New Kimmage Interview
- Thread starter Moller
- Start date
Moller said:
Damn - I didn't know Lance Armstrong was soley responsible for all doping in the peleton and for keeping everybody silent about it.
PK is still banging the same old "i hate lance" drum with the same old "I know he's guilty but I have no proof" drum stick. Yawn.
Are we ever going to move on? Guilty or innocent the powers that be have deemed him innocent - no amount of hatred is ever going to make him guilty.
Next....
Eldron said:
I think the point he was making was that he had moved on... ie that he interviews more sportspeople not associated with cycling than he does with. In fact all of his awards for journalism come from other sports not cycling. He has a passing interest in cycling because unlike every member of this forum he was a professional cyclist. Which makes he rather informed. His beef is not so much that the Big Austin American Texas doped but the pressure he applies on others to dope - the true cancer as he puts it.
Kimmage is a sound bloke.
I got to know PK when I raced against him over 25 years ago.
Although we raced for different teams, I always found him to be a very likeable character and I was not surprised when he took up journalism and showed the same vigour and honesty.
And he was a superb cyclist too.
I've spoke to PK many times when we raced and many times since he started his journalistic career.
Like WBT says, PK writes about many sports.
When he started at the Turbine, he wrote mainly about cycling but at the Sunset Times, he has written about many sports, for which he has received
Sportswriter of the Year awards, several times.
My view?
I think PK calls it as it is, regardless of which sport he is writing/commenting upon.
I know that he still loves the sport of cycling, from personal experience.
I also know that he is not particularly enamoured by the professional racing aspect of the sport of cycling.
I would also suggest that PK has a lot of other sports and sports people who are of more interest to him, than Lance Armstrong.
I got to know PK when I raced against him over 25 years ago.
Although we raced for different teams, I always found him to be a very likeable character and I was not surprised when he took up journalism and showed the same vigour and honesty.
And he was a superb cyclist too.
I've spoke to PK many times when we raced and many times since he started his journalistic career.
Like WBT says, PK writes about many sports.
When he started at the Turbine, he wrote mainly about cycling but at the Sunset Times, he has written about many sports, for which he has received
Sportswriter of the Year awards, several times.
My view?
I think PK calls it as it is, regardless of which sport he is writing/commenting upon.
I know that he still loves the sport of cycling, from personal experience.
I also know that he is not particularly enamoured by the professional racing aspect of the sport of cycling.
I would also suggest that PK has a lot of other sports and sports people who are of more interest to him, than Lance Armstrong.
Wonderful interview.
PK puts journalism back in sports journalism.
Yesterday, I watched the Daily Show with Jon Steward and he had Jim Kramer as guest. Jim Kramer and CNBC have a similar problem as most 'journalists', may they work in business, politics, or sports. A lot of 'journalism' nowadays has to do with access. And you can only get access if you play it nice. Just as in war, the truth is the first victim.
PK puts journalism back in sports journalism.
Yesterday, I watched the Daily Show with Jon Steward and he had Jim Kramer as guest. Jim Kramer and CNBC have a similar problem as most 'journalists', may they work in business, politics, or sports. A lot of 'journalism' nowadays has to do with access. And you can only get access if you play it nice. Just as in war, the truth is the first victim.
Kimmage commits to not a single fact -- just points fingers, draws conclusions based on innuendo -- he belongs in a hair salon with a gaggle of gossiping housewives. He even says "let me be clear about this" -- and then says absolutely nothing. What a grandstanding douchebag.jimmypop said:
(Just trying to help.)
IH8LANCE said:
we can't have read the same article. this was one of the best (if not the best) delineation of how difficult it is to get at the roots of this problem. had you not read the article with your livestrong (tm) blinders on, you should notice that armstrong serves as emblem but not sole practitioner of the sin.
Geoff Vadar said:
Ironically I kinda agree with IH8LANCE - not in calling PK a douche bag (I think he's a fairly talented journalist) but alas PK seems to be falling into the "modern journalism" trap which is: wade in, make loads of accusations, stir up controversy, provide zero proof, collect pay cheque.
Bring back the good old days of The FickleFackles won the ball game 4-2 in a thrilling encounter...
The modern version is:
The FicklesFackles have a long history of suspiscious behaviour, their captain allegedly approached the opposition's nanny for some PED's. The nanny then apparently told her boss that possibly she had perhaps sold him some (she thinks). The FickleFackles won the game 4-2 but if we take PED abuse into account I think the opposition would have taken it 6-5. Maybe.
Methinks modern journalists could do with a healthy dose of fact.
Nah internal legals would be all over his ****. He wouldnt be allowed to fly with fairy land **** unless he could bring (internally) solid material - including facts which dont get to the page (for a million billionity reasons). A lot of stuff which just never sees the light of day but very much based in fact. He would get them sued if he was wandering around just making up alice in wonderland stories.Eldron said:
Some of his best material wouldnt even make it through....
Kimmage original line:
"Armstrong is a farken cnut. He is cheating his **** off and I hate the farker. He was in that hotel room and my source reckons a local chemist visited his room. I bet he was juicing up. ******."
After Editor input:
"Armstrong is a shady character by many modern day standards. He has a history of run ins with the French authorities which has many fans questioning his integrity. He is very coy about who he surrounds himself with and it has been very difficult to shed light on who is in his inner circle. It is difficult to understand his decisions and he lacks transparency."
Final edit after being passed through Legal:
"Armstrong is Armstrong. He rides bikes. Can be complex at times. Has a cancer foundation. His comeback has raised interest."
Geoff Vadar said:"Armstrong is Armstrong. He rides bikes. Can be complex at times. Has a cancer foundation. His comeback has raised interest."
He he he.
I blame the Americans! Because of their "sue your ass off" mentality we have been relegated to the factless drivel that passes for modern journalism...
Oh for the days when we were presented with the facts and expected to make our own opinion - nowadays we can kick back safe in the knowledge that our opinion will be written by someone else and available on the news stans first thing in the morning.
Why? Kimmage is a source of amusement, not anger. Here's a guy who rationalized his lack of success as a professional cyclist by *****ing and moaning about everyone else doping. Then upon retiring after winning exactly nothing during his entire worthless career, he admitted he was a doper himself for the sake of a book deal, essentially confirming his status as a disingenuous weasel.Bro Deal said:
In the context of all that, Lim shows up with this:
"I always found him to be a very likeable character and I was not surprised when he took up journalism and showed the same vigour and honesty.
And he was a superb cyclist too."
"Superb cyclist". "Vigour and honesty".
I'm sorry, to be angry I'd have to stop laughing so hard, and it's just not possible at the moment. Lim is mining comedy gold, and I love it.
I have. I think he comes across as a bitter old man. Not saying I disagree with what he says, but his presentation could be better. Speaking of which, I think LA owned him at that press conference. He came off as a anti-doping champion only to the very small community of cyclists who agree with him. However, LA's demagoguery won the day for the general populus. It also helped that LA had a microphone and Kimmage didn't.classic1 said:
Similar threads
