Phil Liggett on Lance Armstrong

[Keith A]

I hesitate posting anything about LA as this always seems to end up going nowhere. But I thought I'd share this short article on CyclingNews regarding Liggett's opinion of LA, and his support of LA in the face of his reported PED usage.

Here's the link...
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/liggett-i-helped-build-lance-armstrong-into-a-great-cyclist/

[Elefantino]

One thing about Phil is that since the flood broke he hasn't made excuses. He admits that Armstrong took his (PL's) career to new heights by opening up American paychecks for him. Like many, he suspected LA doped but hoped he was wrong.

The sad thing about PL now is that he's lost his quickness on air. He misidentifies too much and falls back on familiar palaver.

[FlashUNC]

Ugh, Phil. Just stop.

[makoti]

One thing about Phil is that since the flood broke he hasn't made excuses. He admits that Armstrong took his (PL's) career to new heights by opening up American paychecks for him. Like many, he suspected LA doped but hoped he was wrong.

The sad thing about PL now is that he's lost his quickness on air. He misidentifies too much and falls back on familiar palaver.

Sounds like Phil thinks it was the other way around.

[Lionel]

PL is such an idiot, I could never stand listening to him comment races and Le tour.

[lovethesport]

We would all benefit if we had a friend like Phil... Live on

[MattTuck]

From Merriam Webster

Definition of commentator

: a person who discusses important people and events on television, in newspapers, etc.

: a person who provides a description on a radio or television program of an event (such as a sports contest) as it is happening


He was the latter. It is not really his job, in that capacity, to defend or make allegations of doping. If a person lines up at the start line, he or she is entitled to some presumption of innocence.

If you are a commentator, of the first type -- well, then, you need to scratch beneath the surface.

[livingminimal]

when I was 10 years old, I loved little more than Phil's voice in my living room in Spring and Summer.

Now, I wince when I hear him. He's an absolute train wreck on the mic these days and in interviews like this. Suckling from the teet of a ····bag like Armstrong was the last straw for me, but I made up my mind around that a decade ago or so.

It's time for some fresh blood. Pay them appropriately, give them a proper set-up and accommodations, and you will get some talent that can do the job well.

[tv_vt]

I like Phil and appreciate all he has done to promote bike racing over the years. Can't comment on current state of affairs, but I appreciate his work over many decades. He put in his time.

[bicycletricycle]

i appreciate the nuanced position, no one person is all bad or good, lance seems to be a great example of this fact.

[Bruce K]

I had the opportunity to spend a little time riding with Phil several years ago

One of my most memorable rides ever

Good stories, a wicked wit, and it was interesting to try and follow the wheel of a REALLY fast Bike Friday

I have no animosity towards the man. He was an entertaining commentator.

His relationship/issues with LA are his burden to bear - I won't judge him for it

BK

[weisan]

I grew up listening to Phil.

I will never get tired of listening to Phil.

[soulspinner]

I grew up listening to Phil.

I will never get tired of listening to Phil.

Right? I just overlook the mistakes ...........

[Fatty]

I like Phil.
Maybe he was just playing it safe with his answers so he didn't get sued.

[clyde the point]

PL = clearly an opportunist and little else. He's set himself up for this "virtual black eye" for years.

Time to hang it up Phil and allow someone younger/more deserving to capture and translate the racing.

[Chris]

PL is such an idiot, I could never stand listening to him comment races and Le tour.

You obviously don't know him, but you seem to be happy to make some broad generalizations and disparagement. I do happen to know Phil. You will never find a more gracious and pleasant person to be around. I have never seen him be rude or unkind to any fan who has come along and asked for a minute of his time, no matter the circumstances. Like all announcers as they age, either because of slowed cognition or deterioration in vision, his commentary has slipped, but I can guarantee, that he has forgotten more about all aspects of cycling than any of us on this forum have ever known. That definitely includes you.

[dave thompson]

I grew up listening to Phil.

I will never get tired of listening to Phil.

Me too. The Phil and Paul show, for better or worse, is cycle racing in our living room.

[sitzmark]

I hesitate posting anything about LA as this always seems to end up going nowhere. But I thought I'd share this short article on CyclingNews regarding Liggett's opinion of LA, and his support of LA in the face of his reported PED usage.

Here's the link...
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/liggett-i-helped-build-lance-armstrong-into-a-great-cyclist/

Those were the best of times ... those were the worst of times. Stuff happens. We learn and (some of us) move on. PL OK in my book - earned his stripes - not perfect, but who is?

I'd suggest PL played a part in the LA phenomenon, but it was multifaceted ... a perfect storm. Phil stood by a friend to the end. Not deserving of a firing squad. Life happens...

[Keith A]

Those were the best of times...Very true statement...it was awesome seeing an American based team doing so well in a sport that has had relatively few stars from this side of the pond. But as they say, it was too good to be true.

[Black Dog]

I was watching some of the 98 tour; Phil was commenting on doping in light of Festina's removal from the race. His comment about doping being the cancer of the sport was prophetic and post hoc ironic.

[Lionel]

You obviously don't know him, but you seem to be happy to make some broad generalizations and disparagement. I do happen to know Phil. You will never find a more gracious and pleasant person to be around. I have never seen him be rude or unkind to any fan who has come along and asked for a minute of his time, no matter the circumstances. Like all announcers as they age, either because of slowed cognition or deterioration in vision, his commentary has slipped, but I can guarantee, that he has forgotten more about all aspects of cycling than any of us on this forum have ever known. That definitely includes you.

Idiot may have been a strong word as I indeed do not know him. But I just cannot stand listening to his useless commentaries on cycling. For whoever who grew up in Europe listening to broadcasts here where people know what they are talking about he comes out as completely clueless. It did not help that I listened to him during the LA tour years. What a joke.

[pdmtong]

Idiot may have been a strong word as I indeed do not know him. But I just cannot stand listening to his useless commentaries on cycling. For whoever who grew up in Europe listening to broadcasts here where people know what they are talking about he comes out as completely clueless. It did not help that I listened to him during the LA tour years. What a joke.

Growing up here (USA), Paul and Phil were essentially the FIRST cycling broadcasters heard by the masses. Prior to -7, we might have been lucky to see 5 minutes of cycling on "wide world of sports" on a Saturday. We all loved P+P - didn't know any different. FFWD 10+ years - we now have the eurosport feed via cyclingfans, among others. Now there is a point of comparison; add that to Phil's degradation/mistakes/biases and his love for -7, it's easy to bash the guy in his twilight.

Yes, i think he needs to retire since his commentary is too predictable, and yes I think he hung on to -7 far too long, but it is what it is. any of the talking heads on the broadcast aren't much of an improvement, leaving me feel that despite our complaints with Phil, there really isn't much of an alternative presented as of yet. really, craig hummer is who we roll out?

[Lionel]

I get the point of reference in the US and the fact that he was the only guy. It does not make him good in absolute terms ;)

[mgm777]

I like Phil and appreciate all he has done to promote bike racing over the years. Can't comment on current state of affairs, but I appreciate his work over many decades. He put in his time.

^ I concur 100%. ...he has put in his time AND he does know the history and the sport of professional cycling, at the Pro Tour level, very, very well.

[marciero]

I liked Phil and Paul back in the day. VCR tapes of the classics from World Cycling Productions were my first introduction to European racing. So sort of a soft spot, despite the repetition and need to fill every second with chatter. As was pointed out, They really were a good fit for American audiences.
I still think Phil was very good calling field sprints.

[oldpotatoe]

PL is such an idiot, I could never stand listening to him comment races and Le tour.

I'm gonna pile on a bit..I have met him and he is the picture of gracious and polite. He is 72 but he and Paul add a lot to a bike race on TV. I have listened to some, mostly Euro announcers and some UK ones that are down right painful to listen to..Phil and Paul are not that. If ya don't like them, turn down the volume or search for other feeds, maybe french speaking ones..since you aren't in the US anyway.

[Tickdoc]

Idiot may have been a strong word as I indeed do not know him. But I just cannot stand listening to his useless commentaries on cycling. For whoever who grew up in Europe listening to broadcasts here where people know what they are talking about he comes out as completely clueless. It did not help that I listened to him during the LA tour years. What a joke.

Ever listen to a race in the US NOT broadcasted by him/them? Now that is painful.

[Vamoots58]

i appreciate the nuanced position, no one person is all bad or good, lance seems to be a great example of this fact.

+1!!

[rustychisel]

You obviously don't know him, but you seem to be happy to make some broad generalizations and disparagement. I do happen to know Phil. You will never find a more gracious and pleasant person to be around. I have never seen him be rude or unkind to any fan who has come along and asked for a minute of his time, no matter the circumstances. Like all announcers as they age, either because of slowed cognition or deterioration in vision, his commentary has slipped, but I can guarantee, that he has forgotten more about all aspects of cycling than any of us on this forum have ever known. That definitely includes you.

Thank you.

I too have met Phil, spent a little time with him, and concur with you fully.

[Lionel]

I'm gonna pile on a bit..I have met him and he is the picture of gracious and polite. He is 72 but he and Paul add a lot to a bike race on TV. I have listened to some, mostly Euro announcers and some UK ones that are down right painful to listen to..Phil and Paul are not that. If ya don't like them, turn down the volume or search for other feeds, maybe french speaking ones..since you aren't in the US anyway.

I am in the US a whole lot. When I did watch a broadcast in the US this is what I did, turn off the volume and find an online radio. The last time I watched a live broadcast in the US was a Paris Roubaix a few years ago where they started the broadcast after Arenberg :crap:

I do not have to suffer thru that crap with eurosport feeds these days.

[Black Dog]

Perhaps some of the issue here is that Phil and Paul have to be extra vanilla because they are broadcasting to a largely uninformed audience? Too technical and nuanced commentary does not cover as wide an audience. I suspect that they could easily provide more substantial coverage if given the green light to do so but are told to keep it simple so as to appeal to a broad audience.

[Chris]

Perhaps some of the issue here is that Phil and Paul have to be extra vanilla because they are broadcasting to a largely uninformed audience? Too technical and nuanced commentary does not cover as wide an audience. I suspect that they could easily provide more substantial coverage if given the green light to do so but are told to keep it simple so as to appeal to a broad audience.

No matter who is providing the commentary, don't underestimate the influence that the network and the producer of the show has on the content being provided. These guys work for a living too and answer to the guys who sign the checks.

[velomonkey]

My big issue with Phil (and Paul) is that he made that bed. He climbed on the LA train and when he damn well knew the guy was a world class jerk, a doper and hid behind cancer - he doubled down.

I'm sorry, one would have to be an idiot not to at least been cautious with Armstrong - especially during the 'comeback.' Not Phil - he stood by and idd nothing as LA ripped people apart whose only crime was telling the truth.

The guy can rot away - good riddance.

[Elefantino]

Perhaps some of the issue here is that Phil and Paul have to be extra vanilla because they are broadcasting to a largely uninformed audience? Too technical and nuanced commentary does not cover as wide an audience. I suspect that they could easily provide more substantial coverage if given the green light to do so but are told to keep it simple so as to appeal to a broad audience.
No. I've heard them do races not broadcast in the US and it's the same.

P&P brought cycling commentary to the masses. They were great.

[FlashUNC]

I loved Phil's rambling video defense of Lance after the Reasoned Decision came out. It really takes skill to be that tone deaf and lack completely in self-awareness.

They've both lost their fastball. Whether its Phil talking about Team Kelme in a breakaway or Paul talking about the importance of drafting yet again. Did you know they can save up to 30% of their energy? WHO KNEW????


Give me Carlton Kirby and Sean Kelly on Eurosport any day. Sean at least has enough tactical sense to provide some form of opinion in a race -- mostly that X or Y rider is being a moron, but an opinion nonetheless.

[Elefantino]

Give me Carlton Kirby and Sean Kelly on Eurosport any day. Sean at least has enough tactical sense to provide some form of opinion in a race -- mostly that X or Y rider is being a moron, but an opinion nonetheless.
I agree. My wife likes it when CK totally loses his s*** in the finale. I actually prefer Rob Hatch to CK, but King Kelly is the best, "torty" times over.

[cdn_bacon]

Just found this. Joe Rogan. Take from it what you want. interesting to listen to.

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=lance+armstrong

[FlashUNC]

Just found this. Joe Rogan. Take from it what you want. interesting to listen to.

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=lance+armstrong

Spoiler Alert: Two hours of Joe Rogan tongue bathing Lance.

[CunegoFan]

Spoiler Alert: Two hours of a more balanced view the haters don't want to hear.

Fixed it for you.

[FlashUNC]

Fixed it for you.

Awwww, that's adorable.

You got a Joe Rogan apologia on the continuing Lance Armstrong image rehab tour.

The man used cancer patients as a shield to cover up his doping so he could win bicycle races.

Is there anything he could do to rehab his image in my mind? Not really, because I think you have to be a really scummy person to do that.

[weiwentg]

We would all benefit if we had a friend like Phil... Live on

Ah, but most of us are not superstar athletes running a massive doping operation and coercing teammates into the whole corrupt enterprise, all the while swearing to the public that we are as clean as the driven snow and trying to destroy anybody who raises doubts about us. If we were such people, then Phil would not be a friend, he would be an enabler of our wickedness and inequity.

[BumbleBeeDave]

Is there anything he could do to rehab his image in my mind? . . .

. . this same question and have yet to come up with a good answer. I think it's akin to what Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart said of obscenity: "I can't define it but I know it when I see it."

When I see Lance do something(s) that truly indicate he has changed, then I will recognize it. But so far I ain't seen it and I'm not holding my breath waiting. Indeed, he just keeps doing things that confirm in my mind that he hasn't changed. Even if he loses the whistleblower case, I'm sure he has enough stashed away in obscure places that he will never have to really work for a living. But I think having to write a check for $125 million might make an impression on him when so many other things don't seem to have made any dent.

As for Phil, it's possible to be BOTH an engaging, classy gentleman AND have his best years as an announcer behind him. After 30 years in journalism, his denial of the obvious with Armstrong doesn't surprise me. He's far from the most egregious case of denial and self-justification I've ever seen. I think he'd be great fun to go for a ride with, down a few beers with, and would make a great friend. I suspect he's a different person when he's not having to come up with witty one liners and ID obscure riders with unpronounceable names on the fly during a broadcast.

BBD

[Ronsonic]

I get the point of reference in the US and the fact that he was the only guy. It does not make him good in absolute terms ;)

Well, yes, it does. He has been pretty good and being all we got .....

[CunegoFan]

You got a Joe Rogan apologia on the continuing Lance Armstrong image rehab tour.

The man used cancer patients as a shield to cover up his doping so he could win bicycle races.

Is there anything he could do to rehab his image in my mind? Not really, because I think you have to be a really scummy person to do that.

Sounds like someone has bought the Betsy's posturing hook, line, and sinker.

To a person who twists a charity that helped a huge number of people into some sort of grand conspiracy to dope, I guess there probably is nothing he could do. Did you ever consider that he really does have a passion for making a difference for cancer and that is why he set up LAG long before winning the Tour, gave eight million dollars of his own money, and spent uncountable hours of his own time?

[FlashUNC]

Sounds like someone has bought the Betsy's posturing hook, line, and sinker.

To a person who twists a charity that helped a huge number of people into some sort of grand conspiracy to dope, I guess there probably is nothing he could do. Did you ever consider that he really does have a passion for making a difference for cancer and that is why he set up LAG long before winning the Tour, gave eight million dollars of his own money, and spent uncountable hours of his own time?

A retort: https://youtu.be/nZgns7CXeUI


Yeah. He was a totally a saint. Lots of guys doped. Only one used the dead, the dying and peoples sympathy for them to cover up his cheating.

[BumbleBeeDave]

Sounds like someone has bought the Betsy's posturing hook, line, and sinker.

To a person who twists a charity that helped a huge number of people into some sort of grand conspiracy to dope, I guess there probably is nothing he could do. Did you ever consider that he really does have a passion for making a difference for cancer and that is why he set up LAG long before winning the Tour, gave eight million dollars of his own money, and spent uncountable hours of his own time?

. . . he has a passion for helping cancer victims. That's why he set up Livestrong.org for the charity--and livestrong.com as a for-profit for himself.

The charity was not a grand conspiracy to dope. But it was a great way for him to look like he's a saint so people wouldn't realize he's a total D-bag. It was a cynical device to enlarge his ego and distract from his real grand conspiracy to dope. And it worked--for a while.

BBD

[rounder]

We have been watching the Phil and Paul show since 1989 when Greg won by 8 seconds.

My wife fell in love with that, which has allowed me to watch Phil and Paul and bike races ever since. I understand that they are getting old, still they know way more than me and the productions are still great.

I can understand Phil's position of standing up for Lance when the facts were not all known.

I sort of felt the same and way and told others that I did not know whether Lance had doped or not, but if he did, I hoped that it would never come out. Obviously, it did.

[sitzmark]

...
My wife fell in love with that, which has allowed me to watch Phil and Paul and bike races ever since. I understand that they are getting old, still they know way more than me and the productions are still great.

I can understand Phil's position of standing up for Lance when the facts were not all known.

I sort of felt the same and way and told others that I did not know whether Lance had doped or not, but if he did, I hoped that it would never come out. Obviously, it did.

Similar. My wife likes (puts up with) cycling only because it's something I enjoy. Phil, Paul, and Bobke keep her entertained enough to allow me to watch a cycling event without constant pressure to change the channel to the Hallmark Channel. Long live PL just for that alone!

Suspected (figured) LA was dirty - as were all. Would have had to be totally naive to think anyone was winning major cycling events without performance enhancing methods (of whatever kind). Didn't care if it came out that LA was guilty, but everyone entitled to innocent until proven. Now out and no one has benefitted. Whole thing handled poorly - especially by UCI. So it was ... and still is (less but still). Welcome to professional sports. Life (real) goes on.