I always thought he was a quiet fella. He certainly calls a spade a spade.
lynford - Better to have stayed a sporting legend
2 of 3
Originally Posted by Truth_Hurts:
“On a forum populated by women I would expect nothing less.”
“On a forum populated by women I would expect nothing less.”
haha i was about to post the same thing!
First off his name is Linford and not Lynford.
He is coming across just like Nigel Benn did - old fashioned, cloth eared, arrogant, narrow minded and confrontational - apart from that he's great.
He is coming across just like Nigel Benn did - old fashioned, cloth eared, arrogant, narrow minded and confrontational - apart from that he's great.
Originally Posted by TheBilly:
“I always thought he was a quiet fella. He certainly calls a spade a spade.”
“I always thought he was a quiet fella. He certainly calls a spade a spade.”
hmmm is that a joke?
Originally Posted by Truth_Hurts:
“On a forum populated by women I would expect nothing less.”
“On a forum populated by women I would expect nothing less.”
you mean this sub section or DS? Read somewhere earlier that 63% of traffic on here are male users
Originally Posted by Crazyeyeskiller:
“you mean this sub section or DS? Read somewhere earlier that 63% of traffic on here are male users”
“you mean this sub section or DS? Read somewhere earlier that 63% of traffic on here are male users”
Yes the 'entertainment' section.
Originally Posted by TheBilly:
“Eh?
”
“Eh?
”
racist undertones - ok i'll let you off , just unfortunate phrasing
not sure if i'm allowed to say this on here but I've had dealings with him as he is a customer of ours (can't say where, might get myself in trouble)
He has always been extremely rude to the point of being intentionally nasty. Always has total contempt for the 'common folk' like us, really irritating me to see him on tv!!
He has always been extremely rude to the point of being intentionally nasty. Always has total contempt for the 'common folk' like us, really irritating me to see him on tv!!
Originally Posted by Littlemark:
“not sure if i'm allowed to say this on here but I've had dealings with him as he is a customer of ours (can't say where, might get myself in trouble)
He has always been extremely rude to the point of being intentionally nasty. Always has total contempt for the 'common folk' like us, really irritating me to see him on tv!!”
“not sure if i'm allowed to say this on here but I've had dealings with him as he is a customer of ours (can't say where, might get myself in trouble)
He has always been extremely rude to the point of being intentionally nasty. Always has total contempt for the 'common folk' like us, really irritating me to see him on tv!!
”
Funny how you only mention it now after is latest rant mmmmmmm
Originally Posted by Littlemark:
“not sure if i'm allowed to say this on here but I've had dealings with him as he is a customer of ours (can't say where, might get myself in trouble)
He has always been extremely rude to the point of being intentionally nasty. Always has total contempt for the 'common folk' like us, really irritating me to see him on tv!!”
“not sure if i'm allowed to say this on here but I've had dealings with him as he is a customer of ours (can't say where, might get myself in trouble)
He has always been extremely rude to the point of being intentionally nasty. Always has total contempt for the 'common folk' like us, really irritating me to see him on tv!!
”
Are you good at your job?
I haven't posted at all on the I'm A Celebrity forum until just now as don't really watch. But listening to him rant in the background spurred me on, don't really care whether you believe me or not mate! Just sharing a fact of my own experience
Originally Posted by Truth_Hurts:
“Are you good at your job?”
“Are you good at your job?”
Lol
yes extremely good (with the bonuses to show it
)
It's such a dated point that he was making tonight - the sort of thing sixth formers debate over. I thought it a bit tragic that Linford thought he was being clever.
Originally Posted by glasshalffull:
“Those of us who followed athletics and remember Linford in his hey day know he was never some shy, retiring wallflower.”
“Those of us who followed athletics and remember Linford in his hey day know he was never some shy, retiring wallflower.”
Exactly. I used to go to a lot of big athletics meetings back in the day & Linford was always a character with the fans. He's very open, friendly & approachable and, yes, very funny & doesn't take himself too seriously. I've seen him stand for hours, chatting with kids & signing autographs, unlike some other names I could mention. Even seen him apologise for having to go, as the team bus was about to leave without him.
As for those calling him a cheat. You're wrong. The nandrolone test was a flawed one & the UK authorities accepted his innocence. He'd come out of retirement for one event, as a jokey bet with the athletes he coached. He had nothing to gain & everything to lose by cheating. I don't believe for one second he is guilty.
Originally Posted by jlrob:
“It's such a dated point that he was making tonight - the sort of thing sixth formers debate over. I thought it a bit tragic that Linford thought he was being clever.”
“It's such a dated point that he was making tonight - the sort of thing sixth formers debate over. I thought it a bit tragic that Linford thought he was being clever.”
His point will only be dated when women achieve equal pay.
Originally Posted by Electra:
“Exactly. I used to go to a lot of big athletics meetings back in the day & Linford was always a character with the fans. He's very open, friendly & approachable and, yes, very funny & doesn't take himself too seriously. I've seen him stand for hours, chatting with kids & signing autographs, unlike some other names I could mention. Even seen him apologise for having to go, as the team bus was about to leave without him.
As for those calling him a cheat. You're wrong. The nandrolone test was a flawed one & the UK authorities accepted his innocence. He'd come out of retirement for one event, as a jokey bet with the athletes he coached. He had nothing to gain & everything to lose by cheating. I don't believe for one second he is guilty.”
“Exactly. I used to go to a lot of big athletics meetings back in the day & Linford was always a character with the fans. He's very open, friendly & approachable and, yes, very funny & doesn't take himself too seriously. I've seen him stand for hours, chatting with kids & signing autographs, unlike some other names I could mention. Even seen him apologise for having to go, as the team bus was about to leave without him.
As for those calling him a cheat. You're wrong. The nandrolone test was a flawed one & the UK authorities accepted his innocence. He'd come out of retirement for one event, as a jokey bet with the athletes he coached. He had nothing to gain & everything to lose by cheating. I don't believe for one second he is guilty.”
Well he failed two drugs tests, one in 1988
which he was given the benifit of the doubt over by one single vote and one in 1999 which resulted in a 2 years ban.
there are some doubts over both,
like most failed drugs tests.
but someone who say's for sure he's a cheat is no more wrong than yourself saying he 100% innocent.
the truth is no one knows
Originally Posted by dave2233:
“Well he failed two drugs tests, one in 1988
which he was given the benifit of the doubt over by one single vote and one in 1999 which resulted in a 2 years ban.
there are some doubts over both,
like most failed drugs tests.
but someone who say's for sure he's a cheat is no more wrong than yourself saying he 100% innocent.
the truth is no one knows”
“Well he failed two drugs tests, one in 1988
which he was given the benifit of the doubt over by one single vote and one in 1999 which resulted in a 2 years ban.
there are some doubts over both,
like most failed drugs tests.
but someone who say's for sure he's a cheat is no more wrong than yourself saying he 100% innocent.
the truth is no one knows”
Linford didn't 'fail' a drug test in 1988. During the Olympics in Seoul he tested positive for minute quantities of a banned stimulant. So minute it couldn't possibly have aided his performance. He ran the 100m & got bronze (later upgraded to silver, following Ben Johnson's drug bust). He was scheduled to run the 200m a few days later. In the intervening period he developed a head cold. Athletes know not to take cold remedies as many contain a stimulant called pseudoephedrine (to counteract drowsiness). Instead, Linford took ginseng, which his coach had bought while they were at the pre olympic training camp in China. Unfortunately for Linford, it was tainted with pseudoephedrine in minute quantities. Linford ran in the 200m & came 4th. Following Ben Johnson's bust, the knives were out for the sprinters in any case. Athletics officials were looking to make examples. It's important to note that his test following the 100m a few days earlier was clear. These borderline cases happen all the time & usually we never hear about them. If you look at the list & quantities of all the banned substances you'll see it's an absolute minefield for athletes & accidental ingestion is an occupational hazard.
Here's the 2008 list. It's 11 pages long
http://www.wada-ama.org/rtecontent/d...08_List_En.pdf
Originally Posted by Electra:
“Linford didn't 'fail' a drug test in 1988. During the Olympics in Seoul he tested positive for minute quantities of a banned stimulant. So minute it couldn't possibly have aided his performance. He ran the 100m & got bronze (later upgraded to silver, following Ben Johnson's drug bust). He was scheduled to run the 200m a few days later. In the intervening period he developed a head cold. Athletes know not to take cold remedies as many contain a stimulant called pseudoephedrine (to counteract drowsiness). Instead, Linford took ginseng, which his coach had bought while they were at the pre olympic training camp in China. Unfortunately for Linford, it was tainted with pseudoephedrine in minute quantities. Linford ran in the 200m & came 4th. Following Ben Johnson's bust, the knives were out for the sprinters in any case. Athletics officials were looking to make examples. It's important to note that his test following the 100m a few days earlier was clear. These borderline cases happen all the time & usually we never hear about them. If you look at the list & quantities of all the banned substances you'll see it's an absolute minefield for athletes & accidental ingestion is an occupational hazard.”
“Linford didn't 'fail' a drug test in 1988. During the Olympics in Seoul he tested positive for minute quantities of a banned stimulant. So minute it couldn't possibly have aided his performance. He ran the 100m & got bronze (later upgraded to silver, following Ben Johnson's drug bust). He was scheduled to run the 200m a few days later. In the intervening period he developed a head cold. Athletes know not to take cold remedies as many contain a stimulant called pseudoephedrine (to counteract drowsiness). Instead, Linford took ginseng, which his coach had bought while they were at the pre olympic training camp in China. Unfortunately for Linford, it was tainted with pseudoephedrine in minute quantities. Linford ran in the 200m & came 4th. Following Ben Johnson's bust, the knives were out for the sprinters in any case. Athletics officials were looking to make examples. It's important to note that his test following the 100m a few days earlier was clear. These borderline cases happen all the time & usually we never hear about them. If you look at the list & quantities of all the banned substances you'll see it's an absolute minefield for athletes & accidental ingestion is an occupational hazard.”
Well Thats my point,
everyone that tests positive for a banned substance has an excuse, some genuine some not. very few are going to hold there hands up and say fair enough, yes ive taken drugs.
The 1988 incident may have been minor in your opinion
but still he only narrowly escaped punishment by one vote.
so alot would disagree
as i said no one knows, some will think hes a cheat other will not.
we will never know.
Originally Posted by dave2233:
“Well Thats my point,
everyone that tests positive for a banned substance has an excuse, some genuine some not. very few are going to hold there hands up and say fair enough, yes ive taken drugs.
The 1988 incident may have been minor in your opinion
but still he only narrowly escaped punishment by one vote.
so alot would disagree
as i said no one knows, some will think hes a cheat other will not.
we will never know.”
“Well Thats my point,
everyone that tests positive for a banned substance has an excuse, some genuine some not. very few are going to hold there hands up and say fair enough, yes ive taken drugs.
The 1988 incident may have been minor in your opinion
but still he only narrowly escaped punishment by one vote.
so alot would disagree
as i said no one knows, some will think hes a cheat other will not.
we will never know.”
It was only one vote because of the state of hysteria following the Ben Johnson bust. If he'd been dirty he'd also have tested positive after the 100m. that test was clear. His explanation holds up.
Originally Posted by autumn:
“His point will only be dated when women achieve equal pay.”
“His point will only be dated when women achieve equal pay.”
Totally. Though it's the fact that he thought he was presenting some kind of radical viewpoint that I found ridiculous.
Originally Posted by Crazyeyeskiller:
“racist undertones - ok i'll let you off , just unfortunate phrasing”
“racist undertones - ok i'll let you off , just unfortunate phrasing”
The term calling a spade a spade has been used for a long time it simply means telling it like it is, being blunt and direct.
If anyone sees racial undertones in that, they need to take a look at themselves and try not to take things out of context in the manner of how it was meant.
2 of 3
