2014 Giro Route Announced

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

thom

____
Location
The Borough
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-24345048

Day two goes pretty much past my front door ^_^ The pics aren't clear enough to narrow the routing down to specific roads,but Cushendall - Belfast is going to be fast and furious.
Wow, Day 1's TT does go down the Stranmillis Road and past my Mum's house where I grew up !
It's a steep enough descent there so they'll just flash past before a stretch to the Ormeau road by the River Lagan.
Day 2 will look good - past Belfast Castle/Cave Hill, up to the Giant's Causeway and as you say back by the coast road round the Glens of Antrim.
 
Last edited:

Noodley

Guest
Because he was an exciting rider who animated races, who many fans loved, and who died a sad early death and doesn't really need any further condemnation?

I suppose it comes down to whether Pantani the doper or Pantani the person is being celebrated. Had he not been a doper he would never have received the adulation nor been in a position to animate races; yet his death was tragic. I do not condemn Pantani yet see him for what he was; a doper who was "caught out" and unable to come to terms with his public persona being tarnished, which eventually led to his tragic death. A fragile person, made famous by doping yet also destroyed by doping.
 

beastie

Guru
Location
penrith
Because he was an exciting rider who animated races, who many fans loved, and who died a sad early death and doesn't really need any further condemnation?
I expect you have read Matt Rendell on Pantani. I took from it that he was a doper for pretty much all of his career. A sad death , but without doping we would possibly never heard of him. The lack of will to deal with doping is the reason cycling is in such mess now. By celebrating Pantani the Giro organization is implying that cheating is(was?)ok. He was a great cyclist, but only because he was a huge cheat. He should be vilified not lauded.
 

thom

____
Location
The Borough
Because he was an exciting rider who animated races, who many fans loved, and who died a sad early death and doesn't really need any further condemnation?
Questioning why the Giro makes a choice to commemorate Pantani is not asking them to condemn him. It's a question about why there is a decision to indulge a legacy based upon a lie, the like of which still plagues the Giro.
 
Last edited:

jowwy

Can't spell, Can't Punctuate....Sue Me
tdf will start in texas in 2015 to commemorate lance armstrongs achievements - drug cheats should be vilified and banned for life not lauded over.
 

Flying_Monkey

Recyclist
Location
Odawa
But Pantani was great to watch, and there was never any suggestion that he behaved the way Armstrong did towards other riders etc. (and in fact, Armstrong treated with him with a patronising contempt). Most of our cycling heroes doped: Merckx, Hinault and other legends - probably almost everyone who has won the Tour or any other major race - and cheating has been part of what has made cycle racing so fascinating from day one. Time is generally quite kind to people involved in such a brutal sport. I expect that in a few years' time, even Lance Armstrong won't be quite such the hate figure he is now... especially if he comes clean and tells all at some point.

None of this is to condone doping - I think it isn't taken seriously enough in terms of the health dangers involved, especially to younger riders. But Pantani being celebrated in a positive way isn't a bad way to remember him, especially if it starts debates about why he should or shouldn't be remembered. It's not as if I'm trying to whitewash the fact thay he doped. And it's not as if he's going to gain personally from it, being dead and all...
 

thom

____
Location
The Borough
I don't really buy the great to watch thing though.

Cycling is trying to make a break with the past right now - I don't want to go round making a point to condemn past practices all the time but I find it hard not to see double standards being applied. I think the right thing to do is lay bare the facts of the time and have some sympathy with those who were able to admit what went on, particularly when done so voluntarily but while you might commemorate a person and their life in isolation, to make a choice to link him now to an event he shamed seems a tacit nod to those like Sayer who create a spectacle and want to cheat it today. It is a mixed message at a time in cycling where clean lines should be being drawn in my opinion.
 
Top Bottom