A lot of this I can not worry too much about, because there are far more serious matters that really impact people every day, going on every day. However, are you prepared to just forget something as serious as perjury, just go away? Last time I checked that was a very serious federal crime. Telling the truth under oath, is a principal upon which the whole justice and legal system is based!

You are OK with that?

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

I saw the Nicole Cooke interview on BBC. That was very well stated by her. The reason why I stated that front page article would be better timed for after the Oprah interview or better yet, after a Tygart statement, because it would be reporting on some news and offering an analysis of the news. I don't see the New York times in their opinion articles (or the Economist), write for a random reason, based on how an editor is feeling about a topic at a given time. Herbert's position is entirely valid and represents somewhere between 45-48 percent of what people are saying on the current poll. I just think a front page opinion piece would be better timed post Oprah interview, or post Tygart statement. I don't actually care what the opinion piece says, I'm just commenting on the timing of the article being published.

Please note that other news sources in the mainstream media have only reported on the news as of yesterday...I watched reports on BBC, TSN (Canada), CBC and there are a reports from the AP, ESPN, in the print/electronic media. None are taking a position about wanting him back or not. They are just reporting the news. Most are probably waiting a bit longer to publish opinion pieces and many sportswriters will have the exact same position as Herbert. I just think that waiting for these events would allow the opinion piece to have a lot more weight. At the moment it lacks context because the guy has a lifetime ban. It may be lifted, but it might be so long in the future that it is irrelevant anyway.

I do hope there is another article by Herbert or Dan or both to coincide with these events. In fact, there needs to be one.

More like Clinton, who like LA, denied, lied, denied, and even lied to congress and was impeached. But he is still loved by many.

Is that what Lance's defenders are now left with? We've gone from:

*Lane never doped, to
* He neve failed a test, to
* Everyone was doing it, to
* it's a witch hunt, to
* it was a long time ago, so who cares?, to
* show me where he doped in triathlons

Gotta be tough to see the emperor naked, huh?

---

Chicago Cubs - 2016 WORLD SERIES Champions!!!!

"If ever the time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin." - Samuel Adams

You think I should not be allowed to voice my opinion on Lance? But you can point fingers at me and tell me where I should live? What qualifies you as an immigration official?

Also, with your Nazi Germany comment on Facebook, I did not know you are a historian.


But yes, you may have your opinion.

I don't think there is an disagreement on the info that he has to base his opinion on. What I am talking about is how readers use media, not how Herbert uses it. Readers will come to a media sources to read their take on the news. Right now, I am getting a more comprehensive view of the events from yesterday from ESPN than from ST. We're getting Herbert's position as of yesterday, and maybe that alone is news for some readers. For example, I would not expect an article of this type on the Economist. On an equivalently heated and polarized topic, this opinion piece was given on gun control in Britain:

http://www.economist.com/blogs/lexington/2012/12/gun-control


We don't need to like the content, I'm more commenting about the type of article and full context.


I believe there is an opportunity for ST to do more (in hopefully an upcoming full blown opinion/op-ed) where the feelings of the writer are also complimented with many of the facts and recent events. Since ST has a leadership and influence role in the multi sports community, that is what I want to see in the front page....and for some reason if the ban is lifted, I would be very interested in a panel type article in a debate format featuring the personal views of Dan, Herbert, Jordan and Tim Carlson. Each of these guys would present a slightly different and valid angle and probably could not be synthesized into a cohesive piece, because I am sure there would be disagreements in views between them. A debate format piece would be a very interesting read.

What's that you say?

---

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
Founder of VeloVetta Cycling Shoes
Instagram • Facebook

Touche. I figured that was coming.

---

"One Line Robert"

His race results you can find with Mark Allen's..................Oh wait, he has no business talking about sport huh

I think it's important for the triathlon community at large to voice its opinion on this, and insofar as Slowtwitch is a not-insignificant 'voice' of the triathlon community, and Herbert is essentially giving an op-ed piece from that voice, I think it's perfectly reasonable to express this view ahead of any decision USADA or any other governing bodies may make. Will it make a difference to their deciion-making? Who knows, but it can't hurt.

So let me add my voice: yes, we don't want him back. And let me be clear, my opinion is not based on the doping. I'm all for a doper who is caught, admits it, accepts their punishment and works to change the culture and future of a sport to be given a second chance. What I'm against is allowing someone who has smeared, threatened and sued anyone who has tried to speak the truth to be allowed back into the sport. Hell, he even tried to get USADA shut down. Essentially a scorched-earth policy.

Ok Mr. Sensitivity, so that everyone will know here's what I wrote on Facebook in reply to
you writing : You Are Not Welcome Here Anymore".

"We don't do that sort of stuff over here in America Mr. Krabel. Perhaps 68 years ago over in
The Fatherland where you are from it was ok, but not here."

I DID NOT call you a Nazi. I stated that over here in this country we do not allow one person to
simply tell someone else that they can't do something just because we don't like it.

When I said I wish you'd go back to Germany I was being sarcastic to match the pomposity of your
comments. We both know you're not going anywhere. Things are too good for you over here.

---

Find out what it is in life that you don't do well, then don't
do that thing.

this century?

---

Find out what it is in life that you don't do well, then don't
do that thing.

Glad you clarified that athletes had to compete in theis century to have an opinion

Actually, that's exactly what we can do here. It's called free speech. Others are free to ignore it though.

This whole week of teary eyed YT video apology and confession on Oprah's couch is nothing more than another PR campaign. http://online.wsj.com/...261928.html?mod=e2fb. Also humorous that the believers have gone from "show me the evidence" to "he deserves the same as everyone else."

In the good ol' USofA, we do this shit all the time.

Really? Systematically doped, cheated, coerced others to do the same, bribed officials to cover it up, and repeatedly lied about it even when given the opportunity to 'fess up and receive a lenient sentence.

He rolled the dice and he lost. I don't see why he should be given another bite at the apple, even if it is in the AG ranks.

John

---

---

Top notch coaching: Francois and Accelerate3 | Follow on Twitter: LifetimeAthlete |

Seriously, one of the best summations I have seen on the topic.

Fully expresses my sentiment, though I think instead of playing golf or darts, he should be thrown in jail for the harassment, torment and wrongful abuse of others by misusing the legal system.

He wants fame... lets give it to him by adding him to the lexicon.

To pull an "Armstrong" - The act of lying, cheating, or stealing and then harassing, suing and intimating those who try to tell the truth.

Oh, yeah, here we go with the semantics and the "show me proofers". No, you did not out and out say the word Nazi. You simply implied it by naming the "Fatherland" and a specific time span to place it during Hitler's regime. Still makes you an asswipe.

However, Godwin's Law having been proven, this thread is effectively over.

John

---

---

Top notch coaching: Francois and Accelerate3 | Follow on Twitter: LifetimeAthlete |

I really could do all my stories from anywhere, but I think my 14 month old twin boys would be really upset if their dad moved back to Germany.

And yes, I am in shit shape right now, but that is irrelevant to the opinion I stated. This opinion although clearly mine is not so much about me anyway, but about the clean pros who would have to compete against him.

"We don't do that sort of stuff over here in America Mr. Krabel.

But you are OK with the perjury? Now you are really out on a slippery slope!

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

You're not paying attention. It's over when Herbert says it's over.