Good read by one of my buddies from Virginia baby!!
Another advocate of Polygraphs?
Lance lives in a world where athletes can?t be trusted
written August 29, 2005 by Bob Molinaro
www.pilotonline.com
Short of hooking him up to a lie detector machine, I?m not sure what we were expected to learn from Lance Armstrong?s appearance on Larry King last week.
Armstrong used the TV forum to dispute reports by a French newspaper that a new test of the urine he provided in 1999 turned up a banned substance. What else did we expect Armstrong to do that night, ask King where he buys his suspenders?
Even in cable-ready America, where a man is only innocent until proven guilty by talk show blather, it has been emphasized that there were no positive tests for Armstrong from 2000 to 2005. What is it with the French, anyway, saving urine for seven years. Do they keep that stuff in their cellars like bottles of wine?
Armstrong?s claim that the report by L?Equipe is part of a ?witch hunt? sounds plausible on this side of the pond, where most things French are suspicious. The French have been hostile to Armstrong ever since he began dominating their race in ?99.
It?s easy for Americans to side with a countryman, especially when it?s the haughty foreigners leveling the charges.
Still and all, wouldn't it be nice if there were some way to hook up Lance to a lie detector? Because, when you get right down to it, all we really know for sure about athletes and drugs is that nobody ever comes clean, even when confronted with lab reports.
Let?s hope Armstrong didn't shake a finger at King, like Rafael Palmeiro did before Congress. That might be a bad sign. Palmeiro?s word is worthless after his public denials of steroid use were trumped by a positive test.
But it?s not as if Palmeiro is the first athlete to lie through his teeth about this. Every athlete who has ever been exposed strongly professed his or her innocence.
International track and field is a cesspool of cynicism because of the drug deceptions that have gone on over the years. American sprinter Kelli White denied and denied, then confessed when faced with the evidence. But not before concocting a tall tale that the banned substance in her system was prescribed by a doctor for narcolepsy.
Athletes, we've learned, will say anything to avoid being suspected. The first lie is taking a banned substance. After that, the denials naturally follow.
Mark McGwire once was an inspiring American along the lines of Armstrong before people began to suspect his home runs were powered by steroids. His pathetic comments to Congress this spring, when he explained why he could not answer questions, finally turned him into just another fallen idol who can't be taken at his word.
Marion Jones, the American track and field star, never failed a drug test, but has been implicated in the BALCO scandal. Nobody believes her, either. And does anybody want to go to bat for Jason Giambi or Barry Bonds?
This is the world in which Armstrong lives, a world where athletes cannot be trusted.
Throw all your support and patriotic fervor behind Armstrong and you risk more than major disappointment. You risk being played for a fool.
There?s never been a drug cheat who didn't deny cheating. Helping to make Armstrong?s case, though, are all the drug tests over all the years. Those countless tests he passed. Because of all the urine samples that didn't turn up positive, people who celebrate the man and respect his image can say that they have more than trust and faith to go on.
Besides, who would choose to be on the side of the French?
Another advocate of Polygraphs?
Lance lives in a world where athletes can?t be trusted
written August 29, 2005 by Bob Molinaro
www.pilotonline.com
Short of hooking him up to a lie detector machine, I?m not sure what we were expected to learn from Lance Armstrong?s appearance on Larry King last week.
Armstrong used the TV forum to dispute reports by a French newspaper that a new test of the urine he provided in 1999 turned up a banned substance. What else did we expect Armstrong to do that night, ask King where he buys his suspenders?
Even in cable-ready America, where a man is only innocent until proven guilty by talk show blather, it has been emphasized that there were no positive tests for Armstrong from 2000 to 2005. What is it with the French, anyway, saving urine for seven years. Do they keep that stuff in their cellars like bottles of wine?
Armstrong?s claim that the report by L?Equipe is part of a ?witch hunt? sounds plausible on this side of the pond, where most things French are suspicious. The French have been hostile to Armstrong ever since he began dominating their race in ?99.
It?s easy for Americans to side with a countryman, especially when it?s the haughty foreigners leveling the charges.
Still and all, wouldn't it be nice if there were some way to hook up Lance to a lie detector? Because, when you get right down to it, all we really know for sure about athletes and drugs is that nobody ever comes clean, even when confronted with lab reports.
Let?s hope Armstrong didn't shake a finger at King, like Rafael Palmeiro did before Congress. That might be a bad sign. Palmeiro?s word is worthless after his public denials of steroid use were trumped by a positive test.
But it?s not as if Palmeiro is the first athlete to lie through his teeth about this. Every athlete who has ever been exposed strongly professed his or her innocence.
International track and field is a cesspool of cynicism because of the drug deceptions that have gone on over the years. American sprinter Kelli White denied and denied, then confessed when faced with the evidence. But not before concocting a tall tale that the banned substance in her system was prescribed by a doctor for narcolepsy.
Athletes, we've learned, will say anything to avoid being suspected. The first lie is taking a banned substance. After that, the denials naturally follow.
Mark McGwire once was an inspiring American along the lines of Armstrong before people began to suspect his home runs were powered by steroids. His pathetic comments to Congress this spring, when he explained why he could not answer questions, finally turned him into just another fallen idol who can't be taken at his word.
Marion Jones, the American track and field star, never failed a drug test, but has been implicated in the BALCO scandal. Nobody believes her, either. And does anybody want to go to bat for Jason Giambi or Barry Bonds?
This is the world in which Armstrong lives, a world where athletes cannot be trusted.
Throw all your support and patriotic fervor behind Armstrong and you risk more than major disappointment. You risk being played for a fool.
There?s never been a drug cheat who didn't deny cheating. Helping to make Armstrong?s case, though, are all the drug tests over all the years. Those countless tests he passed. Because of all the urine samples that didn't turn up positive, people who celebrate the man and respect his image can say that they have more than trust and faith to go on.
Besides, who would choose to be on the side of the French?
