The biggest sporting story in the world this year took place last Thursday at the press conference for the Amgen Cycling Tour of California. Lance Armstrong, cycling's greatest ever athlete, was fielding questions from the media when an Irish journalist from the Sunday Times asked him a question.
Having rehearsed this answer many times in knowing which question was coming, Armstrong reprimanded the journalist in an amazing exchange between the two.
The question from Paul Kimmage that gave rise to Armstrong's meticulously prepared answer was about why Armstrong was welcoming back cyclists who had been proven to be cheats, or dopers.
After asking, "What is it about these dopers you seem to admire so much?", Armstrong rounded on Kimmage by stating, "You are not worth the chair that you're sitting on."
Armstrong turned the tables on Kimmage, blasting the reporter over comments Kimmage made during a Irish radio interview last year, calling Armstrong "The cancer in this sport. For two years, this sport has been in remission. And now, the cancer's back," Kimmage said in the September 2008 interview.
After recognizing Kimmage, Armstrong—who survived testicular cancer in 1996—went on the offensive.
"I'm here to fight this disease," Armstrong said. "You are not worth the chair that you're sitting on with a statement like that with a disease that touches everybody around the world."
Kimmage said he had asked for an interview with Armstrong, but was refused.
"I think it goes without saying, no, we're not going to sit down and do an interview. And I don't think anybody in this room would sit down for that interview," Armstrong said.
Armstrong has portrayed himself as the innocent in this exchange but even here he is being disingenuous.
In refusing Kimmage's advances for an interview Armstrong infers that the interview request was made after the statement by Kimmage, in fact the request was made months before the interview and knowing exactly who Kimmage was and is, Armstrong rejected the interview.
The main problem that Kimmage—and indeed many of the worlds fans and journalists—have with Armstrong is that Armstrong portrays himself as a man who went on to achieve greatness after recovering from testicular cancer.
He has deluded many into thinking that if Lance can beat cancer and go on to become one of the world's premier athletes, then so can they.
What he has failed to do is dispel the stories and rumours about him and his alleged steroid abuse. Almost every Tour De France winner—or second, third, fourth or fifth placed rider, etc.—over the last 15 years has been proven to have doped.
Everyone except Lance.
When the questions were really beginning to bite and come home to roost and his innocence was being questioned at every turn he chose to retire, after winning the Tour seven times in a row.
No other cyclist in the sports history with or without drugs was able to achieve what Lance Armstrong achieved in seven remarkable seasons—after overcoming cancer.
The questions on Armstrong's innocence and alleged use have always been there, but this was the first time that a journalist actually confronted the man.
But who is Kimmage? What right does he have to question Armstrong?
65 Comments
Loading more comments...
This comment and all replies have been deleted This comment has been deleted Undo delete