Michael David Curley - January 28th 2015.
Up until hearing the name of American cyclist Lance Armstrong around the sixth Tour De France win, there was a couple of things' I'd never actually heard of at all, in terms of cycling. Team Sky was about as well known to a layman as anyone now wearing a shirt and wondering why a now Sir Bradley Wiggins could later barely even make the team.
As points do have it, did anyone really care anything about cycling full stop?
Of course we needed our heroes to step up to the plate, as anyone from Liverpool, London or Leeds, probably doesn't cheer on any other nations during the world cup, unless the English sides been knocked out. Thats just pulling out three UK cities that at least all start with an L, and believe in the Northern lights of life being more than what we do know.
Then also remember that due to levels of fitness, to what had then become a major involvement by the press. It was difficult to imagine that anyone of such meteoric rise to household fame, had ever in fact become so well known and been that sick anyway.
That being at least the fact in my humble household, was that any relations to testicular cancer had probably been played up rather than down, and at that point Mr Armstrong's condition, had no doubt been played on by the media. My bad for offending anyone, the realities to life and cancer victims surviving, far out ways gold medals, or anyones name being a 2015 point to a mile stone.
Lets also remind ourselves that in any situation surrounding the Olympics, and situations surrounding lives involved, there are more than special inclusions that provide realities to the ability of the competitors, and certainly their own intentions in getting there.
Therefore without often articles to help make competitions work become somewhat defunct from overall participation. The greater question to myself then being: How does the layman ever really decide what the general ability and intent of anyone is, until they're on the podium, or later running round the countryside helping banks out.
Lance Armstrong is unquestionably one of the greatest sportsmen of our time.
Lets also surmise that during what one can not or ever wishes to imagine unless, make a wish foundation is infact in the area of wishing peoples health: The need to transfuse blood, and proteins in the year 1996, was something that even in the unlikely event of any one surviving to race, should in most countries, and certainly other than jealousy, be placing people into the realms of being able to compete with a disability, and win to the point of him being an expert for life.
In the BBC interview the other night, and without his guilt looking sideways at all. Lance Armstrong now disgraced has been forgotten about, as if he'd killed a man or woman, and then left the body on the early evening news.
I feel bad that he isn't able to raise that money of $100,000 by being involved in a race, and like him, find it disgraceful he can't, full stop.
The classic scenario regardless of conditions is the man or woman who turns up in all the golfing attire and still can't hit the ball for love nor money. We the general public, were never presented the sick and nearly deceased Mr Armstrong, that as a man as good as my age ever did achieve. Is a far better and greater advocate for all of it. Go jump the vault without a pole or laminate it in something to find a wooden horse, to don't step inside, to deceive the one's who don't.
Lets surmise the realities to what he, and as he stated as always is, others involved as well to being a difficulty of conversion we won't hear. Moreover, what do I learn from he, as opposed to a man who Team Sky clearly fell out with, and stopped wearing big sideboards when being in a rock band was never really his thing?
How is Sir Chris Hoy's life achievements any greater than a man who survived the greatest battle of them all? At least to my point they're not. And working on the basis that they're not, don't wish Lance Armstrong's 1996 life on anyone, because why would you.
Perhaps ego and self determination would want to make the man forget. How did Lance Armstrong ever deceive Niké for ten years?
They being the company that made more overseas clothes in
sweatshops than any 2013 apology could ever get them credit for.
Its not like they never made payroll under him, or moved on when it all went west coast official, and out there.
The facts of what we heard besides the interviews that he did in light of the revelations, was so what. To me after surviving what he did is no different to paralympian having to strap on a new pair of legs after getting back from Iraq, Afghanistan or any other sort of war zone.
We sit there and also watch the press based on former Russian defectors going against their own country, whilst clearly working as double agent and spy. And wonder what the British would have done if he was one of ours. Surmising like during the war they shot German spies who happened to just air jump in, and still can't get the facts out on Chilcot.
And if there is no silent events ever going on then why would we ever hold an enquiry? The greater ongoing question to taxpayers is what have double agents who betray their own lands of birth got anything to do with us?
Its not a far cry from the picture of Lance Armstrong above, and in full knowledge that at any time as soon as we need to do an appeal everyone generally knows a person who's either getting well, or battling it out there, in hope.
And yet, since the continued realities that an American cyclist cleansed himself, following an almost certain end to a situation, doesn't mean a person who didn't clean out their systems six of seven times could have been in Lance Armstrong's place and won anyway.
Niké would never have had the embarrassment of those sweatshops
and heavens forbid the fever around any UK cyclists would never have got to where it did. Let alone the no doubt millions made from the once forgettable Team Sky, that has since clearly doubled the pot with arrogance.
They'll berate a guy on the Jeremy Kyle show for smoking cannabis because it relaxes him, and yet actor Seth Rogen gets paid around $8 million U.S, for a film that almost likely starts a cyber war and promotes it on every single show that he does: And don't forget that swimmer with a bong while you out there either:
I appreciate the BBC's sudden candor in asking physical two sided questions on behalf of their countrymen in the last twenty four hours, since getting cut off during interview interference last week.
And if nothing else following the interview they provided with Lance Armstrong on Monday night, in what actually looked like a very honest reply. Decided to at least provide some online support for the man, if not the future of many people's sanities.
There are literally thousands of charities beyond the needs of what many celebrities or households choose to give, and yet we berate the very likes who get up again and survive. That be the case why have paralympians full stop?
And why cut anyone slack when crossing the street: "Cause Lance Armstrong survived it, he should no better"?
You're third down in the last weeks of a life and a man comes along and tells you blood transfusions might help you make the TV in a near twenty years time, to be told you won the Tour De France how many times and cheated?
It sounds like a slam dunk to me, and in terms of charities would be asking a guy like that to participate as much as he could if not to inspire the people who need it. His obvious talent for survival and ego is very much needed to win anything, and if thats what gets it through to genetics, only by desire and mindframe understand that most don't ever see that through.
In closing at least from this end, I was shocked when I found out.
I'm even more adamant now that if he can help people who are diagnosed with illness, or life conditions seek joy, pull through and hasn't yet slammed the door on the world for gross miscalculation,
then the Tour De France can all cycle off where the bikes don't shine.
You don't go down like that in 1996, and ever get left out the fray.
Follow @CurCurley or @Standupcorrect - "We always follow you back, post only sometimes, and retweet entertainment".