Show-trial confessions reveal our own hypocrisy
By Joe Gorman, 22 Jan 2013 Joe Gorman is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- Andrew Johns, Cycling, Golf, Lance Armstrong, Rugby League, Tiger Woods
Andrew Johns while playing for the Newcastle Knights in 2006. Johns was announced as the eighth Rugby League Immortal overnight (AAP Image/Action Photographics/Grant Trouville)
Related coverage
- Golf news
- Rugby League news
- 2013 Spring Classics news
- National Road Series news
- 2013 Tour de France news
Lance Armstrong, in confessing publicly to Oprah in an extended interview, confirmed what many have suspected for years. He is a cheat and a liar.
Worse still, Armstrong is a cheat and a liar who has risen to the top of world sport, accepting and trading upon all of the privileges that came with it. He has, quite literally, deceived his way too the top.
The Texan now stands to lose more than just his sponsorships. He faces a life ban from all sanctioned sporting events, endless court cases, and perhaps even charges of perjury.
Cycling, which barely rates in Australian sports media, is the centre of attention for all the wrong reasons.
Like many others around the country, I tuned into Oprah’s keenly anticipated interview with Armstong and was shocked and angered by his revelations of years of doping.
Watching him speak however, my attitude to the situation softened. It wasn’t as if I believed all that he said, or was gullible enough to think that he was actually ‘coming clean.’ There is no doubt that he is holding on to many secrets, and that his explanations are only part of the story.
Better to view the situation by his actions, not his words. His stand-over tactics to those who accused him of cheating are illustrative of a bully-boy competitor who wanted to “control every outcome.”
Still, what we witnessed was a flawed man trying to explain the impossible. And that makes him human, and worthy of some empathy.
The predictable reaction to the interview among most columnists and fans oscillated between derision and anger. Then there were the usual “I’ll never trust any sportsperson again” hissy-fits. The moralisers were out in force.
Of course, postulating is easy when your a nobody. As Oprah remarked, “fame amplifies the person you really are.” Luckily for us, we’ll never have our indiscretions broadcast to the world.
In Part One of the interview, Armstrong explained that he has always attempted to “control the narrative” of his life.
He’s a self-confessed control freak, with a dangerous streak of “arrogance and defiance.” Armstrong told Oprah that there were only two moments in his life where he wasn’t in control: during his battle with cancer and the interview.
But that was an exaggeration. Armstrong may have lost control of his secret, but in revealing select truths and telling his version of the story, there is still a sense that he is trying to regain control of his own story.
Anyone who has lied, or cheated, or deceived can relate to this process.
Here lies the point. Armstrong is a product of his environment. Not just in his life as an elite cyclist who is expected to perform at the top level, but also as a celebrity.
Many will argue that he coveted fame and fortune and thus deserves to experience the other side of celebrity.
Fair enough. However we should remember that at his core, Armstrong is still a simple man in extraordinary circumstances, like Tiger Woods, or Andrew Johns, or Andre Agassi.
These sportsmen start out as single-minded, tremendously talented athletes, and then we turn them into celebrities and demi-gods.
When they fall, we delight in the bitterness of betrayal and injustice. It’s a chance to reinforce our own moral codes and our own ideological convictions. But there is nothing sadder than frothing over someone else’s mistakes.
The cult of celebrity has been amplified since consumer capitalism commodified all aspects our society, economy and culture. It’s an obsession that started in entertainment, before invading all areas of life, including politics, academia, business and of course, sport.
Sociologists have argued that the celebrity has replaced the cultural role of the religious figurehead, while others refer to them as “the familiar stranger”.
The point is that we invest so much meaning in one individual, and when they fall, we relish the chance to pass judgement. The confessional interview turns into a show-trial, and the situation becomes a pantomime.
At the centre of all this is a man who, you sense, has only made baby steps towards the truth. As fans, it is easy to say we would never cheat, or lie. Indeed the magnitude of Armstrong’s lies are breathtaking.
But it is important to remember that Armstrong didn’t get into the business of lying and cheating as a mature adult with a wife, kids, and a public profile.
He started taking performance enhancing drugs as an ultra-competitive young man, with the implicit support of many of his peers, coaches and teammates.
The original sin, as he himself states, was simply being part of the cycling culture at that time. The dishonesty and rationalisations that followed are a self-perpetuating cycle.
Once you’ve doped and gotten away with it, why stop?
Most of us are lucky enough never to have to face the pressure, expectation and fallout that celebrity athletes do. When we cheat, lie and steal, we only have to face our peers and the people that matter in our small world.
Lance Armstrong deserves severe criticism. His lies went beyond cycling, and his actions should haunt him for the rest of his life. To his credit, he can see that “that guy is still there.”
But “that guy” lies deep inside all of us. Some deeper than others. Some will never let “that guy” see the light of day, to their eternal credit.
David Walsh, the journalist who chased this story for years, is a credit to his profession. Those who didn’t dope and missed out on Tour de France victories as a result can walk a little taller.
Meanwhile, Lance Armstrong, we can all agree, has a lot to answer for. Some would also say that cycling has a lot to answer for. The culture in professional cycling is (or was) clearly toxic.
Still, perhaps there should be more of an effort to understand what drives this kind of behaviour, rather than a witch-hunt.
There will be other Lance Armstrongs. But simply blaming the individual misses the forest for the trees.
Joe Gorman is a football journalist with a particular interest in sports history. After completing his thesis on football in Australia, Joe started with The Roar in October 2012. He tweets from @JoeGorman_89.
The Roar have special SKODA prize packs to award to Roar of the Crowd writers who send us their thoughts on cycling. Each month we're giving away a prize pack, and at the end you could win a SKODA road bike. Simply submit an article to The Roar and you could win! More details here.
- Explore:
- Andrew Johns, Cycling, Golf, Lance Armstrong, Rugby League, Tiger Woods


January 22nd 2013 @ 5:17am
Kasey said | January 22nd 2013 @ 5:17am | Report comment
My$0.02:
You’d think someone like me would be all angry. I’m a Cancer survivor and I discovered and fell in love with cycling during the LA reign(I believed in LA/Santa Claus despite what in hindsight is blindingly obvious), but I’m not angry, I’m disappointed mostly but I forgive Armstrong(does he need it?)
I am Not without sin, who am I to judge him? We can learn from this: for me it is that there is a gulf between being a winner and winning.
“Winning is an event. Being a winner is a spirit.”
Winners have kept winning in perspective based on their value system.
Completing Ironman taught me that just finishing the race was ‘winning’ it.
LA is obviously a deeply flawed human being who had to admit to his son that the bad things other kids were saying were true. Every man should be his son’s first hero. I don’t feel sorry for him, he created his own mess, but I do not hate him or condemn him either. It is up to him now to travel along the redemptive path. I hope he does. He will spend the rest of his life apologising for his mistakes. His legacy will be tainted, but lets not forget that cycling even without Armstrong is booming in this country, for the 10+th(?) year in a row, more bikes than cars were sold. I think its time to just if not forget, then try to come to an understanding if you cant get to forgiveness and move on to focus on the beauty of professional cycling and how much joy participating in this simple activity brings us rank amateurs. I love being a cyclist and this affair does not affect the enjoyment of the wind in my face or that feeling in my body of ‘earned’ tiredness after conquering a climb/distance.
January 22nd 2013 @ 7:30am
Farmerj said | January 22nd 2013 @ 7:30am | Report comment
His biggest crime wasn’t the cheating.
It was the nasty and cruel way he went about destroying the lives of people who didn’t jump on the PED bandwagon. This is why its easy to hate him. That he lied about the drugs in nothing new but he will never be able to repair the harm he has inflicted on innocent people.
January 22nd 2013 @ 8:16am
B.A Sports said | January 22nd 2013 @ 8:16am | Report comment
Agreed
I don’t think the vast majority of people are getting any thrill out of Armstrong’s fall from grace.
Even those who have had believed him to be a driug cheat all along don’t get that much satisfaction from seeing him crushed by all sections of society because it becomes more and more apparaent every day just how many other lives he ruined (like Farmerj said) and you feel sorry for these people. Well the author doesn’t appear to but I and the majority seem to..
January 22nd 2013 @ 8:24am
Turnover said | January 22nd 2013 @ 8:24am | Report comment
I can’t believe Andrew Johns has gig with channel 9.
Next stop for Armstrong is the footy show. Everything will be forgiven and he can become a sideline commentator for Friday night footy.
January 22nd 2013 @ 8:56am
Anon said | January 22nd 2013 @ 8:56am | Report comment
agreed regarding A.Johns,
he was indicative of all that was wrong with in particular a specific club with a tarnished culture regarding drug use. (and in AFL terms we know of the West Coast Eagles had troubles too). The Newcastle Knights had at least a very forgiving nature, including hiring Mitchell Sergent (at the time the recently sacked cocaine user from the NQ Cowboys.
That Johns admitted off season use and ‘occassional’ regular season user (playing ‘Russian roulette’) – based on Lance Armstrong’s interview, one wonders if Johns had willingly come 100% clean or not? However – to then be elevated as one of only 8 ‘Immortals’ of the game is a disgrace, an absolute insult that perhaps can only reflect that the apparant attitude towards drug use at the Newcastle Knights is perhaps more widespread at least within a certain ‘generation’ of RL administrators???
January 22nd 2013 @ 10:10pm
superstar superhuman said | January 22nd 2013 @ 10:10pm | Report comment
Rugby league immortality is decided by what players did on the field. Off-field has nothing to do with it. I don’t care if Joey (or any of the other immortals for that matter) took ecstasy. I don’t care if he took anything. Whether he took it during the season, before or after the season doesn’t matter. As long as he didn’t take anything on game day (and he obviously didn’t, or else he wouldn’t have been such a great player), and if it’s not performance enhancing (ecstasy is not performance enhancing), I really don’t care. Believe it or not, Andrew Johns is not the only young Australian male to have tried and used recreational drugs. I wouldn’t be surprised if one or even several of the other immortals had used ecstasy. Being part of rugby league, they all would’ve had countless wild nights on the drink. What’s not to say that ecstasy or other drugs weren’t involved?
January 22nd 2013 @ 9:13am
B.A Sports said | January 22nd 2013 @ 9:13am | Report comment
To compare what Armstrong has done, from the cheating, to the lies, the perjury, the money making to the destroying of lives, to Andrew Johns taking illict rec drugs and admitting it (not openly lying about it for a decade) is a ridiculous stretch. Its like comparing the Melbourne Storm salary cap rorting to a club who goes over the cap by $10,000 as a result of having to use a few extra players in first grade.
If you compare Johns to say Maradona in terms of their off field behaviour, sure, but like the Armstrong comparison, Johns is a long way from being anywhere near as significant a sports figure globally..
I get the argument that he could have been kept out of the Nine coverage etc, but I don’t see what it has to do with a guy who contrived to destroy the lives of many and make millions and was willing to do what ever it took in order to “succeed”.
January 22nd 2013 @ 9:41am
Tom said | January 22nd 2013 @ 9:41am | Report comment
Yes exactly, I can’t see how what Johns did can be described as cheating, after all, I very much doubt a few pingers can be considered performance enhancing. As such, Johns’ problems are a matter for himself and his family. As far as I know, he has never destroyed anyone’s lives in the manner in which Armstrong went after people like the Andreus, Emma O’Reilly, David Walsh, Greg LeMond et al.
January 22nd 2013 @ 10:12am
Joe Gorman said | January 22nd 2013 @ 10:12am | Report comment
I am in no way comparing the use of recreational drugs to performance enhancing drugs. Clearly what Armstrong did is far worse. But there are similarities in the way we react to their admission of guilt – see the above comments about Ch.9 employing Johns as a commentator.
If you’d read the article properly you would understand that, far from attacking Johns, I am actually calling for a little more empathy in situations like these.
January 22nd 2013 @ 11:10am
B.A Sports said | January 22nd 2013 @ 11:10am | Report comment
But you can’t compare the complete acts of Armstrong to Johns
You might forgive someone charged with assault if they have punched a guy who was abusing their wife but you wouldn’t show any empathy for the guy who deliberately tortured and killed 12 innocent people over a 10 year period.
That is how far apart Armstrong and Johns, or Agassi or Woods (who did not cheat – in the sporting context) are.
January 22nd 2013 @ 10:22am
apaway said | January 22nd 2013 @ 10:22am | Report comment
Tom
Cocaine is considered a performance enhancer.
January 22nd 2013 @ 1:29pm
dasilva said | January 22nd 2013 @ 1:29pm | Report comment
Only during competition and that is define during the match. If you take cocaine even during season but after the match. As long as there’s no cocaine left in your blood when the next match starts then there is no issue.
January 22nd 2013 @ 2:45pm
Turnover said | January 22nd 2013 @ 2:45pm | Report comment
Dasilva are you trying to say that it’s okay to take banned substances on certain days of the week?
January 23rd 2013 @ 12:18am
dasilva said | January 23rd 2013 @ 12:18am | Report comment
It’s not ok to take illicit drugs that breaks the law but it is legal via WADA code to take cocaine during the week but go in clean during the match.
Stimulants do not aid training (in fact taking stimulant regularly will cause burnout and fatigue more than anything) but they assist performance on the here and now.
Johns may be breaking the law taking illicit drugs but he didn’t break the doping code (or at least wasn’t proven to break the doping code). He wasn’t a “drug cheat” getting an unfair advantage over competitors
January 22nd 2013 @ 8:38am
Shrek said | January 22nd 2013 @ 8:38am | Report comment
I completely disagree that “The original sin, as he himself states, was simply being part of the cycling culture at that time”.
His original sin was, in fact, cheating. He then compounded this by the appalling way he treated those who just tried to tell the truth. Why should he not be held accountable for this? Why should he be allowed to regain his privileged place in the sport (let alone the countless criminal violations for abuse of a controlled substance, and perjury)? I refuse to accept that Armstrong can abdicate responsibility by claiming he is a product of his environment, as you have argued.
I think the closing words should go to Nicole Cook, the retiring UK road cylist: “I have been robbed by drug cheats, but I am fortunate, I am here before you with more in my basket than the 12 year old dreamed of. But for many genuine people out there who do ride clean; people with morals, many of these people have had to leave the sport with nothing after a lifetime of hard work – some going through horrific financial turmoil. When Lance “cries” on Oprah later this week and she passes him a tissue, spare a thought for all of those genuine people who walked away with no reward – just shattered dreams. Each one of them is worth a thousand Lances.”
January 22nd 2013 @ 10:19am
Joe Gorman said | January 22nd 2013 @ 10:19am | Report comment
I don’t remember asking for leniency in Armstrong’s punishment? Or that he should “abdicate responsibility.” Where did I write that? Good quote from Cook
January 22nd 2013 @ 11:29am
Shrek said | January 22nd 2013 @ 11:29am | Report comment
Fair point Joe, and my apologies if I misinterpreted your argument – I wrongly interpreted this as an (albeit light) call for leniancy. The point I should’ve made more clearly (and I have no doubt that many will still disagree with me on this!) is that I don’t think blaming Armstrong in this case misses the forest for the trees.
I think that Armstrong’s use of that “original sin” phrase is a calculated effort on his behalf to at least dilute (maybe not abdicate – point taken!) the responsibility he has to take for his actions by shifting blame onto the culture of cycling, and I don’t think he (or anyone) should be given that option, let along be allowed to proft from it.
Having said that, I agree then that we can’t just turn around and blame everyone else using drugs on Armstrong’s behaviour – exhibit A being Nicole Cook – which would indeed be missing the forest for the trees.
January 22nd 2013 @ 1:09pm
Joe Gorman said | January 22nd 2013 @ 1:09pm | Report comment
I would agree that LA seems to be making calculated efforts to regain control of the story, and that he should be punished for his use of banned substances.
My article though was not really about Armstrong, or Andrew Johns, or any individual. It was about the cult of celebrity, the expectations we have on our sports stars, and on the way in which we as fans should respond to their mistakes.
January 22nd 2013 @ 10:22am
Harry said | January 22nd 2013 @ 10:22am | Report comment
Agree on Nicole Cook.
What disgusts me is Armstrong’s failure to apologise to the people he bullied and intimidated. Sickening arrogance and delusion.
The drugs andcheating in cycling I sorta understand – having survived cancer, I can see how a person would think that you may as well load the dice again and cheat. The payoff for LA was – and still is – the rush of 7 victories in brutal competition, global adulation, a massive fortune and a fantastic lfestyle. OK the adulation has turned in most circles to loathing, but I bet many of us, given a choice, wold take Lance Armstrong’s life arc ahead of their own existence.
I sincerely hope the guy is pursued and prosecuted to the maximum level possible. He made his bed …
January 22nd 2013 @ 8:56am
Redback said | January 22nd 2013 @ 8:56am | Report comment
I think its funny when you see and hear league commentators bagging Armstrong when they lay the welcome mat out for Andrew Johns.
January 22nd 2013 @ 10:29am
apaway said | January 22nd 2013 @ 10:29am | Report comment
The Andrew Johns case is interesting. In no way do I see him as a systematic cheat who rorted the system in order to be at the top of his chosen profession in the same way that Lance Armstrong did.
However, he has admitted to drug use “in-season” and at least one of those drugs is considered a performance enhancer. Recreational drug use is, for me, a whole different bag of syringes and falls more into that hazy, open-to-interpretation clause called “Bringing the game into disrepute.”
Johns’ past indiscretions should not have an effect on his current employment status with Channel Nine. But to be elevated to the highest honour his game allows is in my opinion a serious lapse of judgement.
January 22nd 2013 @ 10:41am
oikee said | January 22nd 2013 @ 10:41am | Report comment
Comparing Andrew Johns to Armstrong is a bit rich. One is a sick joke, the other is a immortal.
One admitted he did wrong, the other is a sack of spuds who took Adelaide for a ride for 9 million.
One sucked in the world and still is, the other has redeemed himself.
One has to have Oprah to hold his hand, the other stood tall warts and all.
Say what you like, but grouping Johns with Armstrong is criminal, or insane.
January 22nd 2013 @ 11:34pm
Steve said | January 22nd 2013 @ 11:34pm | Report comment
Spot on Oikee.
Also, Johns didn’t set himself up as Mr. Anti-partying, hound journalists, betray friends, ruin careers, force others to take drugs, threaten women at home, abuse a charity to keep his profile up and provide leverage for personally enriching business deals, use nationalism to denigrate people who told the truth about him, bribe officials, start a personality cult with himself as the golden idol, post a picture up on twitter with a bowl of pills after the truth came out saying ‘screw you journos: everything you say about me is lies’ and WORST OF ALL make grown men have to sit through Oprah.
I would say any forgiveness for Armstrong should wait until he no longer believes he is merely being victimized for his greatness, and he shows at least the tiniest degree of contrition.
I think Andrew Johns and Wally Lewis will win the Tour De France on a tandem before that happens though.
January 23rd 2013 @ 12:47pm
apaway said | January 23rd 2013 @ 12:47pm | Report comment
They are apparently entering a team under the name “Immortals Tour” figuring that now the drug cheats are gone, anyone could do it…:)
January 22nd 2013 @ 11:06am
oikee said | January 22nd 2013 @ 11:06am | Report comment
Armstrong has conned the world, and i even read a story the other day asking weather we should just legalise drugs. ???
OMG, what a sad state of affairs this has come to, and i am sure forgiveness will come for this piece of work somewehere down the path.
Tell you what, i will forgive him as well, when he pays Adelaide the 9 million they paid him to promote the sport.
Maybe it is us, you me, well not me, i have already stopped watching any sport the yanks are involved in, and that includes Tennis, because they cant be trusted.
I tell my fellow league colleague’s all the time, keep your morals, values and ethics intact and you cant go wrong, but dont ever try to group a lowlife like Armstrong with a person like Andrew Johns, you lose credibility straight off.
It is like trying to compare a drug user to a dealer.
Andrew Johns was not cheating the world, he was only cheating himself, and maybe other league fans.
He also did not have to admit to taking drugs, but he was man enough to do so. Again, my morals state that if your man enough to admit you done something wrong, then forgiveness will come.
Armstrong did none of that. Anyhow, that is my stance. And i am the first to admit sportsmen need as many chances as we can give them, or allow. Rugby league was riddled with badboys, who are now wonderful role models.
Amstrong can never take that path. He still cant tell the truth.
January 22nd 2013 @ 12:33pm
YNWA said | January 22nd 2013 @ 12:33pm | Report comment
Andrew Johns only admitted to taking drugs when he was caught in London with pills on him. I’m sorry, but for that, I doubt you would have ever heard his “admission” and his welcome into immortality would’ve been completed without any form of dissertation.
Sure, perhaps you cant place them in same basket in terms of the sheer scale and significance of such an “admission”. However Lance Armstrong, if you break it down, not only disappointed fans of the sport and further enahnced its now dubious legacy of being a dirty sport but also abused and disappointed those who used his exploits as inspiration for a what would be most peoples most treacherous journey, namely battling cancer.
Comparably, Andrew Johns admitted to his exploits after the fact – whether they are PED’s or not, they are still banned substances. He, like LA, wouldve played against guys that were clean – he cheated other players an opportunity that may have been afforded to them in the event he may have been banned. He, like it or not, was held out as the greatest player of a generation and undoubtedly was idolised as such. Admitting to his indiscretions and then being held out as the messiah of rugby league, with no apparent long term disadvantage, strikes me as hypocrisy.
Sure LA fall from grace is larger, more explosive and indicative of a larger problem in what is a dirty sport – but lets be honest, indiscretions are still indiscretions and the fact that AJ is still lauded the way he is still pretty poor.
January 22nd 2013 @ 10:38pm
superstar superhuman said | January 22nd 2013 @ 10:38pm | Report comment
Firstly, at the time Joey was caught with pills in London, he had already confessed his drug use in his (at the time) yet to be released biography. When he got busted he still didn’t “have to” reveal all on the Footy Show. He easily could’ve spun together a story about how he was holding it for someone, or how it was a one time thing, but he didn’t. He simply figured that it was all going to come out soon in his biography, he might as well get it out of the way now.
Secondly, Joey didn’t cheat anyone but himself, and arguably his team. I don’t believe Joey would ever have played under the influence of ecstasy (note that there’s a massive difference between playing under the influence of ecstasy, and playing with ecstasy in your system). It would’ve been so obvious if he did; he would’ve played like absolute sh!t.
January 23rd 2013 @ 12:23am
dasilva said | January 23rd 2013 @ 12:23am | Report comment
The difference between Andrew Johns and Lance armstrong was that there’s no evidence that Andrew Johns break the doping code whilst LA did.
cocaine is only banned from a sporting context (yes I know it’s against the law) during the match. There’s no evidence that Johns played a competitive match of rugby under the influence of drugs. He even admitted that he never got caught because he took it after the match.
his failing may well break someone’s moral code of conduct for people who consider self-harm to be immoral but they did not break sporting conduct and he did not get a competitive advantage over competitors.
January 22nd 2013 @ 12:10pm
Ballymore said | January 22nd 2013 @ 12:10pm | Report comment
I believe that if everyone is cheating, nobody is cheating. Drugs in le Tour remind me of the ‘Prisoner’s Dilemma’.
–
Comment left via The Roar’s iPhone app. Download The Roar’s iPhone App in the App Store here.
January 22nd 2013 @ 1:55pm
wisey_9 said | January 22nd 2013 @ 1:55pm | Report comment
I agree with you that this is a chance for us all to reinforce our own moral codes. Something I try and get myself the teams I coach to live by -
“Win only by what is right, as there is no glory, point or worth in winning by any other means.” – Justin Benitez