David Millar

kangarouge

Is it just me or did anyone else notice the hypocrisy of Mr Millar offering an opinion, during his commentary on ITV4 on today's TDF stage, of the what 'is good for the sport'? I personally find it a bit rich.

Does anyone else get irritated by the likes of Armstrong, Millar and Verenque commentating on races?

slowmart

The individuals you’ve mentioned certainly have an in-depth knowledge and unique insight and while they’ve made mistakes in the past and paid for them I don’t see why it should diminish the legitimacy of their comments.

I’d rather have someone who’s a bit colourful and entertaining commentating

PhilipPirrip

Do I go around searching for and eeking out every opportunity to be irritated/offended/upset about things that have no real impact upon my life?

Sounds like sheer bloody lunacy to me.

pblakeney

Outrage is endemic.

john1967

Yeah. I reckon every young man that makes a mistake and was influenced into doing something wrong should have too pay for it for the rest of his life

amrushton

Kangarouge wrote:

Is it just me or did anyone else notice the hypocrisy of Mr Millar offering an opinion, during his commentary on ITV4 on today's TDF stage, of the what 'is good for the sport'? I personally find it a bit rich.

Does anyone else get irritated by the likes of Armstrong, Millar and Verenque commentating on races?

for me Virenque cried like a baby and won some french sympathy. Millar was 'mea culpa' and paid his price and is willing to talk about it. Armstrong is still the same really but he took a big financial hit and came clean but would do it again. V.knowledgeable guys (never heard Virenque). I don't worry about the outrage it's a bike race. They got caught, did their time.

pilot_pete

I actually admire David Millar for coming clean and admitting what occurred. He was caught up in it as a young man desperate to follow his dreams. He seems more genuine in his desire to want the sport to be clean and he is a good orator with great knowledge of the pro peloton. I have met and chatted with him and he comes across well.

As for the others, well, never heard anything of Verenque on the airwaves but Armstrong is an arrogant piece of sh1t and I wouldn’t spit on him if he was on fire. He was and remains a thoroughly narcissistic, nasty, bullying, lying cunexttuesday. With great knowledge of the pro peloton I’m sure, but I’d rather hear that from elsewhere, in fact I would even actually prefer to listen to the monotone that is Sean Kelly. Well maybe not... Just my opinion.

PP

ugo.santalucia

Kangarouge wrote:

Is it just me or did anyone else notice the hypocrisy of Mr Millar offering an opinion, during his commentary on ITV4 on today's TDF stage, of the what 'is good for the sport'? I personally find it a bit rich.

Does anyone else get irritated by the likes of Armstrong, Millar and Verenque commentating on races?

What do you think about divorced politicians having opinions on families?

crescent

I like Millar as a pundit, his assessment of the racing is spot on and I do genuinely believe his contrition over his past is genuine. The one that galls me is Vinokourov - his involvement in cycling still feels very seedy, in my opinion. I do find it a little strange that Virenque is still the poster boy for Festina watches, given their association with the 1998 tour of shame.

surfercyclist

Millar is excellent on tv, Armstrong podcast is very good apart from that JB character who is boring as.

However, this has to be tempered by fact they are ex-drug cheats, something which gets to me.

ugo.santalucia

SurferCyclist wrote:

something which gets to me.

It's typical among those who have no talent for sport and never had to make tough decisions to unlock their potential...

alanparsons

Crescent wrote:

I do find it a little strange that Virenque is still the poster boy for Festina watches, given their association with the 1998 tour of shame.

Proof that there is no such thing as bad publicity.

surfercyclist

ugo.santalucia wrote:

SurferCyclist wrote:

something which gets to me.

It's typical among those who have no talent for sport and never had to make tough decisions to unlock their potential...

Yeah well fuck you, I've won surf comps, played octopush internationally, represented school in diving(admittedly a long time ago). I continue to surf at a high level, decent rider etc so my sporting credentials are fine thanks very much.

You're an apologist for drug cheats so you're as bad as them.

simon_e

SurferCyclist wrote:

Millar is excellent on tv, Armstrong podcast is very good apart from that JB character who is boring as.

However, this has to be tempered by fact they are ex-drug cheats, something which gets to me.

I guess you have a problem with most of the riders in the entire history of pro cycling then, including most of the current directeur sportifs and many other people involved in the sport.

If people have a problem with Millar as a pundit or that he returned to racing again after his ban ended it leads me to wonder whether it's either prejudice or that they simply have a chip on their shoulder about something.

craigus89

I think he is the best cycling commentator I have heard.

surfercyclist

Simon E wrote:

SurferCyclist wrote:

Millar is excellent on tv, Armstrong podcast is very good apart from that JB character who is boring as.

However, this has to be tempered by fact they are ex-drug cheats, something which gets to me.

I guess you have a problem with most of the riders in the entire history of pro cycling then, including most of the current directeur sportifs and many other people involved in the sport.

If people have a problem with Millar as a pundit or that he returned to racing again after his ban ended it leads me to wonder whether it's either prejudice or that they simply have a chip on their shoulder about something.

Well yes if they are cheats. I guess I'm in a minority who finds cheating abhorrent, if you can't win fairly then don't compete. This bullshit about "well they all do it so will I", sorry doesn't cut it. I guess my moral standards are higher than others...

ddraver

SurferCyclist wrote:

Millar is excellent on tv, Armstrong podcast is very good apart from that JB character who is boring as.

Anyone else catch Wiggins impersonating Armstrong on yesterday's podcast?

Clearly a listener

surrey_commuter

SurferCyclist wrote:

Simon E wrote:

SurferCyclist wrote:

Millar is excellent on tv, Armstrong podcast is very good apart from that JB character who is boring as.

However, this has to be tempered by fact they are ex-drug cheats, something which gets to me.

I guess you have a problem with most of the riders in the entire history of pro cycling then, including most of the current directeur sportifs and many other people involved in the sport.

If people have a problem with Millar as a pundit or that he returned to racing again after his ban ended it leads me to wonder whether it's either prejudice or that they simply have a chip on their shoulder about something.

Well yes if they are cheats. I guess I'm in a minority who finds cheating abhorrent, if you can't win fairly then don't compete. This bullshit about "well they all do it so will I", sorry doesn't cut it. I guess my moral standards are higher than others...

The fact he was welcomed back into the pro cycling fraternity tells you all you need to know about the others attitude towards PED.

Are you fine with Wiggins?

surfercyclist

He's not been found guilty or admitted anything but the suspicion is there. However, it's only fair and right to presume innocence until proven guilty.

pblakeney

SurferCyclist wrote:

Well yes if they are cheats. I guess I'm in a minority who finds cheating abhorrent, if you can't win fairly then don't compete. This bullshit about "well they all do it so will I", sorry doesn't cut it.

Name a clean TdF before, oh go on, pick your own year.
There wouldn't have been many participants by your standards.
#youcantdothisonbreadandwater

surfercyclist

PBlakeney wrote:

SurferCyclist wrote:

Well yes if they are cheats. I guess I'm in a minority who finds cheating abhorrent, if you can't win fairly then don't compete. This bullshit about "well they all do it so will I", sorry doesn't cut it.

Name a clean TdF before, oh go on, pick your own year.
There wouldn't have been many participants by your standards.
#youcantdothisonbreadandwater

So does that make it right? The fact that the majority may have doped doesn't really justify it does it?

imposter2.0

SurferCyclist wrote:

He's not been found guilty or admitted anything but the suspicion is there. However, it's only fair and right to presume innocence until proven guilty.

But someone who got caught, came clean, took his punishment with dignity and then rehabilitated - that’s not on, right?

Sanctimonious hypocrite, with your ‘higher moral standards’...

pblakeney

SurferCyclist wrote:

PBlakeney wrote:

SurferCyclist wrote:

Well yes if they are cheats. I guess I'm in a minority who finds cheating abhorrent, if you can't win fairly then don't compete. This bullshit about "well they all do it so will I", sorry doesn't cut it.

Name a clean TdF before, oh go on, pick your own year.
There wouldn't have been many participants by your standards.
#youcantdothisonbreadandwater

So does that make it right? The fact that the majority may have doped doesn't really justify it does it?

No, it doesn't make it right. But it does mean that you have to wipe out cycle racing history in it's entirety, or accept it for what it was.

craigus89

What would you prefer he do? Disappear into the wilderness and never show his face again?

Out of all of the people who were done for it he has dealt with it far better.

ugo.santalucia

SurferCyclist wrote:

Yeah well fark you, I've won surf comps

Admirable... I am not aware of surfing being plagued by doping though... is there even an anti-doping programme at the top level?

simon_e

SurferCyclist wrote:

I guess I'm in a minority who finds cheating abhorrent, if you can't win fairly then don't compete. This bullshit about "well they all do it so will I", sorry doesn't cut it. I guess my moral standards are higher than others...

So why follow pro cycling? It's full of unrepentant cheats and fraudsters. Is there a Tour you think was won clean?

Are your moral standards are higher? How do you know? I'd argue that that is a very precarious point of view to take. I certainly don't like cheating, fairness is a big deal but I acknowledge that life isn't 'fair' (in the way that I think of it). I find bullying, abuse and threats that Armstrong perpetuated for over a decade much harder to tolerate, which makes it difficult for me to respect him, regardless of his achievements on the bike.

Unlike virtually every other doper, Millar did bare his soul, didn't shy away from the topic and pushed for change. I don't have to admire him personally or have a rose-tinted view of the sport to recognise that or to respect his knowledge as a pundit. And only a doper can know what it's like to have doped.

But, removing the blinkers and taking a wider view, even if riders cheated and doped that is not the sum total of their personality and IMO not sufficient to stone them for the rest of their lives. Just like if someone goes to prison for fraud it doesn't mean they cannot ever do an honest day's work again or that a violent criminal can never move on from his past.

SurferCyclist wrote:

Yeah well fark you, I've won surf comps

Did you really write that? If so then f..k me, that's a rather small willy you're waving. My 80 year old mum kick your ar5e at Scrabble. So there!

ugo.santalucia

When I was 16, back in Italy, I had a couple of friends who were racing at Junior level... they all gave up when the pills were no longer enough and the needle was the "must have" to keep up. They made the right choice, probably, although none of them had spectacular success in anything afterwards... whether they became builders or worked in the retail sector...

It's hard to judge success in life, but what is obvious is that there was a clear line to cross and not crossing it meant giving up on any ambition in the sport... I don't really feel like blaming those who decided to cross the line.

surfercyclist

Wow, I'm genuinely surprised at how many here seem to defend doping and cheating.
Also some here need to read and understand posts before replying as you have definitely misinterpreted some of my posts.


Imposter - I was referring to Wiggins being presumed innocent not Millar as you seem to think.

Simon E - I mentioned surf comps etc in response to ugo.santalucia basically inferring I have no sporting talent. Yes willy waving but there you go. Believe it or not, I do or certainly did have sporting talent.

And yes the WSL does drug test for PEDS


As for why follow racing, I really enjoy the Grand tours. Undoubtedly some are likely to be doping but as I said previously I presume innocence until proven otherwise.

As I said, I find Millar excellent on tv as a commentator and it is commendable how he has come clean about drug use, regrets he did it and now mentors young riders about it. Surely the fact he regrets using drugs means he realises it's WRONG! Which is exactly the point I'm making.


There was recently articles in the news of swimmer Duncan Scott refusing to share the podium or shake hand of Sun Yang who won because of doping. I guess he's a sanctimonious hypocrite as well. And I guess Adam Peaty is as well who backed him up.

I also think that drug cheats who are caught with irrefutable evidence should be life banned from competition. It really gets to me that drug cheats are caught, given a two year ban or whatever then allowed to go back in and compete.
No doubt you'll all disagree with this as well...


Whatevs.

imposter2.0

SurferCyclist wrote:

Imposter - I was referring to Wiggins being presumed innocent not Millar as you seem to think.

I know you were, which is why I called you a sanctimonious hypocrite...

surfercyclist

Sorry I was wrong. You are not misinterpreting my posts, you're just a thick ladies front bottom.

ugo.santalucia

SurferCyclist wrote:

There was recently articles in the news of swimmer Duncan Scott refusing to share the podium or shake hand of Sun Yang who won because of doping. I guess he's a sanctimonious hypocrite as well. And I guess Adam Peaty is as well who backed him up.
.

If he has the impression that the winner is still on the drugs, despite a previous ban, then he has the right to protest, I would probably do the same. In the same FINA have the right to punish him, if they feel it's the right thing to do.

In cycling it was different... because they were all at it, there was camaraderie and nobody was particularly keen to point the finger, given nobody was innocent. The attitude has now changed, but certainly that was true in Millar's days... to the point that the UCI itself was acting as cover.

Nobody here is saying that it was right or pretty, but singling out Millar (or else) for doping is pure hypocrisy