Not sure what to make of this....
____
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZgns7CXeUI
The Tour of California – I refuse to call it by its sponsor's name until the race organisers and sponsors at least acknowledge the absurdity of an EPO manufacturer sponsoring a sporting event that has had terrible problems with the mis-use of the substance – started with a showdown in the press room.
You can watch the exchange on youtube for yourself, but the essence is that Kimmage asked Armstrong what it was he admired so much about the recently-returned dopers such as Ivan Basso and Tyler Hamilton.
Armstrong began by asking: “What was your name again?”
And this is where I feel his response loses credibility. It seems highly unlikely that Armstrong would not recognise by sight and sound the face and voice of Paul Kimmage, but in the grand theatre of the moment, it was important for Armstrong to begin the effort to undermine early.
Armstrong's response is measured and seems almost rehearsed, as if he knew the question was coming. He said: “When I decided to come back for what I think is a very noble reason, you said the cancer was back, meaning me.
“I am here to fight this disease, so I don't have to deal with it, I don't have to deal with it. It goes without saying, we're not going to sit down and do an interview. I don't think anyone in this room would sit down for that interview. You are not worth the chair you are sitting on with a statement like that.”
He then goes on to answer the question and explain that David Millar 'got caught with his hand in the cookie jar”, Floyd Landis doesn't feel he did anything wrong and that he admired Ivan Basso.
The cookie jar comment, in particular, shows a complete lack of willingness to address doping in cycling as a serious issue, reducing it to the sort of thing a naughty schoolboy might do. That, surely, is not acceptable.
He added: “As a society, are we supposed to forgive? Absolutely.”
But forgiveness should be preceded by contrition. Millar's stance has been clear since joining Jonathan Vaughters's Slipstream team. Even Basso has admitted he made mistakes.
Where, though, was the condemnation of doping? Given a perfect opportunity to say once and for all that doping was unequivocally wrong, Lance Armstrong chose not to.
Now, you can say that spoken words are only so much hot air and that it's the easiest thing in the world to say one thing and do another. But to say nothing at all? That is surely bizarre.
It was classic Armstrong. Get the room on your side, narrow down the target and isolate them. “I'm not sure anyone in this room would sit down for an interview with you.” “I'm not sure anyone in the world would forgive you for that comment.”
Having met Paul Kimmage, I can say he is an intimidating character. He is the master of silence and he listens intently. In the end you become very aware of the sound of your own voice and begin to feel as if you are babbling. To be interviewed by him must be quite formidable because he has a knack of homing in on the salient point and not letting go, not letting you get away with poorly-explained half-statements.
I like him and I respect him for having the courage to sit in the front row and ask Armstrong a direct question about doping because I know that cannot have been easy.
I can see, though, that his comment in a radio interview – not as many seem to think in the
Sunday Times – would have offended people.
It was a typically forthright comment. “The great cancer martyr… this is what he hides behind all the time. The great man who conquered cancer. Well, he is the cancer in this sport, and for two years this sport has been in remission. Now the cancer's back.”
It is harsh, inflammatory stuff, but it is also anchored in truth.
The irony is that if Kimmage had not said it, he would not have offered Armstrong the opportunity to divert the attention away by talking about cancer. The illness is emotive and emotional and as soon as you hear the word you feel yourself shrink away.
But if Kimmage's comments offended some, are the same people not offended that Armstrong is also using cancer?
Kimmage ended by saying: “You don't have a patent on cancer. I am interested in the cancer of doping in cycling. I exposed it. You come along and it disappears.”
He's right, Armstrong doesn't have a patent on cancer.
And if you watch the clip to the end, Armstrong does something else he does best. Having singled out his target, he gets the rest of the room on side. “Switching back to the Tour of California…” he said, to guffaws and applause.
That's it. Laugh it up. Let's not address the real issue.