[Poll]Life or not: Lance's ban

open topic, for anything cycling related.

Will Lance recieve a life time ban? Leave you reasons below.

Life and deserves it.
21
43%
Life but it shouldn't be
2
4%
Short and justified
6
12%
Short but he will deserve more
1
2%
I couldn't give a BSO
7
14%
*added* Jail time for all the money he screwed from sponsors (as well as lying under oath, fraud, drug trafficking ect.)
12
24%
 
Total votes : 49

[Poll]Life or not: Lance's ban

Postby TomBikes » Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:39 pm

So what do you all think?
Last edited by TomBikes on Sat Jan 19, 2013 9:38 pm, edited 2 times in total.
TomBikes
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 8:40 pm

by BNA » Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:42 pm

BNA
 

Re: [Poll]Life or not: Lance's ban

Postby sogood » Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:42 pm

Is there a regulation on life ban? I guess the question here is one of process. LA will want to negotiate and use whatever leverage he has. USADA and others will most likely want to crucify him in some ways.
Bianchi, Ridley, Montague, GT, Garmin and All things Apple :)
RK wrote:And that is Wikipedia - I can write my own definition.
User avatar
sogood
 
Posts: 17082
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 7:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Re: [Poll]Life or not: Lance's ban

Postby lump_a_charcoal » Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:46 pm

The man has almost ruined the sport.

He should take no further part in it.

In fact, I believe he should face gaol, as his sponsorship and winnings were stolen from clean athletes.


FLA.
Image
lump_a_charcoal
 
Posts: 351
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2011 8:44 am

Re: [Poll]Life or not: Lance's ban

Postby il padrone » Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:49 pm

Jut get him out of our sight please.

I know - he can return to the Pro-team when he turns 70 eh?
Riding bikes in traffic - what seems dangerous is usually safe; what seems safe is often more dangerous.
User avatar
il padrone
 
Posts: 19588
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: [Poll]Life or not: Lance's ban

Postby winstonw » Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:54 pm

he was more successful at the game the UCI sanctioned.
as a news commentary pointed out tonight, the fastest riders today would have placed 40 something 15-20 years ago.

the sport was and potentially still is rotten...just look at the joke that is Contador.

where's the witch hunt to get Bernard Hinault, Miguel Indurain, Laurent Fignon, etc, etc?
User avatar
winstonw
 
Posts: 1793
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 7:18 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: [Poll]Life or not: Lance's ban

Postby TomBikes » Fri Jan 18, 2013 10:02 pm

Correct me if I'm wrong, but a believe that large amount of the outrage and 'witch hunt' behavior was/is fueled by the large bags of money he secured from the results of his doping.
TomBikes
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 8:40 pm

Re: [Poll]Life or not: Lance's ban

Postby il padrone » Fri Jan 18, 2013 10:08 pm

winstonw wrote:where's the witch hunt to get Bernard Hinault, Miguel Indurain, Laurent Fignon, etc, etc?

Go easy. 'The Professor' has only just passed away 18 months ago - let him RIP :|
Riding bikes in traffic - what seems dangerous is usually safe; what seems safe is often more dangerous.
User avatar
il padrone
 
Posts: 19588
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: [Poll]Life or not: Lance's ban

Postby winstonw » Sat Jan 19, 2013 11:39 am

il padrone wrote:
winstonw wrote:where's the witch hunt to get Bernard Hinault, Miguel Indurain, Laurent Fignon, etc, etc?

Go easy. 'The Professor' has only just passed away 18 months ago - let him RIP :|


Are you serious? 18 mths is 18 mths.
It was cheats like Fignon that forced younger riders (like LA) to CHEAT.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-08-3 ... -says.html
"Fignon confessed to taking amphetamines and cortisone as a rider in his autobiography, “We Were Young and Carefree,” France 2 said on its website, adding he didn’t make a link with the banned drugs and his cancer."

Contador and Fignon are treated like innocentes....LA is tarred evil. It's naive BS.
Let's face it, sour grapes about the money LA made.
The sport was rotten and I have no doubt cheating is still pervasive.
User avatar
winstonw
 
Posts: 1793
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 7:18 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: [Poll]Life or not: Lance's ban

Postby sogood » Sat Jan 19, 2013 11:53 am

winstonw wrote:It was cheats like Fignon that forced younger riders (like LA) to CHEAT.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-08-3 ... -says.html
"Fignon confessed to taking amphetamines and cortisone as a rider in his autobiography, “We Were Young and Carefree,” France 2 said on its website, adding he didn’t make a link with the banned drugs and his cancer."
Contador and Fignon are treated like innocentes....LA is tarred evil. It's naive BS.
Let's face it, sour grapes about the money LA made.
The sport was rotten and I have no doubt cheating is still pervasive.

It's the "Bash Lance" media circus right now. And I agree, LA's lack of guilt and his sense of "level playing field" is quite understandable when interpreted in the context of the time. Although it doesn't make LA right, it does explain a lot. At the same time, I wouldn't nail Fignon either as he was also a product of the doping culture that was prevalent within the sport (and society) at the time. The big crime LA and Johan Bruyneel committed was that they took it to a higher level and soundly beat the Euro Pros at their game and turned the table on their dominance. In the process, they made an enormous load of money and Lance Inc. Not too different to how so many US multi-national corporations raided Europe and other economies worldwide. It has always been a dirty game.
Bianchi, Ridley, Montague, GT, Garmin and All things Apple :)
RK wrote:And that is Wikipedia - I can write my own definition.
User avatar
sogood
 
Posts: 17082
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 7:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Re: [Poll]Life or not: Lance's ban

Postby sumgy » Sat Jan 19, 2013 12:02 pm

Every time that guy's name is typed is another Google hit for him.
More fame for him.
The interview was just a way to rally that fame.
The confession just another thing for him to add to his speaking tours.
User avatar
sumgy
 
Posts: 1467
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 9:58 pm

Re: [Poll]Life or not: Lance's ban

Postby Mulger bill » Sat Jan 19, 2013 12:27 pm

Well put Sumgy, I will refrain from mentioning the name Rancid Pharmstrong again :D
...whatever the road rules, self-preservation is the absolute priority for a cyclist when mixing it with motorised traffic.
London Boy 29/12/2011
User avatar
Mulger bill
Super Mod
Super Mod
 
Posts: 26312
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:41 pm
Location: Sunbury Vic

Re: [Poll]Life or not: Lance's ban

Postby sumgy » Sat Jan 19, 2013 1:13 pm

Mulger bill wrote:Well put Sumgy, I will refrain from mentioning the name Rancid Pharmstrong again :D


Exactly.
And seriously how many threads do we need on this site and FB chronicling every little thing that if we actually gave a toss we could watch with that other useless fameseeker on TV.
2 of the most fame driven egocentrics in the world on one show.
User avatar
sumgy
 
Posts: 1467
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 9:58 pm

Re: [Poll]Life or not: Lance's ban

Postby biker jk » Sat Jan 19, 2013 1:22 pm

sogood wrote:Is there a regulation on life ban? I guess the question here is one of process. LA will want to negotiate and use whatever leverage he has. USADA and others will most likely want to crucify him in some ways.


Yes I too am curious of the "process" he used to inject EPO, etc. and get away with it for so long. Unfortunately he didn't tell us in the OW interview so hopefully he confesses all to USADA. Your reference to crucify is kind of amusing given Lance is the cancer Jesus.
User avatar
biker jk
 
Posts: 2963
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: [Poll]Life or not: Lance's ban

Postby ozzymac » Sat Jan 19, 2013 1:24 pm

As I posted in other threads, can someone please explain to me the difference between Armstrong and all the other riders who cheated?


Cheers




Sent from my GT-P5110 using Tapatalk 2
User avatar
ozzymac
 
Posts: 688
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2010 6:14 pm

Re: [Poll]Life or not: Lance's ban

Postby sogood » Sat Jan 19, 2013 1:41 pm

biker jk wrote:Yes I too am curious of the "process" he used to inject EPO, etc. and get away with it for so long. Unfortunately he didn't tell us in the OW interview so hopefully he confesses all to USADA. Your reference to crucify is kind of amusing given Lance is the cancer Jesus.

I think we all know that "process". It's micro-dosing with a rigorous system that managed the risks of getting caught. From what I've read, Johan Bruyneel is one smart cookie, a tier or two above in intellect to those rough as guts fellow managers. As I suggested, they basically applied the techniques of a US multi-national to the sporting field and beat the system. Just like the movie "The Brain" (1969). Yes, there are many amusing snippets that can come out of this whole saga.
Bianchi, Ridley, Montague, GT, Garmin and All things Apple :)
RK wrote:And that is Wikipedia - I can write my own definition.
User avatar
sogood
 
Posts: 17082
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 7:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Re: [Poll]Life or not: Lance's ban

Postby sogood » Sat Jan 19, 2013 1:46 pm

ozzymac wrote:As I posted in other threads, can someone please explain to me the difference between Armstrong and all the other riders who cheated?

He lied longer than all others and managed to sustain it. It made everyone else looked very very stupid. As such, people will subjectively react more severely than usual, let alone the media beat up. All quite explainable.
Bianchi, Ridley, Montague, GT, Garmin and All things Apple :)
RK wrote:And that is Wikipedia - I can write my own definition.
User avatar
sogood
 
Posts: 17082
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 7:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Re: [Poll]Life or not: Lance's ban

Postby biker jk » Sat Jan 19, 2013 2:10 pm

ozzymac wrote:As I posted in other threads, can someone please explain to me the difference between Armstrong and all the other riders who cheated?

Cheers

Sent from my GT-P5110 using Tapatalk 2


Cheating in the TdF began from day one in 1903. However, in terms of performance enhancing drugs the birth of EPO allowed donkeys to be turned into racehorses. This wasn't the case with PEDs prior to the EPO era. Armstrong pre-EPO was an average rider. He took EPO use to a new level, paid the best doping doctor Ferrari a million dollars per year and bribed the UCI to not test positive. So it wasn't a level playing field. Armstrong was the king of dopers and the other riders were serfs.
User avatar
biker jk
 
Posts: 2963
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: [Poll]Life or not: Lance's ban

Postby sumgy » Sat Jan 19, 2013 2:14 pm

Not forgetting he has managed to lie past the 5 year Statute of Limitations for most Local and Federal US courts. :wink:
User avatar
sumgy
 
Posts: 1467
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 9:58 pm

Re: [Poll]Life or not: Lance's ban

Postby sogood » Sat Jan 19, 2013 2:22 pm

biker jk wrote:Cheating in the TdF began from day one in 1903. However, in terms of performance enhancing drugs the birth of EPO allowed donkeys to be turned into racehorses. This wasn't the case with PEDs prior to the EPO era. Armstrong pre-EPO was an average rider. He took EPO use to a new level, paid the best doping doctor Ferrari a million dollars per year and bribed the UCI to not test positive. So it wasn't a level playing field. Armstrong was the king of dopers and the other riders were serfs.

Let's not give him credit where he is not due. LA did not discover EPO nor was he so knowledgeable to know how to effectively use the substance and dodge the barriers. Rogue doctors and physiologists worked out the regime and he and other members of his team worked out the mechanism to execute and out last everyone else in the field. Also need to recognise that his teams (US Postal and Discovery) weren't the only teams that used EPO through that period of time. And let's not over glorify EPO either. Steroids and blood transfusions also gave significant edges in these long endurance races. It's too easy for people to blame everything on LA and EPO. He played a role, but he is not everything that's out there.
Last edited by sogood on Sat Jan 19, 2013 2:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Bianchi, Ridley, Montague, GT, Garmin and All things Apple :)
RK wrote:And that is Wikipedia - I can write my own definition.
User avatar
sogood
 
Posts: 17082
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 7:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Re: [Poll]Life or not: Lance's ban

Postby sogood » Sat Jan 19, 2013 2:24 pm

sumgy wrote:Not forgetting he has managed to lie past the 5 year Statute of Limitations for most Local and Federal US courts. :wink:

Standard legal and accounting risk mitigating technique. Any half competent lawyer or accountant would have informed him of that. The fact that he succeeded is what made so many people even more angry. :roll:
Bianchi, Ridley, Montague, GT, Garmin and All things Apple :)
RK wrote:And that is Wikipedia - I can write my own definition.
User avatar
sogood
 
Posts: 17082
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 7:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Re: [Poll]Life or not: Lance's ban

Postby gpz1100 » Sat Jan 19, 2013 3:02 pm

cant wait for the movie :mrgreen:
User avatar
gpz1100
 
Posts: 45
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 2:44 pm
Location: sydney

Re: [Poll]Life or not: Lance's ban

Postby sogood » Sat Jan 19, 2013 3:14 pm

gpz1100 wrote:cant wait for the movie :mrgreen:

Pop corns!
Bianchi, Ridley, Montague, GT, Garmin and All things Apple :)
RK wrote:And that is Wikipedia - I can write my own definition.
User avatar
sogood
 
Posts: 17082
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 7:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Re: [Poll]Life or not: Lance's ban

Postby ruscook » Sat Jan 19, 2013 3:40 pm

sogood wrote:. It's too easy for people to blame everything on LA and EPO. He played a role, but he is not everything that's out there.

Combine this with your other comment about context and the time/era it was done in and I think you've summed it up nicely. :D
Image
GT Avalanche 1.0 | TCR Alliance 0 | Giant Bowery | BMW K1300R
Two wheels good, Four wheels bad
ruscook
 
Posts: 2338
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 7:59 pm
Location: Tregear, NSW

Re: [Poll]Life or not: Lance's ban

Postby moosterbounce » Sat Jan 19, 2013 6:20 pm

I think he should be allowed to compete after serving a ban, but I'd like to see something like "if you actually win the ny marathon, then you won't be recognized as the winner". Seriously...he's getting on so I doubt he'd trouble the serious race contenders, maybe the age groupers, so put a "can't win" in place. Stopping someone run a marathon etc - which tend to be personal goals at this age - just because it's sanctioned is stupid. Everyone loves David miller now don't they? Both denied it until caught, just one was more verbal in their denials and took longer to get caught.

Ban him from team races for life so he can't help someone win.

I'd still go to see him compete at anything and would welcome riding with him. I'd take the opportunity for a chat though and ask a few questions. At the end of the day, you could shove as many performance I handing doo-dads in me and I'd still be mediocre at best!!
moosterbounce
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 2500
Joined: Tue May 17, 2011 8:06 pm
Location: Rivervale WA

Re: [Poll]Life or not: Lance's ban

Postby toolonglegs » Sat Jan 19, 2013 6:38 pm

Whats short?... short to me is 6 months like all the others got.
2-4 years would be fine by me... and lifetime ban on appearance fees.
Being someone who lives to compete a lifetime ban is a bit much... it's only sport, you get a lot less for much more serious crimes.
User avatar
toolonglegs
 
Posts: 14657
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:49 pm
Location: Somewhere with padded walls and really big hills!

Next

Return to General discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Feedfetcher, MTG



Popular Bike Shops
Wiggle Wiggle UK
Ground Effect Ground Effect NZ
Ebay Ebay AU
Chain Reaction Cycles CRC UK

“Bicycles BNA Twitter
“Bicycles BNA Facebook
“Google+ BNA Google+
“Bicycles BNA Newsletter

> FREE BNA Stickers
> BNA Cycling Kit