… maybe accident or whatever post his tour wins. Seeing as the next Giro route will be honouring Pantani, would we now be getting Tour routes to honour Armstrong?

give it until 10 years after his death and we’ll see.

Was Lance French then??

Was Lance French then??

Ok, appreciate it’s not quite the same, ToC then 🙂 Not quite the point I was trying to question.

Edit: thread was really prompted by reading two stories on cycling news that were next to each other. The first about the Giro route honouring Pantani, and the next about Armstrong’s medal being turned to the IOC.

Pantani was a deeply flawed man who killed himself through his own demons whilst also providing fantastic theatre whilst Armstrong was a lying shit who deliberately set out to destroy other people’s lives and careers.
I know which one I’d rather was remembered.

And I guess the Italians really do like their heroes flawed.

To the OP.
WHO THE @@@@@@@@ CARES

To the OP.
WHO THE @@@@@@@@ CARES

Not you clearly 🙂 Though you do seem to be making a habit of crashing numerous threads with the same comment.

Pantani was a deeply flawed man who killed himself through his own demons whilst also providing fantastic theatre whilst Armstrong was a lying shit who deliberately set out to destroy other people’s lives and careers.

This. The reason I, and many others despise Armstrong isn’t because he doped.

Pantani was a drug addict, not just performance enhancing, but also the ‘street corner’ drugs. I have more sympathy for him than Lance as his life was generally screwed outside of cycling. The subtle differnce is Lance was very brazen for years about how clean he was, it just feels different.

BUT kids all drugs are bad -of course AND celebrating the Giro in his honour is still wrong and a mistake.

Bad Dobby. bad dobby. actually pantani looked like Dobby. 🙂

Care to elaborate more mrblobby? Are you stalking me?
My comment was made on the basis that yet another thread has been started on that cheating drug taking charity abusing half wit texan.
Does anyone actually care? Please feel free to post if you do.

Yes, Lance clearly deserves all he gets!

Pantani on the other hand, regardless of what sordid revelations are exposed, I’m sure he’ll always remain a national hero to the Italians. Hmm how many times did they re-elect Berlusconi?

Edit…

Care to elaborate more mrblobby? Are you stalking me?
My comment was made on the basis that yet another thread has been started on that cheating drug taking charity abusing half wit texan.
Does anyone actually care? Please feel free to post if you do.

🙂 Actually this thread was intended to be more about Pantani’s legacy than Armstrong. Armstrong was just a point of comparison I guess,

Double edit: Mods, can I change the title to “If Pantani had not died” please 🙂

Triple edit: I’m off to start another thread!

Please, please – no more threads about xxxxing Lance!

Pantani was a deeply flawed man who killed himself through his own demons whilst also providing fantastic theatre whilst Armstrong was a lying shit who deliberately set out to destroy other people’s lives and careers.
This. The reason I, and many others despise Armstrong isn’t only because he doped.

+1

You know what I can’t get my head round with the history of cycling and doping is the resounding and crashing silence about “Big Mig” who won the tour multiple times right when, by general consensus, the pro tour was riddled with PEDs. I’ve not seen any evidence that he doped (not that I’ve spent any time searching), but nor have I seen any counter commentary, no mention in reviews of the period that “Big Mig was definitely clean”.

He’s celebrated – popped up at this year’s TdF as a multiple former winner. Should he be? I felt uneasy seeing him there, but am I being unfair in assuming that, if he could beat all and sundry in the 90s, he must have been dirty?

Doesn’t really matter whether he was or not. He hasn’t been proved to be dirty, and it’s too long ago to say otherwise.

You might as well hang on to the heroes who are left rather than undermining them all.

You know what I can’t get my head round with the history of cycling and doping is the resounding and crashing silence about “Big Mig” who won the tour multiple times right when, by general consensus, the pro tour was riddled with PEDs. I’ve not seen any evidence that he doped (not that I’ve spent any time searching), but nor have I seen any counter commentary, no mention in reviews of the period that “Big Mig was definitely clean”

As others have mentioned above, the issue with Armstrong wasn’t so much that he was a doper, it was that he was a lying bully who coerced others around him and aggressively hunted and destroyed anyone who dared to question his methods. He was, and is, a nasty piece of work.

Given that the Tour De France has been associated with drug use (painkillers, alcohol (riders used to strip bars bare in the early days and then ride off without paying), benzedrine, amphetamines etc etc etc), it’s pretty much a given that the greats of yesteryear were on something. At the end of the day that was then and this is now. Armstrong was rightly done because he is an obnoxious idiot. The rest should be left to enjoy their retirements in peace, after all whatever they did/didn’t do they were brave men and extraordinary cyclists.

Pantani was a hero though. Still is!

Armstrong was rightly done because he is an obnoxious idiot.

Armstrong was done because of the PEDs. The fact that he was a lying bullying scumbag just made it sweeter 🙂

Ah I see, so Pantani was “deeply flawed” and “had demons” so that’s OK, but Lance is just a ****.

The disparity was what prompted the thread.