Forgot to impart a comment about one of your earlier rants about me and my lack of knowledge about cycling as a whole. By the way, thank you for the award and praise for comedy gold. I really do appreciate your acknowledgement of such great humour, thank you. Now i can return to (hopefully with the same comedy verve) your uncalled for outburst about my apparent vacuous knowledge and reference to L'Equipe and their connection to Le Tour. You rant that " as you are incapable of spending time to discover your comments make no sense" and "Your comments about L'Equipe demonstrate how little you know about Cycling and highlight that you truly are unable to research anything before you say it" and of course your classic "you are incapable of spending time to discover your comments make no sense you will never find that out, unless of course someone else on here corrects you and educates you" only matched by the lovingly phrased "There is a saying where I come from about people like you turtle who wants to keep saying stuff but make no sense and have no real opinions of their own and that is...íyou are full of wind and pissí"turtle you are truly devoid of being able to make a new fresh and cogent comment/point without trying to write nonsense and use other peoples posts as the basis.
True comedy gold also geeman, i take my hat off to you. If i recall these one liners were in reference to my proposition that there was a certain wholeness to L'Equipe reporting interviews, and being the one media outlet to present the most up to date progress on anything to do with Le Tour. That L'Equipe was the appropriate place for this to take place, was something you clearly thought with your vast knowledge and understanding of all things "cycling" that was an imbecilic thing to even consider never mind propose. Also that my research participation was indeed laughable to you. I would accept that i had in fact done no research at all in my reflection of this thought. That it was actually long standing knowledge which led me to such a conclusion. The notion i forwarded of L'Equipe being firstly and most importantly being a paper whose leanings would be overtaken by its dedication of being for the tour. You clearly thought were nonsense and of no relevance.
If you knew your cycling history and were not in need of researching before you presented any of your opinions or facts. You would know that Le Tour would not exist without the existence of a paper known as L'Auto and that in fact, this paper had gone on to become L'Equipe. That through the whole of the last century this paper had been the strength Le tour had needed on many occasions to keep it the spectacle it was but more importantly to keep the good and true sporting values it was based on. Separate of trends and controversies of the time, this paper had stood up for Le tours core values time again.
Of course i know you knew all of this as you belittled me and my research and that you just thought it was so insignificant it was not worth a mention. Again i bow down to you superior knowledge and mostly your research before you make any unwise or just daft comments.