Armstrong coming back for the 2009 TdF

[Noodley]

I also have to remember that even on drugs in the best form of my life, I couldn't do a day of TdF riding.

And I refer to the previous reply I made (was it on this thread or the Landis thread?) that the notion that there was something superhuman about the TdeF and pro cycling which almost accepted that doping was required for it to be humanly possible only contributes to it's continuation....what about cycling 400km in a day? Is that superhuman? Does it need drugs? Or 1200km in 3 days? Or cycling across America...etc. etc.

 

[Crackle]

And I refer to the previous reply I made (was it on this thread or the Landis thread?) that the notion that there was something superhuman about the TdeF and pro cycling which almost accepted that doping was required for it to be humanly possible only contributes to it's continuation....what about cycling 400km in a day? Is that superhuman? Does it need drugs? Or 1200km in 3 days? Or cycling across America...etc. etc.

I meant that people concentrate on the drugs as if it's what makes the cyclist. They forget that these are top athletes who would be top athletes drugs or not. You're partially right though. I feel an ambivalence to drug taking in cycling which I don't feel towards other sports. I wouldn't go as far as saying it's tacit approval though.

 

[Noodley]

I meant that people concentrate on the drugs as if it's what makes the cyclist. They forget that these are top athletes who would be top athletes drugs or not...

Therein lies the problem IMO. Yes they are top athletes. But many top athletes do not dope. And many top athletes do not win. And there are some top athletes who dope to win...

Here's a name to throw into the mix: Cunego.

IMO he is now riding to his natural ability. Which is impressive. Previously, I think he was riding beyond his natural ability.

 

[Tetedelacourse]

Arguably Valv.piti too if this season is anything to go by.

I think we all agree that LA is/ was a nasty piece of work, and probably cheated in the past.

Where we disagree is that his return weakens the fight against doping. And how much value to attach to that piece of tat from CW

Chuffy you can be content that the witchhunt is now back on and LA might once again be in the firing line.

 

[Noodley]

Arguably Valv.piti too if this season is anything to go by.

I would agree with that.

 

[John the Monkey]

... we shouldn't care if they're nice people to the camera and the mike. We want to watch excellence not Mother Theresas.

I don't know about that, RichP. I admired Cuddles' responses to the attacks on Prato Nevosa(?) this year, but his antics in the post race q&a put me right off him, personally. Compare with, say, Frank Schleck and the "one, stupid, little second". Schleck may never win a grand tour, but he'd still be a rider I personally admired more than Cuddles or Armstrong.

 

[mondobongo]

I think that we actually want both, sporting excellence and that they come across as nice people. Cadel's comments and actions drew a lot of negative press and comment whereas Frank and his 'one stupid bloody second' immediately developed an empathy with fans.

We want heroes but have been disappointed in the past so many times that now we are liable to carefully analyse all aspects of the rider before giving the nod of approval. armstrong has continued to be analysed after leaving the sport and has gradually lost support. Hence his return has not been met by open arms, his media machine may well be aware of this hence the almost homemade webcam announcement expect a charm offensive.

 

[girofan]

Armstrong back in the peleton. Uuuuuugggghhhh.

 

[Blue]

Is that it? Because Joe Public doesn't know who Sastre is we've got to grovel and be grateful that Lance is coming back?

No, you don't need to grovel. What you do have to do is appreciate that events like the TdF want people like LA - they draw publicity/crowds/revenue etc. You needn't get shirty with me because I express an opinion.

He has always behaved like a daffodil in the peloton. Other riders have done their share of bossing the peloton over the years but Lance, off and on the bikes, wins the prize every time.

Yeah, he also won the race - which, I thought, was the point of him being there and, to me, proves my point to a great extent.

 

[Chuffy]

No, you don't need to grovel. What you do have to do is appreciate that events like the TdF want people like LA - they draw publicity/crowds/revenue etc. You needn't get shirty with me because I express an opinion.

People will come anyway. Were the roads empty in 06, 07, 08? I don't think they were. Next year the Schlecks are going to be big favourites, Contador will probably be back, Cuddles will have a much stronger team, Cav might actually get over a mountain or two and be up for the green jersey. There's going to be plenty of interest/crowds/revenue. A lot of the publicity that Armstrong generates is going to be controversy, rehashing of old arguments and a reminder of the not so good old days. That's not the kind of extra interest that the sport needs. If I sound terse it's because I find this 'yay, he's back and the Tour will get loads of coverage!' argument incredibly simplistic and frustrating.

 

[John the Monkey]

No, you don't need to grovel. What you do have to do is appreciate that events like the TdF want people like LA - they draw publicity/crowds/revenue etc.

Undoubtedly somewhat true - I'd imagine ASO and whatever team Mellow Johnny ends up in will be licking their chops at the thought of the extra cash money heading their way.

It's a bit different to say the the TdeF as an event/spectacle/pinnacle of the cycling calendar wants/needs him though...

 

[yello]

Blue, the tour was popular both before and after LA. The magic of the tour, imo, is that it transcends individuals. The riders are the players, the play is the important part. There have been many many big players over the years, they've come and gone. Please don't buy into LA's believe of his own self-importance too.

 

[Tetedelacourse]

Funnily enough Yello that's my POV too. The point is that the tour is big enough and bold enough to "withstand" LA's return. It doesn't put back the fight against doping by a few years. It doesn't do anything to further the cause of a clean LA or a cheating LA. I still fail to understand the grounds for this conclusion.

It's a bit of an oxymoron really (or whatever the word is). "we (the sport, the fans of the sport, the peloton) don't need him" versus "if he does come back he'll ruin it all".

OK another question for the worryers: How will his presence in the peloton change doping protocols?

 

[Blue]

Blue, the tour was popular both before and after LA.

I know. I was a fan/viewer long before the LA era and continued to so be since. I couldn't give a choughs ass if LA rides or not, as such. I just think that he hasn't been replaced and we need a 'cult' figure. Without a new icon, the old one will have to do.

My point, from my original post, was that people want to see the "likes of Armstrong". My point from my subsequent posts was that we haven't seen his like since he left. I think a lot of people watch the Tour for the spectacle as much as the 'race'.

I just enjoy expressing my opinion and I have now done that so I'll say no more on the subject.

 

[Noodley]

....we haven't seen his like since he left...

Yes we have. Landis. He was a cheating twatty bastard as well But then again he got caught...as you were.