According to Kazakhstan’s cycling federation deputy president Nikolai Proskurin, Astana have won the race to sign Lance Armstrong. The move was widely expected in cycling circles because of Armstrong’s close ties to Astana team boss Johan Bruyneel who managed him to seven Tour de France victories. There could be some fireworks in Spain though Armstrong’s first race will be the Tour Down Under in January – which he will ride as part of his build up to winning an eigth Tour de France in July all of which is part of his greater goal of raising cancer awareness. Of Armstrong’s return, Bruyneel has said that it is unthinkable that he could ride for another team and that he would find it impossiblle to leave him out of his team – a factor which clearly unsettled Contador. Speaking to the BBC Mr Proskurin acknowledged that accommodating both men in the same team was going to be difficult – perhaps not surprisingly though Astana are going to try. Mr Proskurin aid that Armstrong would share the leadership in the team with the current leader, Spaniard Alberto Contador, the 2007 Tour de France winner who has won the Tour of Spain and Giro d’Italia this season. "Currently there’s certain tension in the team but I hope we are capable of keeping the situation under control," Proskurin said. "Armstrong will not be the only star, he will be one of the team’s leaders." In other Armstrong-related news, Tour of Britain organisers today officially invited Lance and the Astana team to take part in the 2009 event. This year’s race drew record crowds and the organisers are confident that next year’s race will top that – particularly as the final stage will be run on the central London street circuit that proved so popular in 2008. Armstrong’s presence would add even more to the crowds. It would certainly help with his bid to publicise the fight against cancer, partiuclarly if he rode as winner of the 2009 Tour de France.
Armstrong joins Astana (gets ToB invite) … over to you Alberto
Help us to bring you the best cycling content
If you’ve enjoyed this article, then please consider subscribing to road.cc from as little as £2.49. Our mission is to bring you all the news that’s relevant to you as a cyclist, independent reviews, impartial buying advice and more. Your subscription will help us to do more.
No Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
I wasn't saying that nor talking about people who say that. I said it was silly to claim that wearing a helmet indicates acceptance of dangerous driving and poor infrastructure. I choose to wear a helmet; I also regularly report dangerous driving to the police and correspond with councils and road authorities about ways infrastructure could be improved for cyclists. I rather doubt I'm the only helmet wearer who does so.
@JamieT (a pedant writes) she's a London Assembly member, not an MP.
@Rendel Harris ".....but the claim that wearing one is somehow to be accepting dangerous driving and poor infrastructure is silly." Not that silly. Demanding that cyclists wear a helmet is seen by many people as 'the answer' to cycling safety, so there's no need to put in infrastructure. The difference between infrastructure and helmets is that infrastructure works. Helmets are a distraction from what really works, and the more time we spend talking about them, the less time we spend on things that do work. Helmets should be consigned to the dustbin of history as a failed experiment, and we should cease even mentioning them.
@Mr Blackbird Hats off to George Hall My hat's not coming off- despite this touch of cycleway-washing, Hall still bears the Mark of Cain, until he repudiates his party altogether
Perhaps an article showing a) what is available in the uk as cargo bikes and) comments from real life scenarios from those already using bikes or cargo bikes as one gentleman has done in the comments. Perhaps road.cc could follow up with this. Even the London Assembly member said not every business should use cargo bikes but suggested a more nuanced approach suitable for certain trades or companies....
@mdavidford Clearly the end of the sentence got deleted by mistake and it's meant to finish "...devices in their pockets."
@Terry Hutt I don't support mandatory helmets either, but I always think that's a daft analogy (I realise you're not quoting it approvingly): if people shooting in the streets was a regular problem, I'd campaign against it vociferously and expect the authorities to do something about it, but I'd still wear body armour unless and until the problem was sorted out. It's perfectly reasonable for people to question the efficacy of cycle helmets, but the claim that wearing one is somehow to be accepting dangerous driving and poor infrastructure is silly.
“People who are wearing body armour get used to being shot at, when it’s the getting shot at that’s the problem.” People who are wearing body armour get used to being shot at because they survive. People not wearing it die the first time they are shot. So they don't really have much chance to get used to being shot at, do they? But seriously if you don't want to wear a helmet and you're an adult, no-one should have the right to make you wear one.
@lawrence18uk Occasionally I see tradies travelling with some tools on the train, compact tool bags, rucksacks and wheelie luggage, often carrying long spirit levels separately, but on a couple of occasions collapsible ladders.