Everything has two sides!

Reflections on the 2013 Tour de France.

An extract from The Daily Telegraph UK newspaper:

Tour de France 2013: Spectre of Lance Armstrong could prevent Chris Froome reaping sponsorship deals

The spectre of Lance Armstrong could hurt Chris Froome’s ability to fully exploit his Tour de France triumph, leading sponsorship experts warned last night.

Heading for glory: Chris Froome is cheered on by a British fan Photo: PA
Heading for glory: Chris Froome is cheered on by a British fan Photo: PA

Brands might have been expected to flock to Britain’s latest cycling star after he became the country’s second successive winner of the world’s most famous bike race yesterday.

However, Froome was also the first man to secure the yellow jersey since Armstrong confessed to doping his way to all seven of his Tour de France victories, a scandal from which the sport has yet to fully recover.

A slightly different thought from Willie Nelson brought to you courtesy of Bob Derham:

“I think it is just terrible and disgusting how everyone has treated Lance Armstrong, especially after what he achieved, winning seven Tour de France races while on drugs.

When I was on drugs, I couldn’t even find my bike ….”

Willie Nelson

Guess that’s a fair point! 😉

8 thoughts on “Everything has two sides!

  1. There are different types of drugs, and cheating using drugs that enhance performance is in my opinion worthy of the individual being hammered as Lance Armstrong was. I have competed in sport fairly and won county medals, but I would be placed at a disadvantage by a cheat using drugs.

    Like

      1. The situation in sports is actually humoristic, indeed. Particular countries, some tiny, apparently crawl with extra-terrestrials, as they get all the medals.

        Like

      2. Patrice, as you are clearly around just now, I wanted to mention two things. The first was that I have read your latest essay about the adulation of plutocrats a couple of times. I found it powerful albeit exposing my terrible lack of knowledge of history. Which, I guess, is the reason I have been reticent to comment.

        The second thing is that I am at this moment writing the post for tomorrow, part one of the ‘debate’ I promised over a week ago.

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.