1. Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

Lance is a cheat? Yes or no

Discussion in 'Cycling' started by I like to watch, Jun 14, 2012.


Lance is a cheat?

Yes 42 vote(s) 84.0%
No 8 vote(s) 16.0%
  1. 10to12 Jimmy Flynn (14)

    Likes Received:
    Did he cheat??? Winning all those years when all those others were cheating makes him the greatest athlete of all time???
  2. maxdacat John Solomon (38)

    Likes Received:
    which has a spotless record up until now :D
    Garry Owen and Baldric like this.
  3. Ignoto Chilla Wilson (44)

    Likes Received:
    Pretty much summarizes the entire debate.

    Go back and look at who else where the contenders and you see the likes of Ullrich, Baso and a few others. Both have admitted/been found guilty of doping and they weren't able to come close to Armstrong. There is one scene I remember distinctly (I think its around the 2003 or 2004 tour) when Baso and Armstrong were duking it out in the mountains and Armstrong went and just left Baso in his wake.

    There's no doubt in my mind that he took some form of advance EPO or found a masking agent that isn't known to the market yet. But the other contenders weren't saints as well so no-one was "robbed" out of a title, just those poor guys who haven't been taking anything.

    Even if it comes out that he was on EPO etc, I wont think any less of him. What he did of beating cancer and doing so much to promote Male Testicular cancer will be what I remember him for. I wont be throwing out my US Postal jersey in disgust because I know how dirty the sport of cycling is.
  4. The_Brown_Hornet Michael Lynagh (62)

    Likes Received:
    I reckon there is a good chance he was on the juice, because as others have pointed out everyone else was too. With that said, he's never tested positive and deserves the presumption of innocence. There is a huge amount of resentment of his success in Europe and I can't help but feel that there is a vendetta at play there.

    As for the role model stuff, I'm not really that bothered about it. He has raised the profile of the sport through his success (and the circumstances in which it happened), however, and that's a good thing. We all love a story like that.
  5. Cutter Nicholas Shehadie (39)

    Likes Received:
    Talk to a cancer sufferer. "It's not about the bike" is called "The Book" between cancer sufferers. They all read it, they're all inspired by it and it gives hope.

    If he had won the TdF 7 times but not had cancer, this would be a very different discussion. Lance is a far bigger figure than just as a cyclist.
  6. Scarfman Knitter of the Scarf

    Likes Received:
    I reckon hounding him out of history is the right thing to do. Would we have ever got a clean TdF winner (which I'm very much hoping Cadel is) if we went easy on the cheats? They deserve nothing.
    Garry Owen and waratahjesus like this.
  7. Cutter Nicholas Shehadie (39)

    Likes Received:
    How far do you go back Scarfy? Merckx was undoubtedly doping as well. Do you write him out of history too? What about Coppi? Get rid of him? Cycling is littered with a history of drug use because the TdF, in particular, is designed to break the riders. There are some superb books talking about all of these things.

    You have to draw a line in the sand. In my mind, for the reasons articulated in this thread, it should be post Armstrong.
  8. The_Brown_Hornet Michael Lynagh (62)

    Likes Received:
    I've read the book and it's an inspirational story, no doubt. Don't get me wrong, I think what he did under the circumstances was absolutely remarkable.

    I don't want to derail the thread, but my stance is that I don't don't expect sports people to be role models any more than any other well known figure (I call it the Charles Barkley rule). On the flip side of that, I don't like them thinking rules don't apply to them because of their status either.
  9. the sabanator Ron Walden (29)

    Likes Received:
    Look at who they would award his yellow jerseys to:
    2005 - Ivan Basso - Banned after being heavily implicated in Operacion Puerto.
    2004 - Andreas Kloden - Was part of the T-Mobile Team that nearly had to withdraw from the 2006 TdF when almost half the starting 9 riders were implicated in regard to Puerto.
    2000, 2001, 2003 - Jan Ullrich, who won in '97, was also caught in Puerto and was practically forced to retire having been kicked out of the '06 edition of le Grand Boucle.
    2002 - Joseba Beloki, who was also implicated in Puerto and was never proven guilty, however there have long been suspicions regarding Beloki.
    1999 - Alex Zulle of Switzerland, was part of the 1998 Festina Affair when the entire Festina team was kicked off the race. He admitted to taking EPO.

    So practically all of them were drug cheats. Either Armstrong is a genetic freak, or a doper. Personally I'm inclined to believe he wasn't, considering his proven physical superiority in areas such as the heart. To this day he still competes at a high level, and I really can't see Armstrong risking his reputation at 39 by doping in amateur triathlons. USADA are out to get him because they're under the impression that he's been flunking their tests for years, but I really think they should give it up.
  10. Joe Mac Arch Winning (36)

    Likes Received:
    I agree with your post here, great points.

    On a side note, I am devastated not to be able to see lance attempt to take on Craig Alexander and the Hawaii Ironman this year. They are both the same age (41 I believe) and I don't think they can stay at the top of their game for many more years. What happened to innocent until proven guilty?
    Cutter likes this.
  11. Cutter Nicholas Shehadie (39)

    Likes Received:
    With all due respect my friend, irrespective of what you think (and notwithstanding that you have made up a name for the rule), it's unrealistic to think sports stars aren't role models. They are. It has ever been thus. Advertising makes it so. They may not be held out by authority figures to be role models, but children wear what they wear, drink what the sports star tells them to drink, eat what they tell them to eat etc. That the parents busily buy the kit, ride the bikes, drink the sports drinks etc reinforces this.
  12. The_Brown_Hornet Michael Lynagh (62)

    Likes Received:
    I respectfully disagree with that. One thing that Mr Barkley said that I quite agree with is this: "I'm not a role model. Just because I can dunk a basketball doesn't mean I should raise your kids".

    The test I apply when thinking about the conduct of sports (or any other famous person) people is "what if he/she was a good mate or close relative, would I slap them on the back saying well done or give them a clip over the ear for being a dickhead". Kids may be influenced by well known people, but their biggest influencers are their parents and their peers. If I disagree with what Chris Judd or Marc Murphy do off the paddock (my son and I both support Carlton), then I will make it known to my kids. I also remind them that these blokes are just footballers, they are not gods. I don't think it's a lot to ask that other parents consider doing the same.

    As I said earlier, all I expect from sports people is to for them to conduct themselves in the same manner as I would expect others in society. I don't expect them to be infallible. I do, however, think that the players, managers, media, advertisers and the sporting fans make a rod for their own backs at times by building these young blokes up to be more than they really are.

    Anyway, I've derailed the thread enough. I'll leave it there.
    ChargerWA and Bullrush like this.
  13. Scarfman Knitter of the Scarf

    Likes Received:
    For me, the only line to draw is between cheats and clean riders. If they have to go down to 23rd place to award it to a clean rider I would do that.

    What about crimes like murders and rapes that receive new evidence 20 years later. They re-open the case. I say that is they ever get new evidence (or new tests or techniques or anything) about any rider, they should pursue it.

    Think about it - you're a tour rider, close to the top. Scenario A: You know that all you have to do is stay clean for the period of your wins, then admit it all and still keep your tour wins. Scenario B: You know that the authorities will pursue you for the next 50 years, and one day they are going to strip the wins off you. Don't you think that makes a difference to the future of the sport.
    ChargerWA likes this.
  14. Joe Mac Arch Winning (36)

    Likes Received:
    If they kept samples for every rider in the tour then that could work. However at this stage they have proved nothing, only made accusations against Lance and on the back of these accusations, he has been disqualified from competing. That is the problem. Until he is a proven drug cheat, he should be given the benefit of the doubt.
  15. Scarfman Knitter of the Scarf

    Likes Received:
    That's not quite true. Think about bail vs remand custody. If there is strong enough evidence for a serious enough crime, the accused is likely to held in custody (even under the presumption of innocence). If the case is weak or the incident is minor, they are granted bail.

    So in this case, and the Beale case, if there is enough evidence for a serious enough crime, they should be stood down until it is resolved. If not, then I agree with you.
  16. tigerland12 John Thornett (49)

    Likes Received:
    I honestly have never been a fan of Armstrong, and I also think there may be some conspiracy theories to why he has never been caught. When you have former team mates say they have SEEN him do it, then how can you not think he's guilty.

    Anyway, this could fuck up cyclings reputation which is already hanging by a thread.
  17. Joe Mac Arch Winning (36)

    Likes Received:
    Bail is generally only used if the person is a flight risk or a risk to society. I don't see how that is relevant in a doping case. Besides, the FBI undertook a full two year investigation and dropped all charges against him. This governing body has no jurisdiction to charge him with a crime, all they can do is ban him from competing and strip him of his titles in a worst case scenario. It doesn't seem fair he suffers this fate before they release anything on the case.
  18. the sabanator Ron Walden (29)

    Likes Received:
    Reputation? What reputation?

    As a sport cycling is a great spectacle. A wide variety of competitions, one day races along vicious cobblestones to three week long tests of the human body around an entire country. While the long nature of races/stages doesn't make it great TV for its entirety, there is almost nothing more thrilling than the last hour of a mountain stage, or the final duels in Paris-Roubaix. A wide range of international riders makes for some great personalities in the peloton. While it'll never gain mainstream success in Australia, simply because of the lack of high quality racing and the reputation of cyclists on our roads, cycling definitely does have a cult following in Australia that seems to be accustomed to pro cycling. It's just a part of the sport, like sexually assaulting women is in AFL and League and picking which of the three musketeers will do something stupid next in rugby (O'Connor? Beale? Cooper? OR SOME WEIRD COMBINATION OF THE THREE?!).

    It's a shame that such an interesting test of human endurance, mentally and physically, is tarnished through toxic cocktails designed to increase stamina.

    The saddest thing is, these drugs might make a 1% or 2% boost to athletes who are at peak physical condition. While times might be a bit slower, the sport would be just as interesting without drugs as its appeal isn't so much the speed, it's the mental battles and battles on the roads that make it interesting to the spectator.
    Bruwheresmycar likes this.
  19. Pauly Sydney Middleton (9)

    Likes Received:
    Is it right that testicular cancer is a possible side effect of performance-enhancing drugs?

    Oh look - there's an elephant in the room!
  20. cyclopath Phil Waugh (73)

    Likes Received:
    Elephant dead.
    Ivory, anyone? :D
    Schadenfreude likes this.

Share This Page