ESPN Spin On Lance Armstrong Cheating - "He's like Robin Hood".

Essentially ESPN has decided that Lance Armstrong did what he did in order to benefit mankind, he didn't cheat for himself, to win, for the fame and the money and the hot women, he cheated specifically to make his cancer charity (which provides money for eduction btw, not research. What does that mean exactly). Lance is a modern day robin hood. Everything he did was to cure cancer. NEver for himself.

I'm both impressed and horrified by this spin. If it becomes a mainstream story i'll be both even more.

I haven't seen the Oprah thing yet

is this the same "spin" that Lance himself is claiming?




you know, if his little escapade did result in $millions toward cancer research then I guess I am glad it happened...I really don't care about the Tour de France and who wins

in fact, I can't even name another person who has won it other than Lance...

[QUOTE=-p.tiddy-]I haven't seen the Oprah thing yet

is this the same "spin" that Lance himself is claiming?




you know, if his little escapade did result in $millions toward cancer research then I guess I am glad it happened...I really don't care about the Tour de France and who wins

in fact, I can't even name another person who has won it other than Lance...[/QUOTE]
Probably because they've all been busted for doping and don't really have a winner :lol

[QUOTE=niko]Essentially ESPN has decided that Lance Armstrong did what he did in order to benefit mankind, he didn't cheat for himself, to win, for the fame and the money and the hot women, he cheated specifically to make his cancer charity ([B]which provides money for eduction btw, not research[/B]. What does that mean exactly). Lance is a modern day robin hood. Everything he did was to cure cancer. NEver for himself.

I'm both impressed and horrified by this spin. If it becomes a mainstream story i'll be both even more.[/QUOTE]

That's a bit misleading. Currently yes, but they used to provide money for research and so did Lance.

When discussed on First Take Champion asked if he could be called that but Bayless and Smith both disagreed. I'm not sure ESPN is behind him.

[QUOTE=Real Men Wear Green]When discussed on First Take Champion asked if he could be called that but Bayless and Smith both disagreed. I'm not sure ESPN is behind him.[/QUOTE]
This is true, there is not real unified ESPN spin per se (not like LEBRON IS GOD) or anything. I've heard this brought up as a discussion point though on more than one show today. It's a ludicrous notion to me.

F*ck Lance Armstrong directly in his mouth.

F*ck ESPN if they're helping this fart stain spin his bullshit.

[QUOTE=niko]This is true, there is not real unified ESPN spin per se (not like LEBRON IS GOD) or anything. I've heard this brought up as a discussion point though on more than one show today. It's a ludicrous notion to me.[/QUOTE]
They probably just want to ride the controversy to ratings. He's lied too many times, too aggressively and attacked too many people based on his lies to rehabilitate his image with the general public and the ESPN reporters are some of the main people he's lied to. Some of them have to be carrying a grudge. ESPN doesn't need his good will while he does need theirs so they don't have to be nice.

he cheated in a sport where cheating via blood doping has been rampant since the 19teens? IDGAF.

He did lots of good for cancer research and thats the only real thing that matters.

[QUOTE=kentatm]he cheated in a sport where cheating via blood doping has been rampant since the 19teens? IDGAF.

He did lots of good for cancer research and thats the only real thing that matters.[/QUOTE]

Of course.

The hundreds of lives he destroyed by perpetrating his lie via bullying tactics, physical and verbal threats, protracted lawsuits and the like...no big deal at all. People's careers destroyed, their livelihoods ended, their families financially ruined...whatevs, he got cancer some money and is himself sitting on more money than he'll ever spend so no big whup!

[QUOTE=kentatm]he cheated in a sport where cheating via blood doping has been rampant since the 19teens? IDGAF.

He did lots of good for cancer research and thats the only real thing that matters.[/QUOTE]
What about the fact that he didn't even deny the allegations but took an attitude of "how dare you question me, how could you even suggest such a thing?" and not mention...his victory speech after winning the 7th.. looking back now is a sure face palm.

[QUOTE=Derka]Of course.

The hundreds of lives he destroyed by perpetrating his lie via bullying tactics, physical and verbal threats, protracted lawsuits and the like...no big deal at all. People's careers destroyed, their livelihoods ended, their families financially ruined...whatevs, he got cancer some money and is himself sitting on more money than he'll ever spend so no big whup![/QUOTE]
hundreds of lives he destroyed?

come on...


cancer research >>>>>>>>>>

[QUOTE=Derka]Of course.

The hundreds of lives he destroyed by perpetrating his lie via bullying tactics, physical and verbal threats, protracted lawsuits and the like...no big deal at all. People's careers destroyed, their livelihoods ended, their families financially ruined...whatevs, he got cancer some money and is himself sitting on more money than he'll ever spend so no big whup![/QUOTE]

:lol hundreds of lives my ass dude

[QUOTE=D-Rose]What about the fact that he didn't even deny the allegations but took an attitude of "how dare you question me, how could you even suggest such a thing?" and not mention...his victory speech after winning the 7th.. looking back now is a sure face palm.[/QUOTE]


I don't care about corrupt people in a corrupt sport.

Just how I don't care that baseball and NFL players use roids. People have been cheating with blood doping since the early 1900s.

[QUOTE=-p.tiddy-]hundreds of lives he destroyed?

come on...


cancer research >>>>>>>>>>[/QUOTE]

Pathetic reasoning. Jerry Sandusky ran a charity that helped a lot more boys than he was able to get his dick into, and continues to help them. I don't hear anyone giving him a free pass.

Lance Armstrong is a vile human who should be shot at the next sunrise.

[QUOTE=Derka]Pathetic reasoning. Jerry Sandusky ran a charity that helped a lot more boys than he was able to get his dick into, and continues to help them. I don't hear anyone giving him a free pass.

Lance Armstrong is a vile human who should be shot at the next sunrise.[/QUOTE]
you're comparing cheating in sports to child rape :facepalm

wtf...get a grip on what is important and what isn't

[QUOTE=Derka]Pathetic reasoning. Jerry Sandusky ran a charity that helped a lot more boys than he was able to get his dick into, and continues to help them. I don't hear anyone giving him a free pass.

Lance Armstrong is a vile human who should be shot at the next sunrise.[/QUOTE]

Those two situations aren't even remotely similar. Seriously?

[QUOTE=Derka]Pathetic reasoning. Jerry Sandusky ran a charity that helped a lot more boys than he was able to get his dick into, and continues to help them. I don't hear anyone giving him a free pass.

Lance Armstrong is a vile human who should be shot at the next sunrise.[/QUOTE]


:biggums:

you just compared blood doping to raping kids?

WTF is wrong with you?

[QUOTE=kentatm]he cheated in a sport where cheating via blood doping has been rampant since the 19teens? IDGAF.

He did lots of good for cancer research and thats the only real thing that matters.[/QUOTE]
[URL="http://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-adventure/athletes/lance-armstrong/Its-Not-About-the-Lab-Rats.html?page=all"]How much good did he do?[/URL]

Not to say he did nothing for cancer research but the more I learn about Armstrong in general the worse he seems. Case in point: [URL="http://articles.philly.com/2012-10-20/sports/34585424_1_sca-promotions-bonus-cyclist"]Bribery.[/URL] There are, have been, and will be bigger villains in sports, he may not even be that bad of a guy. But when you soak yourself in lies and deceit like he did, drowning in cover-ups of cover-ups of cover-ups it has to warp you.

[QUOTE=kentatm]:lol hundreds of lives my ass dude[/QUOTE]

Do your homework or stay ignorant. As some who has lost family members to cancer, I hope Lance Armstrong gets run over by a f*cking Abrams as soon as possible.

[QUOTE=Derka]Do your homework or stay ignorant. As some who has lost family members to cancer, I hope Lance Armstrong gets run over by a f*cking Abrams as soon as possible.[/QUOTE]

:rolleyes:

as if you're the only one whose family has been touched by cancer

GTFO with your bleeding heart bullshit

especially after you tried to compare blood doping to child rape.

[QUOTE=kentatm]IDGAF.
[/QUOTE]

I just want to see this Oprah interview and I'll be back to not giving a f*ck too.

[QUOTE=-p.tiddy-]you're comparing cheating in sports to child rape :facepalm

wtf...get a grip on what is important and what isn't[/QUOTE]

I didn't. At all. But you and the others who seem to think I did are too dull to grasp it cos OMG CANCER RESEARCH, so whatever.

Lance Armstrong is not a scum bag because he cheated in sports. He's a vile and detestable human being because he ruined innocent people's live in defense of a lie. What's worse, he used the act of charity as a pretext to do naught but inflate an already massive ego and continue perpetuating said lie.

Literally nothing he's done here is forgivable, the very least of which is cheating in sports.

Armstrong cheated in sport where cheating is rampant and run by corrupt officials. You think Armstrong mysteriously passed hundreds of tests because he was that much better at hiding it than others? How often have the riders actually been nabbed while actually cheating vs the ones that are found to have cheated after the fact. Most of the riders called out have been called out by whistle blowers not by the organizers of the events themselves. Not all mind you but most.

As for destroying lives I don't think Armstrong took down anyone that wasn't bent on taking him down first.

Did he do good with Llivestrong? you bet he has, does it condone cheating? I don't know, I think that's a moral values thing depending on each person own life rules.

I'm not a real big "ban em all" person when it comes to performance enhancement. I think in a lot of cases it's would be better to allow it on limited basis than to continue fighting for a system that the high end participants can and do exploit while low end athletes watch from afar because they don't have the financial resources nor the notoriety to partake

[QUOTE=Derka]I didn't. At all. But you and the others who seem to think I did are too dull to grasp it cos OMG CANCER RESEARCH, so whatever.

Lance Armstrong is not a scum bag because he cheated in sports. He's a vile and detestable human being because he ruined innocent people's live in defense of a lie. What's worse, he used the act of charity as a pretext to do naught but inflate an already massive ego and continue perpetuating said lie.

Literally nothing he's done here is forgivable, the very least of which is cheating in sports.[/QUOTE]
firsdt of all you DID compare him to Sandusky so "yes you did"

second, could you please explain how he "ruined hundreds of lives" :confusedshrug:

So far the two sides are easy to describe.

Camp A: Lance Armstrong won dirty in a dirty sport, therefore he is the champion nevertheless. He brought a lot to the cancer research, and that is a great achievement for a person.

Camp B: Lance Armstrong lied and dealt with everybody that tried to confront him, he did that because of his ego, he has behaved the opposite of a hero and has to be punished for hoarding the credit unrightfully.

Camp A focuses on what he has done, physically, and Camp B on what he is, as a person. Juristically, I think Camp A is right, because the motives are not to be judged. Ethically, Camp B is right.

I don't know, but I really do think the decisive position on this should be achieved and stated. Cannot leave such a public story hang.

I'm shocked how people can try to spin this. No amount good, incidentally done, makes up for the lack of character he has shown.

Anyone who can beat cancer is a champion in my book. I don't care about his titles or the fact that he used enhancers.

[QUOTE=IGOTGAME]I'm shocked how people can try to spin this. No amount good, incidentally done, makes up for the lack of character he has shown.[/QUOTE]
It's easy, watch

Did his winning the Tour have a direct effect on my life or someone I know? for me the answer is no

Did his cheating have a direct effect on my life or someone I know? once again no

Did his lack of character in dealing with the above have an effect on my life or someone I know? no

Does his cancer awareness and money raised for research have a direct effect? Maybe someday it will

[QUOTE=daily]It's easy, watch

Did his winning the Tour have a direct effect on my life or someone I know? for me the answer is no

Did his cheating have a direct effect on my life or someone I know? once again no

Did his lack of character in dealing with the above have an effect on my life or someone I know? no

Does his cancer awareness and money raised for research have a direct effect? Maybe someday it will[/QUOTE]
I'm happy you view on morality is so self-centered and short sighted.

Not to compare everything, but he did not compare cheating to rape.


What he said is that he was an asshole who attacked other people, even someone who, under oath, testified to what turns out to be the truth. He attacked other people to perpetuate a lie that he's suddenly turning back on.


**** this guy. And stop accusing someone of comparing cheating to rape, when that is clearly not what he did...and it's clear for anyone who knows how to read.

[QUOTE=niko]Essentially ESPN has decided that Lance Armstrong did what he did in order to benefit mankind, he didn't cheat for himself, to win, for the fame and the money and the hot women, he cheated specifically to make his cancer charity (which provides money for eduction btw, not research. What does that mean exactly). Lance is a modern day robin hood. Everything he did was to cure cancer. NEver for himself.

I'm both impressed and horrified by this spin. If it becomes a mainstream story i'll be both even more.[/QUOTE]
and are you going to be responsible for creating every fukcing thread on ISH regarding lance armstrong from here on out?

i mean, so you just created a 'lance armstrong thread on oprah' a day or two ago... now you're apparently not thrilled how its been going and so its time for ANOTHER NEW THREAD to start over with your own original confirmation bias completely intact?

really?

and this is swaying HOW MANY of the people who originally disagreed with you how, exactly?

please do enlighten me, sir...

[QUOTE=Derka]Pathetic reasoning. Jerry Sandusky ran a charity that helped a lot more boys than he was able to get his dick into, and continues to help them. I don't hear anyone giving him a free pass.

Lance Armstrong is a vile human who should be shot at the next sunrise.[/QUOTE]
If you are comparing those boys to the "ruined" lives of Armstrong's detractors, then you are way off base. I'm not buying it that his detractors were of noble intentions. They were in a sport with a systemic prisoner's dilemma to be the best. They were a part of an already dirty sport and they were calling out the best doper because he was on top. It is bullshit to sit there and think you wouldn't lash out at people attacking your own livelihood, especially when they are also eating the forbidden fruit to gain success.

I am more than capable of understanding why many people would rightfully dislike the guy after going out of his way of denying his PED use. That being said, I don't seem to understand why some people are choosing to paint him as some f*cking monster. "Shot at next sunrise." Really? :facepalm

LOL at giving Lance a free pass because he ran a charity.

Reminds me of the wealthy Romans bribing church officials to get into heaven. Here's some money I'm a good person now right?

:facepalm

And you guys know the reason Lance waited til now to confess is the statue of limitations period has passed for his lawsuits against various media outlets that claimed he was doping. If he were to have admitted it a year ago they could've sued him for suing them.

[QUOTE=Derka]

Lance Armstrong is a vile human who should be shot at the next sunrise.[/QUOTE]

[IMG]http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/250x250/33398787.jpg[/IMG]

ESPN, and everyone else really, seems to be getting at him. Idk what you were looking at Niko but they are constantly making him look like an arrogant fool.

And really it fits.

I wonder, I haven't followed Armstrong really because cycling is so far from my peripheral until someone says: "An American won the Tour de France" but was Lance generally liked by the media? Like was he a difficult guy with them, or did most the media like him?

[QUOTE=tpols]And you guys know the reason Lance waited til now to confess is the [b]statue of limitations[/b] period has passed for his lawsuits against various media outlets that claimed he was doping. If he were to have admitted it a year ago they could've sued him for suing them.[/QUOTE]
wow... i've always wanted to see the fabled statue of limitations. that's awesome, dude!


[img]http://dreamcatchersforabusedchildren.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Statue_of_Limitations.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=gigantes]wow... i've always wanted to see the fabled statue of limitations. that's awesome, dude!


[img]http://dreamcatchersforabusedchildren.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Statue_of_Limitations.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
statute.:D

why the **** are some of you even defending Armstrong??? tha **** is wrong is you?? he is a cheater and liar deserves to be thrown in jail or hanged:rant