It is undeniably an achievement that Armstrong has won his sixth tour, and is
probably odds-on favourite for a seventh or more. Many would say that
Armstrong's win puts him head and shoulders above former five-time tour winners
Jacques Anquetil, Bernard Hinault, Miguel Indurain and Eddy Merckx, but it can
be countered that had any of those dedicated their racing careers to the Tour
de France alone, they could have won far more often.
Armstrong is not the most popular rider on the tour, despite how a favourable
press ( particularly an American one ) may present him, and he has been shouted
at, spat upon and otherwise abused by the crowds that line the tour's route.
Armstrong's performance on the 18th Stage, did nothing to improve his standing
with those who think the Texan is an arrogant and bullying rider, and it does
nothing to improve Euro-American relationships.
"I believe that the man who works the hardest is the man who deserves to win",
is what Armstrong claims to be his personal philosophy, but betrays that in his
actions, and fans have observed it, and no more so than in this year's tour.
When, virtually unheard of, Filippo Simeoni made a break from the peleton to
join up with the leading riders, Armstrong took it upon himself to chase him
down and force him to back away from the breakaway; if he didn't return to the
peleton, Armstrong would make sure that the group would lose any chance of
securing victory.
The politics of cycling are complex, but this was bullying of the highest
order; Armstrong had decided that Simeoni was not going to be given a chance
to shine in the stage, and that was that. Placed in an almost impossible
position, Simeoni had little choice but to climb down and rejoin the peleton.
Armstrong's strong-arm tactics have over-shadowed the stage, perhaps even the
tour and his win itself. His action has split the cycling audience into pro
and anti Armstrong camps, and there seems to be many more complaining than
rejoicing.
The dispute between Armstrong and Simeoni goes back to 2002, when Simeoni
testified in a Bologna Court that Doctor Michele Ferrari was involved
in doping and had provided him with the banned red blood cell booster EPO
and shown him how to use it more effectively. Ferrari has denied the charges
against him, and the case continues to drag on.
Armstrong's involvement in the case arises because he had, shortly before
the Bologna testimony, publicly declared that he, like many other professional
cyclists, was a client of Ferrari's. Despite there having been no accusation
from Simeoni against Armstrong, Armstrong took it upon himself to declare that
Simeoni was "a compulsive liar", and in return, Simeoni has commenced defamation
proceedings against Armstrong.
It now seems that Armstrong has taken his personal dispute onto the field with
him.
Armstrong claimed that he, "was defending the interests of the peleton", and
said many in that group had agreed with his action. That may well
be true, but it was certainly not a universal opinion. David Etxebarria, of
Euskaltel, rejected the view that the peleton had approved of Armstrong's move,
while his colleague, Unai Etxebarria, was even more outspoken; "It was a very
ugly idea to go after Simeoni. The truth is that a man with a bit of class
would not have done what he did and the peleton didn't like it one bit. It was
something very sad".
It is reported that a number of Italian riders gave Simeoni a "rollicking" when
forced back into the peleton, but not all of his fellow countrymen were so
condemning; Paolo Bettini, Salvatore Commesso, Massimiliano Mori, Michele
Scarponi and Francesco Secchiari reportedly offered words of consolation.
While there is a divide in the cyclists' view about the way Simeoni has been
treated, commentators were united in condemning Armstrong's team mate,
Viatcheslav Ekimov, for making obscene gestures and spitting at Simeoni's wheel
during the final stage in Paris.
It was uncalled for and a disgusting display from a US Postal rider, and the
Italian Cycling Federation has publicly come out on Simeoni's side.
Armstrong's argument that he was protecting the peleton is also entirely
disingenuous. Simeoni was well down in the classification and in no way
a threat to Armstrong's own dominant position. It is hard to see his action
as being anything but to prevent Simeoni having a shot at winning fairly. If
anyone was doing any protecting, it was Simeoni who sacrificed himself for the
good of the then race leaders by reluctantly complying with Armstrong's threats
to close down their breakaway.
Armstrong revealed his distaste for Simeoni when he said, "All he wants to do is
destroy cycling, destroy the sport that pays him", and it seems that a fair few
of the professionals in the peleton agree with those sentiments. Which is quite
amazing considering Simeoni's crime - To play a part in outing those who
allegedly engage in the despicable act of gaining an unfair advantage by doping.
Simeoni himself was given a four month ban after admitting doping offences and
has since been ostracised by some of his fellow professionals; not because he
was involved in such underhand activity, but because he dared to say that he was
not alone in doing so. It is
unsettling when those who seek to clean up the sport, and are prepared to admit
they have done wrong in the past, are condemned for their subsequent actions. It
leaves a bitter taste in the mouth, and casts serious doubts on the professional
cycling fraternity's claims to have cleaned up its act.
Armstrong took his personal feud with Simeoni onto the 18th stage of the Tour
de France and showed his ugly side to the world. He may have effectively ended
the career of Simeoni, who seemed more than prepared to throw in the towel at
the end of the race, but he won few friends in doing so.
Armstrong may well be a great cyclist, but he is a poor evangelist for the
ethos of fair sporting challenge. Armstrong showed the world that he can be
petty, arrogant and spiteful. As he stepped onto the podium on the Champs
Elysées in the shadow of the Arc de Triomphe, the Maillot
Jaune didn't shine as brightly as it could have.
