everyone else, who knows, but they certainly weren't in a minority for most of that period.

Is Lance a convenient scapegoat, yes, did he do wrong and deserve to be punished, yes. Is the punishment (in my opinion) disproportionate based on that handed to other competitors for similar wrongdoing (both in cycling and other sports), yes. Lance seems to have been punished more due to his continued denial, but put that against the backdrop of the effect an admission would have had on both his and his charity's finances versus how it would impact other people and its understandable.

Spot on!

Except it is USADA's punishment, not the UCI's isn't it?

He cheated bigly to win bigly, then moans when he gets punished bigly?

svetty

There is something in the nature of a fair and civilised society that punishment is proportionate and just. Given that the sporting authorities (USADA et al) have penalised LA more severely that others who broke the same doping rules he did there are some grounds for his claims to have been unfairly treated.

Indurain and Merkxx were no paragons of virtue but are generally well respected in the cycling community. Tom Simpson......

LA was a manipulating, bullying scumbag but that doesn't mean he's wrong on this point and if we lay claim to higher standards of decency and justice that means accepting that he has been unfairly treated compared to many others of his generation.

With respect to the non-sporting legal proceedings that is a different domain IMHO and it is for the state judicial process in the US to run it's course.

pblakeney

Svetty wrote:

There is something in the nature of a fair and civilised society that punishment is proportionate and just. Given that the sporting authorities (USADA et al) have penalised LA more severely that others who broke the same doping rules he did there are some grounds for his claims to have been unfairly treated.

Indurain and Merkxx were no paragons of virtue but are generally well respected in the cycling community. Tom Simpson......

LA was a manipulating, bullying scumbag but that doesn't mean he's wrong on this point and if we lay claim to higher standards of decency and justice that means accepting that he has been unfairly treated compared to many others of his generation.

With respect to the non-sporting legal proceedings that is a different domain IMHO and it is for the state judicial process in the US to run it's course.

Minor point, but Indurain, Merkxx, Simpson et all are/were not citizens of the USA for USADA to punish.

SuperHans808

No.

dennisn

KingstonGraham wrote:

He doesn't want forgiveness as an abstract concept. He wants to be allowed to compete. At something.

FWIW we can't help him.

burnthesheep

Here is my opinion as someone new to the sport of cycling but has gone through a similar "hero" or "fallen star" occurrence in the sport.

I've played golf since I was 5 years old. I competed quite a bit, nothing stellar but I was full on into the sport. I grew up with the Tiger Woods generation of youth golfers.

It was amazing to watch him play and what he could do.

Now, he has not been banned for doping but he has seriously let down the sport. In Tiger's case I feel like you had a great responsibility to the youth. Plenty of previous generation top level pros were great but never took on the youth fan base, they continued to live the big life drinking and running game on the ladies.

I have a strong suspicion that even as a golfer Woods was on the juice of some kind. I mean crap, look at his college year video footage and look at him in his prime.

As soon as the PGA started random testing suddenly Woods has trouble recovering from typical age specific knee and back issues that somehow before he could mysteriously just beat off like it was nothing.

For Lance, it is totally forgivable........if he ever actually changes as a person. To me, in some hidden way, he is still that bully a-hole at heart. As long as he is that, nope.

As for the doping itself.........it's a total hypocrisy for only his punishment to be the severity it is and not a lot of others........ I mean, look, there's a freaking statue for a guy that DIED BECAUSE HE DOPED on a mountain stage.

But the hypocrisy can't mean you give things back or go lightly.

shortfall

Not sure how you can put Lance and Tiger in the same category. If we're being charitable we could say that Lance was better at cheating in a sport where cheating was endemic but that still doesn't excuse all the other stuff like destroying the lives of people who stood in his way or who might have exposed him. Tiger had his faults and wasn't a gentleman champion like say Arnold Palmer or Jack Nicklaus, but to my knowledge he never cheated at the game of golf and he inspired legions of young people to get into a sport that had previously been the preserve of rich white men. He cheated on his wife and liked the services of hookers and the scandal around that was his undoing because the sponsors didn't like it. It might not make him the greatest human being in the world but he was arguably the greatest golfer and only Nicklaus has a better record of Majors. If infidelity was his only crime it pales into significance against the rap sheet against Lance Armstrong.

charlie_potatoes

No.

simon_masterson

meanredspider wrote:

I'm conflicted about LA - the doping is just what loads of riders have done but what he did to bully others was pretty terrible.

This. I remain unconvinced that being particularly good at doping is enough to earn a harsher punishment, but no-one else (that I'm aware of) has gone after those that attempted to expose him in the same way. That said, wiping out his tour wins mainly serves to show how inconsistent (and at times farcical) the UCI's approach to doping control has been - plenty of grand tour/classics winners were caught and given little more than a slap on the wrist - and that's to say nothing of those that doped but there's no proof. (eg Big Mig)

navrig2

Simon Masterson wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

I'm conflicted about LA - the doping is just what loads of riders have done but what he did to bully others was pretty terrible.

This. I remain unconvinced that being particularly good at doping is enough to earn a harsher punishment, but no-one else (that I'm aware of) has gone after those that attempted to expose him in the same way. That said, wiping out his tour wins mainly serves to show how inconsistent (and at times farcical) the UCI's approach to doping control has been - plenty of grand tour/classics winners were caught and given little more than a slap on the wrist - and that's to say nothing of those that doped but there's no proof. (eg Big Mig)

I agree. He bullied lots of people but bullying those who have less confidence and resources to defend themselves is deplorable and for that reason alone he doesn't deserve forgiveness or entitlement to compete ever again.

For those seeking to recover monies he earned directly from them - Good luck. Most contracts have professional behaviour and disrepute clauses of some sort. To me he clearly is in breach of such clauses and they are entitled to recover losses/costs or damages from him.

At the end of the day he should be pretty broke and have to work like the rest of use to earn a crust. He should have no entitlement to live off his earlier winning/earnings or live of his reputation.

Harsh? Perhaps.