Reduced ban? To what end?
Last Post 11/16/2013 12:55 PM by jacques anquetil. 12 Replies.
Author Messages
thinline

Posts:150

--
11/14/2013 09:29 AM
Okay, so now the talk of a potential (very slight potential) for a reduced ban is floating about. To what end? Seriosuly, if Armstrong got his ban reduced and was allowed to compete starting literally next season, to what end? King of the regional tri circuit? Really? I assume no team would touch him, no sponsor would care. Unless a pharma company had a good sense of humor.
Cosmic Kid

Posts:1100

--
11/14/2013 09:48 AM
Well, as I understand it, the only reduction in his ban would be to 8 years, not 6 months as -7 wants. And it is not about cycling for him at this point, it is triathlon and even just being able to run in a marathon. As it stands now, he could not enter the NY Marathon, Chicago marathon, etc.

At the end of the day, the guy is driven to compete. For whatever reason, it drives the guy and consumes him. And for that reason, the lifetime ban is fairly poetic.
Just say "NO!" to WCP!!!!
jacques_anquetil

Posts:216

--
11/14/2013 10:45 AM
-7 yearns to be relevant again.
79pmooney

Posts:1113

--
11/14/2013 11:37 AM
Halve it. A lifetime is what, 80 years? 1/2 = 40 years. Good behavior? Halve it again. (He cost others easily that many years at their peaks with all the torpedoed careers.)

Ben
Entheo

Posts:317

--
11/14/2013 01:32 PM
he's 42, same age as chris horner. i'm thinking he's hoping to get the ban lifted, then get on horner's program so he can win the vuelta next year. wink wink.
RobertMitchum

Posts:21

--
11/14/2013 02:04 PM
In my humble opinion; he cannot abide being told, “No, you are not allowed to do this.” It’s his competitive obsession. He chooses not to acknowledge that there is a higher power that can prohibit him from doing what he wants to do. I doubt that anyone in his adult life has ever told him no before and backed it up. I hope they don’t buckle. I agree with GL’s assessment; the fraud that LA committed is beyond a sports infraction. It was a criminal act. He deserves to be a footnote, like Pete Rose.
jmdirt

Posts:699

--
11/14/2013 04:00 PM
Robert, so you are saying that LA should be in the cycling hall of fame?

Comparing LA to PR is just silly!

A guy at the Y last night suggested reducing LA's ban to 25 years.
RobertMitchum

Posts:21

--
11/15/2013 12:32 PM
Jmdirt:

Had LA not finally 'fessed up do you doubt he would have forever been enshrined in cycling's “hall of fame?”

Last time I checked Pete Rose wasn't in the Baseball Hall Of Fame. He is on the Hall of Fame's "permanently ineligible list." He and others on his behalf have tried to appeal this life-long ban and have failed.

Both PR and LA were fierce, wily and talented competitors—LA obviously with PED assistance. Both accumulated a long and impressive list of palmares. Both were known to be arrogant and difficult. Both were named Sports Illustrated’s Athlete of the Year. Both staged “comebacks,” if you will—PR as a manager, LA as a competitor.

Like LA, PR denied allegations of his misdeeds for many years before coming clean. And while being investigated for his activities, much like LA, he vigorously attacked his accusers, suing the Commissioner of Baseball. His final admission was as disingenuous and begrudging as LA’s.

Is Pete’s gambling mojo comparable to what LA did? In my opinion, no. LA’s antics negatively impacted an entire generation of competitors and has permanently stained the image of professional cycling. I doubt that ever in my lifetime a professional cyclist will be out from under the suspicion of “Is he clean?”

Pete’s behavior has probably permanently relegated him to be “almost, but never.” I hope LA suffers similarly.

I’ll stand by my comparison.
jmdirt

Posts:699

--
11/15/2013 03:20 PM
Yah, they are both white, male, two legs, two arms, two testicles (auhh wait)...

PR busted his ars to win on beer and bread and was one of the best players in the history of the sport. He didn't break a competition rule. He broke an antiquated rule that was put in place because at one time guys could make more money by throwing games than by winning games. PR bet FOR his team so while he broke the letter of the rule, he didn't break the intent of the rule.

LA was a doper.

You said that they (and/or their sporting sins) don't compare "Is Pete’s gambling mojo comparable to what LA did? In my opinion, no. " but then said you stand by comparing them.

When I said "Robert, so you are saying that LA should be in the cycling hall of fame? " I was making a stupidalec reference to the fact that PR should be in the HoF so I was wondering if your felt that LA belonged in the HoF as well. Thanks for the brief history lesson though.
Cosmic Kid

Posts:1100

--
11/15/2013 04:17 PM
Oh jeez....I don't wanna get into a whole PR discussion, but we have no idea how Rose bet. The only person who says he only bet on the Reds to win is himself, AFAIK. And let's face it....his credibility sucks on this issue. "I never gambled on baseball" ---> "I never bet on the Reds"----->"I never bet on the Reds to lose."

Having the manager of a team bet on the sport threatens the very stability of the sport (no matter what sport it is).

That said, I think Rose should be in the HOF as a player with big * next to his name, noting what he did as a manager.

Just say "NO!" to WCP!!!!
RobertMitchum

Posts:21

--
11/15/2013 04:23 PM
jmdirt
Sorry I didn't pick up on your sarcasm. Have a great weekend.
jmdirt

Posts:699

--
11/15/2013 07:04 PM
Cosmic, I think a baseball investigator and an independent guy both said that there was proof of him betting on the Reds and no proof that he ever bet against the reds. The guy hired by baseball was a fed investigator but the other guy might have been an author so who knows who was paying his bills. Baseball made a statement that PR didn't bet against the Reds. Of course, who knows.

PS: I'm going from memory on that so Google/wiki might prove me wrong...I have CRS!
jacques_anquetil

Posts:216

--
11/16/2013 12:55 PM
-7 wants a reduced ban so that he can be treated "fairly."


---
Active Forums 4.1