RE: Who’s been a naughty cyclist?
January 19, 2013 at 2:54 am
(This post was last modified: January 19, 2013 at 3:05 am by Aractus.)
(January 18, 2013 at 2:01 pm)Moros Synackaon Wrote: To be honest, who has [explicit annotation censored] really harmed?How about all the people he sued for telling the truth?
How about the insurance company he scammed?
Let alone the poor honest riders who had no hope of winning when they were racing against cheats.... he's just a really nasty man, a bully who is happy to hurt anyone that gets in his way or that dare opposes him.
(January 18, 2013 at 2:35 pm)Shell B Wrote: Ew. I hate the word naughty in this context.He took EPO, testosterone and blood transfusions - what "health repercussions"?
I think he's a bit of a douche. A lot of people looked up to him. However, I don't care that much. He's the one who will reap the health repercussions.
(January 18, 2013 at 2:49 pm)Chuck Wrote: But seriously, Armstrong's doping in itself couldn't not have damaged the sport cycling anymore than the doping that was done by everyone else, or by the doping that would have been done by whoever else would have won the Tour if Armstrong didn't dope.If everyone is taking drugs I don't say "pass the bong please", I walk out of the room and leave. You can't excuse something because you're peers are doing it. Even so, the fact of the matter is that this petty pathetic man was such a nasty piece of work that he actively targeted and sued anyone that dare tell the truth about him.
I believe perjury is worse than rape, what do you think of that?
