Patchelicious Posted January 23, 2018 Share The point he makes about the possibility of CF winning say the Giro or the TDF this year and then having it stripped when he fails to prove his innocence is enough for me.By all accounts if it drags on that long there is a strong possibility of that happening as I am sure he has a number of big wins left in him.Thats all reallyOh ok, then we missed each other. The post you made quoted a LA post, so it read like you were saying that LA going to Belgium was a big problem. Yes, Froome winning and then being stripped would be a terrible embarrassment for the UCI. So I can understand why the UCI wouldn't want that to happen. They should help expedite an outcome. Their drawn out processes are part of the problem. Edited January 23, 2018 by Patchelicious Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patchelicious Posted January 23, 2018 Share Holy shibbles man. There are ex dopers, dodgy doctors and rotten apples all over cycling and this is where Lappies chooses to make a stand? Reeeediculous...........H&M Eldron 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kranswurm Posted January 23, 2018 Share Oh ok, then we missed each other. The post you made quoted a LA post, so it read like you were saying that LA going to Belgium was a big problem. Yes, Froome winning and then being stripped would be a terrible embarrassment for the UCI. So I can understand why the UCI wouldn't want that to happen. They should help expedite an outcome. Their drawn out processes are part of the problem.It was Swiss Miss who referred to LA on a post about CF...and was just perpetuatedI really don't care what or where LA goes or says. Patchelicious 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Steer Posted January 23, 2018 Share Shame, poor Lance... We should all really empathize with the poor little narcissist... How dare the president of the UCI object to the poster boy of professional doping wanting to make yet more money out of the sport he has trashed. Hahaha... and people wonder why we have doping problems NelAndre, Tristand and Gen 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eldron Posted January 23, 2018 Share Shame, poor Lance... We should all really empathize with the poor little narcissist... How dare the president of the UCI object to the poster boy of professional doping wanting to make yet more money out of the sport he has trashed. Hahaha... and people wonder why we have doping problemsI don't understand it - many many ex dopers still make a living out of cycling and nobody seems to mind - Lance opens his mouth and everbody has a little **** fit. Keep ALL sanctioned dopers out of cycling I say. ALL of them. How is this so hard? Oufy MTB (Roadie) and Andrew Steer 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Steer Posted January 23, 2018 Share I don't understand it - many many ex dopers still make a living out of cycling and nobody seems to mind - Lance opens his mouth and everbody has a little **** fit. Keep ALL sanctioned dopers out of cycling I say. ALL of them. How is this so hard?Agree 100% on your second point, far too many of the little #hit$ still running around in the sport (probably passing on their knowledge)... and on your first point - "The tallest trees always catch the most wind" And to reaffirm things, this brilliant quote from an absolute nobody - "Lance is a horrible human being and a symptom of the effed up, 'win at all costs' world that we live in" - Andrew Steer, Jan 23 2018, Bikehub, South Africa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patchelicious Posted January 23, 2018 Share Shame, poor Lance... We should all really empathize with the poor little narcissist... How dare the president of the UCI object to the poster boy of professional doping wanting to make yet more money out of the sport he has trashed. Hahaha... and people wonder why we have doping problems Yes, this is why there is doping problems, because the UCI president seems more worried about a podcaster than the people currently cheating in his pelotons. Its like going after apartheid era criminals but ignoring the current looters.... JanJan and Duane_Bosch 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tothehills Posted January 23, 2018 Share Being dyslexic and reading to fast. Was reading Lammertiet and not Lappertient fanievb, Patchelicious, Edition 507 and 2 others 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patchelicious Posted January 23, 2018 Share Being dyslexic and reading to fast. Was reading Lammertiet and not Lappertient No, those brothers are in the Cape, have little to do with the UCI NotSoBigBen 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Steer Posted January 23, 2018 Share Yes, this is why there is doping problems, because the UCI president seems more worried about a podcaster than the people currently cheating in his pelotons. Its like going after apartheid era criminals but ignoring the current looters.... Eish Patch, you're becoming a bit of a nit picker... I never said it's the only reason we have doping problems? Is Lappartient not worried about doping in the peloton? I'm pretty sure he is, and he has weighed in the Froome saga. I would also think he probably has enough time in his schedule to be worried about both And you can't downplay who Lance is by calling him a podcaster - that's just not cricket Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fanievb Posted January 23, 2018 Share http://inrng.com/2018/01/a-lifetime-ban/ A quick note on Lance Armstrong’s lifetime ban which excludes him from competition and also from attending events, including the Tour of Flanders. Armstrong hardly needs an introduction, he was given a lifetime ban by USADA, the anti-doping agency of the USA, in 2012 along with US Postal team manager Johan Bruyneel as well as medical staff Pedro Celaya, José “Pepe” Martí, Luis Garcia Del Moral and private trainer Michele Ferrari. Cycling’s governing body duly recognised the USADA verdict and complies with the ruling, as it has to under the rules of WADA, the World Anti-Doping Agency.A lifetime ban is just that, anyone given this is excluded from taking part in competition and related activities. So you might know Armstrong can’t take part in races, whether as a pro or as an amateur but crucially here he’s also excluded from related activities which is what is causing the fuss at the moment as the Tour of Flanders, in their wisdom, have decided to invite him. Here’s the relevant UCI rule screen-grabbed:http://inrng.com/medias/images/ucirule10121.gifTo simply the text it says anyone who has been banned cannot “participate in any capacity in a Competition or activity… organized by… any international or national level event”. So no competition and no activity either. In case you’re wondering what “activity” means note the wording about “other than authorized anti-doping education or rehabilitation programs” so it’s not related to sports activities, it’s a catch-all for anything except a “don’t do it kids” seminar.Given the Tour of Flanders is organising activities in and around the elite men’s and women’s races then Armstrong and anyone else serving an anti-doping ban has to stay clear, whether it’s a ride or an after-dinner speech.Hasn’t the UCI got anything better to do?There have been several “hasn’t the UCI got anything better to do” comments on social media but the answer can surely only be “actually, no they haven’t”. After all if a governing body can’t uphold its own rules then it’s not good for much. If it didn’t try then WADA would and the UCI could be held up as “non-compliant”.Maybe – maybe not – you feel sympathy for Armstrong and feel he’s served enough of a ban and that’s fine: but ask for his ban to be commuted to something shorter or even lifted. But as long as he’s banned then we can only expect the governing body and others such as WADA or the Belgian Cycling Federation to seek to uphold their fundamental rules in an exemplary manner.SummaryA lifetime ban is just that and the scope extends beyond competition and into “activities”. The very least the UCI can do is uphold its rules. Armstrong may have things to say and some but not all will be listening but it seems odd that the greatest one day race in the world needs to ferment a sideline polemic rather than promoting their essence of their race. Andrew Steer 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geomark Posted January 23, 2018 Share The Inner Ring's take on it, rules is rules apparently http://inrng.com/2018/01/a-lifetime-ban/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eldron Posted January 23, 2018 Share And to reaffirm things, this brilliant quote from an absolute nobody - "Lance is a horrible human being and a symptom of the effed up, 'win at all costs' world that we live in" - Andrew Steer, Jan 23 2018, Bikehub, South Africa.Hahahahaha. Classic! One nit picking point though - he is a cheater and that's all. He may be an awesome father, loyal friend and all round nice guy. This we don't know. We only know he cheated like a boss and rode rough shod over tobs of people to do it. I'm not a big fan of the knee jerk "he's a complete arsehole" generalisation when we only really know what happened on the doping portion of ther lives. Andrew Steer and Patchelicious 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patchelicious Posted January 23, 2018 Share If Im a nit picker, then you are becoming a drama queen, look at the post I quoted below, that is right up there with my dramatics! Shame, poor Lance... We should all really empathize with the poor little narcissist... How dare the president of the UCI object to the poster boy of professional doping wanting to make yet more money out of the sport he has trashed. Hahaha... and people wonder why we have doping problems Eish Patch, you're becoming a bit of a nit picker... I never said it's the only reason we have doping problems?Is Lappartient not worried about doping in the peloton? I'm pretty sure he is, and he has weighed in the Froome saga. I would also think he probably has enough time in his schedule to be worried about both And you can't downplay who Lance is by calling him a podcaster - that's just not cricket Im not down playing him, what else is he these days? Thats nit picking. Call him what you like, it doesn't detract from the point that I think (opinion) that there are far bigger CURRENT issues that Lappies could and should be beating his chest about. (State sponsored doping, gender equality is cycling, Motos, rider safety etc etc) Lance going to Flanders IS an issue, but it should be like number 9 on the list of things to worry about, not number 1. (not saying it is number 1, just making a point about priority) I also never said that you said "it is the only reason we have doping problems", I said it, I also didn't use absolutes, I never said its the only reason, it is "A" reason. You call it nit picking, I call it correcting what you said I said. We can assume that Lappies cares about these issues all we want, what we have seen though doesn't necessarily agree with those assumptions though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jewbacca Posted January 23, 2018 Share Fight night is ON! Keep this going while I get my popcorn! Personally, this is all just emotional perspective and turns out to be keyboard bashing drivel at the end of the day. If the guy doesn't want to hang out with the Texan Cowboy, that is his prerogative.. Who are we to question why or how? Maybe he does have a long term goal in dealing with the current doping issue and part of it is to set a precedent that ex dopers, as well as current dopers and future dopers aren't welcome. This just seems like guys making up stories because they are bored of waiting for the spring classics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patchelicious Posted January 23, 2018 Share 1: Fight night is ON! Keep this going while I get my popcorn! Personally, this is all just emotional perspective and turns out to be keyboard bashing drivel at the end of the day. 2: If the guy doesn't want to hang out with the Texan Cowboy, that is his prerogative.. Who are we to question why or how? Maybe he does have a long term goal in dealing with the current doping issue and part of it is to set a precedent that ex dopers, as well as current dopers and future dopers aren't welcome. This just seems like guys making up stories because they are bored of waiting for the spring classics 1:Its not a fight and nobody is emotional, please lets not try and turn this into something that its not. 2: Personally I couldn't care if he hangs out with Lance or not, as you say its prerogative. I care about the UCI president giving attentions to matters that matters. So if he chooses to pick the LA thing as his moral stance, so be it, I would just prefer a guy who cared more about the motorbikes injuring and killing riders... Edited January 23, 2018 by Patchelicious Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now