David Millar

12467

Comments

  • Ben6899
    Ben6899 Posts: 9,686
    PBlakeney wrote:
    Jez mon wrote:
    A truly old school approach would involve a quote about bread and water, and a gallic shrug.
    PBlakeney wrote:
    #youcantdothisonbreadandwater

    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    pas normal
    Ben

    Bikes: Donhou DSS4 Custom | Condor Italia RC | Gios Megalite | Dolan Preffisio | Giant Bowery '76
    Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ben_h_ppcc/
    Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/143173475@N05/
  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 27,496
    Ben6899 wrote:
    PBlakeney wrote:
    Jez mon wrote:
    A truly old school approach would involve a quote about bread and water, and a gallic shrug.
    PBlakeney wrote:
    #youcantdothisonbreadandwater

    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    pas normal
    Merci!
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • Longshot
    Longshot Posts: 940
    I don't mind Millar but Armstrong is a **** in my opinion. Not all cheats (alleged or otherwise) are equal.
    You can fool some of the people all of the time. Concentrate on those people.
  • homers_double
    homers_double Posts: 8,332
    Keith57 wrote:
    keef66 wrote:
    ...At the end of the day the winning rider still has to get round quicker than anyone else; it's an outstanding physical achievement, and it's generally entertaining to watch.
    Yes, that’s all very true and I do like it too.

    But when, say the person or persons, who could really challenge the eventual GC champion is on the same team working for them, it’s not really as exciting as it could be perhaps?

    That’s the point I was trying to make. Applies to many pro ‘team’ sports I guess, not just bicycling :-)

    In my mind I see it all as a bit ‘manufactured’ and a little artificial. Not as ‘real’ to me personally as say me and my mates tackling a big Alpine col together. Everyone sees things form their own personal perspective of course. Each one isn't better or worse than another, just different :-)

    Assuming you and your mates are matched in ability but one earns 50k and you earn 20k, he's going to be able to buy faster wheels and beat you up the hill.
    Advocate of disc brakes.
  • Matthewfalle
    Matthewfalle Posts: 17,380
    Longshot wrote:
    I don't mind Millar but Armstrong is a **** in my opinion. Not all cheats (alleged or otherwise) are equal.

    they both cheated
    they both lied
    no difference

    #dopinglyinngcheat
    #251
    Postby team47b » Sun Jun 28, 2015 11:53 am

    De Sisti wrote:
    This is one of the silliest threads I've come across. :lol:

    Recognition at last Matthew, well done!, a justified honour :D
    smithy21 wrote:

    He's right you know.
  • amrushton
    amrushton Posts: 1,313
    Matthewfalle wrote:
    Longshot wrote:
    I don't mind Millar but Armstrong is a **** in my opinion. Not all cheats (alleged or otherwise) are equal.

    they both cheated
    they both lied
    no difference

    #dopinglyinngcheat
    #251

    They did and it cost them their livelihood and $$$$ but that was the risk they took. Millar was imo more cautious before going into it whereas Lance was full-on as he knew what was required to defeat his opposition who were doping on an industrial scale (E.German/Russia/Spain/Italy). But one day the stories will come out about all the other sports who cheated and I suspect cycling will be a minor sport. Russia was even guilty of duplicate labs and fraud and only got a slap from the IOC
  • Alejandrosdog
    Alejandrosdog Posts: 1,975
    Imposter wrote:
    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’...
    Millar doesn’t fit in that category
  • Alejandrosdog
    Alejandrosdog Posts: 1,975
    Millar is a drug cheat. And a cunt
  • Matthewfalle
    Matthewfalle Posts: 17,380
    Alejandrosdog wrote:
    Millar is a drug cheat. And a ****


    good points well presented

    #truedat
    Postby team47b » Sun Jun 28, 2015 11:53 am

    De Sisti wrote:
    This is one of the silliest threads I've come across. :lol:

    Recognition at last Matthew, well done!, a justified honour :D
    smithy21 wrote:

    He's right you know.
  • imposter2.0
    imposter2.0 Posts: 12,028
    Alejandrosdog wrote:
    Imposter wrote:
    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’...
    Millar doesn’t fit in that category

    In my opinion he does. You’ll need to explain why you think he doesn’t...
  • Alejandrosdog
    Alejandrosdog Posts: 1,975
    Imposter wrote:
    Alejandrosdog wrote:
    Imposter wrote:
    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’...
    Millar doesn’t fit in that category

    In my opinion he does. You’ll need to explain why you think he doesn’t...

    I don’t need to explain anything. Millar is a proven drug cheat. His PR efforts are quite impressive but he is still a cheating tool that has people
    Believing he’s the next messiah or something.
  • imposter2.0
    imposter2.0 Posts: 12,028
    Alejandrosdog wrote:
    Imposter wrote:
    Alejandrosdog wrote:
    Imposter wrote:
    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’...
    Millar doesn’t fit in that category

    In my opinion he does. You’ll need to explain why you think he doesn’t...

    I don’t need to explain anything. Millar is a proven drug cheat. His PR efforts are quite impressive but he is still a cheating tool that has people
    Believing he’s the next messiah or something.

    You're obviously free to disagree. But if you can't or won't explain your reasoning, then you'll have to forgive me if I don't take your opinion seriously..
  • tootsie323
    tootsie323 Posts: 199
    Miller broke the rules. He served a ban. He came back clean.
    He has now stopped pro cycling and is now, in my opinion, a knowledgeable pundit.
    I don't condone his drug use but fail to see how that should have any bearing on whether he should be allowed to provide punditry on the sport.
  • Alejandrosdog
    Alejandrosdog Posts: 1,975
    Imposter wrote:
    Alejandrosdog wrote:
    Imposter wrote:
    Alejandrosdog wrote:
    Imposter wrote:
    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’...
    Millar doesn’t fit in that category

    In my opinion he does. You’ll need to explain why you think he doesn’t...

    I don’t need to explain anything. Millar is a proven drug cheat. His PR efforts are quite impressive but he is still a cheating tool that has people
    Believing he’s the next messiah or something.

    You're obviously free to disagree. But if you can't or won't explain your reasoning, then you'll have to forgive me if I don't take your opinion seriously..

    My reasoning is quite clear. hes a drug cheat. I could go on by describing the way i dislike crass excuses from doping sportsmen along the lines of i'm the most tested sportsman blah blah, i only kept it to remind myself how close id come to cheating blah blah. I dislike them because the person who tells lies like this is assuming his audience is universally gullible or stupid.

    His remorse is a pr exercise in contrition his book says poor me etc etc and the truth is Millar is a cheat. worse still, he strikes me as someone who is using this faux contrition to further his career.

    Armstrongs behaviour was far far far worse than Millars but somehow even his rehabilitation is less unappetising. possibly because he (Armstrong) isn't sanctimonious.
  • imposter2.0
    imposter2.0 Posts: 12,028
    Alejandrosdog wrote:

    My reasoning is quite clear. hes a drug cheat. I could go on by describing the way i dislike crass excuses from doping sportsmen along the lines of i'm the most tested sportsman blah blah, i only kept it to remind myself how close id come to cheating blah blah. I dislike them because the person who tells lies like this is assuming his audience is universally gullible or stupid.

    His remorse is a pr exercise in contrition his book says poor me etc etc and the truth is Millar is a cheat. worse still, he strikes me as someone who is using this faux contrition to further his career.

    Armstrongs behaviour was far far far worse than Millars but somehow even his rehabilitation is less unappetising. possibly because he (Armstrong) isn't sanctimonious.

    Well, trivially, we already know he's a drug cheat, so claiming that is hardly what you'd call progressive reasoning. You're one of these "lock em up and throw away the key" guys - I get that. We're never going to agree.
  • shortfall
    shortfall Posts: 3,288
    I'm all for a zero tolerance approach to drug cheats, but the point is that when Millar was cheating so were most of his rivals and the UCI was well aware and allegedly in collusion with it all. Given the climate at the time I see no merit in damning someone forever who happened to cross the line. At least Millar has accepted his wrong doing and worked to change the sport. If you don't believe his remorse is genuine then that's too bad, but unlike Armstrong he didn't set about destroying other people's lives and reputations. If you want to draw a line and say that going forward all cheats receive a life ban then I'm right with you.
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    Shortfall wrote:
    I'm all for a zero tolerance approach to drug cheats, but the point is that when Millar was cheating so were most of his rivals and the UCI was well aware and allegedly in collusion with it all. Given the climate at the time I see no merit in damning someone forever who happened to cross the line. At least Millar has accepted his wrong doing and worked to change the sport. If you don't believe his remorse is genuine then that's too bad, but unlike Armstrong he didn't set about destroying other people's lives and reputations. If you want to draw a line and say that going forward all cheats receive a life ban then I'm right with you.

    What about all the current cyclists on sh1t money because sponsorship money is low because of the likes of Millar doping.

    Why not hire a clean ex-cyclist as a reward for their previously diminished career prospects?
  • imposter2.0
    imposter2.0 Posts: 12,028
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    What about all the current cyclists on sh1t money because sponsorship money is low because of the likes of Millar doping.

    The point being made above is that they pretty much were all at it. Millar was 'unlucky' enough to get caught.
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Why not hire a clean ex-cyclist as a reward for their previously diminished career prospects?

    Let us know if you find one...
  • shortfall
    shortfall Posts: 3,288
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Shortfall wrote:
    I'm all for a zero tolerance approach to drug cheats, but the point is that when Millar was cheating so were most of his rivals and the UCI was well aware and allegedly in collusion with it all. Given the climate at the time I see no merit in damning someone forever who happened to cross the line. At least Millar has accepted his wrong doing and worked to change the sport. If you don't believe his remorse is genuine then that's too bad, but unlike Armstrong he didn't set about destroying other people's lives and reputations. If you want to draw a line and say that going forward all cheats receive a life ban then I'm right with you.

    What about all the current cyclists on sh1t money because sponsorship money is low because of the likes of Millar doping.

    Why not hire a clean ex-cyclist as a reward for their previously diminished career prospects?

    I don't disagree but that's up to the TV companies. Nobody's stopping them.
  • Matthewfalle
    Matthewfalle Posts: 17,380
    Alejandrosdog wrote:
    Imposter wrote:
    Alejandrosdog wrote:
    Imposter wrote:
    Alejandrosdog wrote:
    Imposter wrote:
    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’...
    Millar doesn’t fit in that category

    In my opinion he does. You’ll need to explain why you think he doesn’t...

    I don’t need to explain anything. Millar is a proven drug cheat. His PR efforts are quite impressive but he is still a cheating tool that has people
    Believing he’s the next messiah or something.

    You're obviously free to disagree. But if you can't or won't explain your reasoning, then you'll have to forgive me if I don't take your opinion seriously..

    My reasoning is quite clear. hes a drug cheat. I could go on by describing the way i dislike crass excuses from doping sportsmen along the lines of i'm the most tested sportsman blah blah, i only kept it to remind myself how close id come to cheating blah blah. I dislike them because the person who tells lies like this is assuming his audience is universally gullible or stupid.

    His remorse is a pr exercise in contrition his book says poor me etc etc and the truth is Millar is a cheat. worse still, he strikes me as someone who is using this faux contrition to further his career.

    Armstrongs behaviour was far far far worse than Millars but somehow even his rehabilitation is less unappetising. possibly because he (Armstrong) isn't sanctimonious.

    this

    #wellsaid
    Postby team47b » Sun Jun 28, 2015 11:53 am

    De Sisti wrote:
    This is one of the silliest threads I've come across. :lol:

    Recognition at last Matthew, well done!, a justified honour :D
    smithy21 wrote:

    He's right you know.
  • Alejandrosdog
    Alejandrosdog Posts: 1,975
    Matthewfalle wrote:
    Alejandrosdog wrote:
    Imposter wrote:
    Alejandrosdog wrote:
    Imposter wrote:
    Alejandrosdog wrote:
    Imposter wrote:
    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’...
    Millar doesn’t fit in that category

    In my opinion he does. You’ll need to explain why you think he doesn’t...

    I don’t need to explain anything. Millar is a proven drug cheat. His PR efforts are quite impressive but he is still a cheating tool that has people
    Believing he’s the next messiah or something.

    You're obviously free to disagree. But if you can't or won't explain your reasoning, then you'll have to forgive me if I don't take your opinion seriously..

    My reasoning is quite clear. hes a drug cheat. I could go on by describing the way i dislike crass excuses from doping sportsmen along the lines of i'm the most tested sportsman blah blah, i only kept it to remind myself how close id come to cheating blah blah. I dislike them because the person who tells lies like this is assuming his audience is universally gullible or stupid.

    His remorse is a pr exercise in contrition his book says poor me etc etc and the truth is Millar is a cheat. worse still, he strikes me as someone who is using this faux contrition to further his career.

    Armstrongs behaviour was far far far worse than Millars but somehow even his rehabilitation is less unappetising. possibly because he (Armstrong) isn't sanctimonious.

    this

    #wellsaid

    Thank you. Actually its the bit about how the cheats deal with it that galls me most. Cheating is bad, you get caught, you get punished. fair enough. its the lying bull shi t that millar came out with that makes him repulsive to me. If he made the most of it and became a sort of pantomime villain it would be better.
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 28,228
    You do know he's British?
  • Alejandrosdog
    Alejandrosdog Posts: 1,975
    KingstonGraham wrote:
    You do know he's British?

    :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
  • surfercyclist
    surfercyclist Posts: 894
    So this still rumbling on. Good to know I'm not the only one who despises cheating.
  • imposter2.0
    imposter2.0 Posts: 12,028
    SurferCyclist wrote:
    So this still rumbling on. Good to know I'm not the only one who despises cheating.

    :lol::lol:
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    Imposter wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    What about all the current cyclists on sh1t money because sponsorship money is low because of the likes of Millar doping.

    The point being made above is that they pretty much were all at it. Millar was 'unlucky' enough to get caught.
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Why not hire a clean ex-cyclist as a reward for their previously diminished career prospects?

    Let us know if you find one...

    Christophe Bassons
  • Matthewfalle
    Matthewfalle Posts: 17,380
    KingstonGraham wrote:
    You do know he's British?

    what has that got to do with anything?

    #confused
    Postby team47b » Sun Jun 28, 2015 11:53 am

    De Sisti wrote:
    This is one of the silliest threads I've come across. :lol:

    Recognition at last Matthew, well done!, a justified honour :D
    smithy21 wrote:

    He's right you know.
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 28,228
    Matthewfalle wrote:
    KingstonGraham wrote:
    You do know he's British?

    what has that got to do with anything?

    #confused

    Easy formula:

    Cheat + Foreign = lifelong stain on character, no way back, boos all the way
    Cheat + British = say sorry and everyone cheers you, you get a job with the national governing body, a nice gig on TV, and launch your own clothing range. See also Linford Christie.
  • imposter2.0
    imposter2.0 Posts: 12,028
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Imposter wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    What about all the current cyclists on sh1t money because sponsorship money is low because of the likes of Millar doping.

    The point being made above is that they pretty much were all at it. Millar was 'unlucky' enough to get caught.
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Why not hire a clean ex-cyclist as a reward for their previously diminished career prospects?

    Let us know if you find one...

    Christophe Bassons

    Great - sign him up.
  • chris_bass
    chris_bass Posts: 4,913
    KingstonGraham wrote:
    Matthewfalle wrote:
    KingstonGraham wrote:
    You do know he's British?

    what has that got to do with anything?

    #confused

    Easy formula:

    Cheat + Foreign = lifelong stain on character, no way back, boos all the way
    Cheat + British = say sorry and everyone cheers you, you get a job with the national governing body, a nice gig on TV, and launch your own clothing range. See also Linford Christie.

    you obviously don't remember Dwayne Chambers!

    Anyway - back on topic - Millar is Scottish - aren't they all on drugs up there?
    www.conjunctivitis.com - a site for sore eyes

Categories