So what do you think of Lance Armstrong?

Page 8 of 14 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast

  1. Posts : 263
    Windows 7 Home Premium x64
    Thread Starter
       #71

    Australian TV did a well researched piece on the Armstrong doping controversy. It includes video of Lance and others testifying in the SCA Promotions case. Lance firmly states under oath that he has never used performance enhancing drugs. Hmmm.

    The show is 46 minutes long, and covers a lot of detail. Worth a watch if you have some time:
    The World According to Lance - Four Corners
      My Computer


  2. Posts : 402
    Vista Home Premium, contemplating moving to Linux
       #72

    pincushion said:
    JimJoe said:
    Sadly, we have no way of knowing if these expose's are truthful, or just someone being cruel.
    Really? There are an awful lot of 'someones' in this case. Conspiracy theories are best left to kiddies.
    I don't listen to conspiracy theories. I'm saying when one person attacks spomeone famous, others jump on the bandwagon. They rarely have truth at hand, they just like to attack more like sharks in a feeding frenzy than 'concerned reporters'.
      My Computer


  3. Posts : 19,383
    Windows 10 Pro x64 ; Xubuntu x64
       #73

    When faced with overwhelming evidence, the best defence is denial. Sorry Lance Strongarms, it seems clear-cut to me............
      My Computer


  4. Posts : 472
    Windows 7 x64 SP1
       #74

    JimJoe said:
    pincushion said:
    JimJoe said:
    Sadly, we have no way of knowing if these expose's are truthful, or just someone being cruel.
    Really? There are an awful lot of 'someones' in this case. Conspiracy theories are best left to kiddies.
    I don't listen to conspiracy theories. I'm saying when one person attacks spomeone famous, others jump on the bandwagon. They rarely have truth at hand, they just like to attack more like sharks in a feeding frenzy than 'concerned reporters'.
    What like Jimmy Savile? There is no 'jumping on the bandwagon', only a number of people who appear to be corroborating each other as to what happened. Whether anyone is famous or not is besides the point. Fame, as in Savile's case gave him some protection from prosecution whilst he was alive.

    Last edited by pincushion; 17 Oct 2012 at 10:25. Reason: add
      My Computer


  5. Posts : 24,479
    Windows 7 Ultimate X64 SP1
       #75

    To answer the title question, who cares?
      My Computer


  6. whs
    Posts : 26,210
    Vista, Windows7, Mint Mate, Zorin, Windows 8
       #76

    I have been watching the tour since the 70's. It is unfortunate to say, but I think there has been doping going on at all times. It has only been relatively recent that the authorities started focussing on it.

    The problem is that if they take the titles away from Armstron, they will default to the ones who came in second - and have been doping too. So what's the point.
      My Computer


  7. Posts : 4,751
    Windows 7 Home Premium 32-Bit - Build 7600 SP1
       #77

    whs said:
    I have been watching the tour since the 70's. It is unfortunate to say, but I think there has been doping going on at all times. It has only been relatively recent that the authorities started focussing on it.

    The problem is that if they take the titles away from Armstron, they will default to the ones who came in second - and have been doping too. So what's the point.
    The first year that Armstrong did not race the Tour, didn't the guy that won get disqualified for doping? That should say a lot about the whole sport.
      My Computer


  8. whs
    Posts : 26,210
    Vista, Windows7, Mint Mate, Zorin, Windows 8
       #78

    bigmck said:
    whs said:
    I have been watching the tour since the 70's. It is unfortunate to say, but I think there has been doping going on at all times. It has only been relatively recent that the authorities started focussing on it.

    The problem is that if they take the titles away from Armstron, they will default to the ones who came in second - and have been doping too. So what's the point.
    The first year that Armstrong did not race the Tour, didn't the guy that won get disqualified for doping? That should say a lot about the whole sport.
    That is correct if you mean Alberto Contador. He got a 2 year ban but his case was never fully proven either. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberto_C._Velasco
      My Computer


  9. Posts : 9,582
    Windows 8.1 Pro RTM x64
       #79

    He (Lance Armstrong) has been dropped by Nike over this issue. BBC Sport - Lance Armstrong dropped by Nike over doping evidence

    As regards Jimmy Savile, he wrote the following in his autobiography:
    Jimmy Savile Autobiography said:
    “‘Ah,’ says I all serious, ‘if she comes in I’ll bring her back tomorrow but I’ll keep her all night first as my reward’.”
    More on this sordid entry: Jimmy Savile's affections laid bare by...Jimmy Savile? | Times Opinion on Tumblr

    The questions remain:

    Why did these issues remain as they are for so long? In the latter case (Savile), surely alarm bells would (or should) have been ringing given such an autobiographical entry.

    As regards Armstrong, he didn't cause anyone any direct harm through his cheating (although he has brought his sport into disrepute), he only deluded himself. Savile, on the other hand, based on the allegations currently circulating, certainly did directly harm those who were unfortunate to come into contact with him under the circumstances alleged in the reports.
      My Computer


  10. Posts : 472
    Windows 7 x64 SP1
       #80

    Dwarf said:
    He (Lance Armstrong) has been dropped by Nike over this issue. BBC Sport - Lance Armstrong dropped by Nike over doping evidence

    As regards Jimmy Savile, he wrote the following in his autobiography:
    Jimmy Savile Autobiography said:
    “‘Ah,’ says I all serious, ‘if she comes in I’ll bring her back tomorrow but I’ll keep her all night first as my reward’.”
    More on this sordid entry: Jimmy Savile's affections laid bare by...Jimmy Savile? | Times Opinion on Tumblr

    The questions remain:

    Why did these issues remain as they are for so long? In the latter case (Savile), surely alarm bells would (or should) have been ringing given such an autobiographical entry.

    As regards Armstrong, he didn't cause anyone any direct harm through his cheating (although he has brought his sport into disrepute), he only deluded himself. Savile, on the other hand, based on the allegations currently circulating, certainly did directly harm those who were unfortunate to come into contact with him under the circumstances alleged in the reports.
    I think the Savile case is a bit like the Michael Jackson one where he was known to have an interest in children but his 'fame' allowed a lot of leeway. I think Michael Jackson's 'Bad' was perhaps his way of expressing himself as it seems did Savile in some of his comments. Times were different then and groupies to Rock groups were known to be rather young so probably many will have something that they would not like to be made public now.

      My Computer


 
Page 8 of 14 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast

  Related Discussions
Our Sites
Site Links
About Us
Windows 7 Forums is an independent web site and has not been authorized, sponsored, or otherwise approved by Microsoft Corporation. "Windows 7" and related materials are trademarks of Microsoft Corp.

© Designer Media Ltd
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:24.
Find Us