IRISH JOURNALIST DAVID Walsh has suggested a Lance Armstrong interview with The Sunday Times could be on the cards.
Speaking on The Late Late Show last night, Walsh hinted that Armstrong would be willing to sit down for a chat with the paper who he famously sued at one point, after they suggested he was guilty of doping.
In light of the disgraced cyclist’s admission that he doped, the paper is now seeking to regain the £900,000 out-of-court settlement they previously paid him, and Walsh indicated an interview could become part of any subsequent deal that is reached between the two parties.
Asked about his reaction to Armstrong telling Oprah he would apologise to Walsh, the journalist added:
“My feeling was ‘Lance, I don’t need an apology,’ I’d far rather get the chance to interview him.”
He said he was not satisfied with the cyclist’s two-and-a-half-hour sit-down with Oprah, explaining that “a lot of stuff remained unanswered”.
“His apologies weren’t heartfelt. Emotionally, he didn’t seem like he meant it.“He was like a person who wants to grieve at a funeral, but emotionally, he can’t do it.”
Walsh also described his interpretations of Armstrong’s body language during the recent interview with Oprah.
“When he gave an answer, you could see a smirk across his face,” he said. “He didn’t want to do that – it was an involuntary reaction.”
In addition, The Sunday Times journalist recalled how “stressful it was at the time,” highlighting, in particular, Armstrong’s poor treatment of his one-time assistant, Emma O’Reilly.
“He said there were issues with Emma – issues involving members of the team. He implied Emma had improper relationships with members of the team.“I believed Lance doped from his first tour. We did the interview – and Emma told me everything that happened.”
He continued: “It shows the arrogance of Armstrong and his team – they presumed she’d keep the secrets even though she was badly treated.
“[The interview] was my Christmas – this was the most revealing interview I’d ever get.”
Walsh also told of how the Armstrong case was not something he could easily forget.
“[Chasing Armstrong] was an obsession. I remember going to the golf in Augusta. The guy beside me in the airport had a yellow [Livestrong] wristband.
“I pointed at his wristband and I said: ‘You know that guy’s a fraud.’ I said: ‘I know he cheats, I’m a journalist.’ The guy thought I was completely mad.”
Walsh added that the personal way in which Armstrong analysed his motives was hurtful to him.
“Lance discussed my relationship with my son John. He said it was sick that I should describe John as ‘my favourite son’.“He said the reason I had a vendetta against cycling was because my son was killed on a bicycle.”
Speaking on the same show, Emma O’Reilly said she was similarly unimpressed for the most part with the Oprah interview, describing Armstrong’s answers as “the language of a man who’s lost 75 million dollars in one day”.
She added: “I thought: ‘Lance, you needed more practice. He’s not sorry.’
“In the interview, when he said ‘Emma got rolled over’ – that was a really emotional moment, because he actually told the truth.
“I realised then how much it had actually hurt me.”
O’Reilly revealed that she would be willing to meet up with Armstrong at a future date on the condition that there were no members of the media present, saying: “Otherwise, it’d be Lance playing to the cameras.”
She described the disgraced cyclist as “pleasant” before he eventually turned on her, and insisted: “We did have a really good relationship.”
The names he called Emma were disgusting. I hope that at the very least she gets a big fat chunk of his cash to compensate her for the humiliation that he subjected her to and to reward her for her honesty.
Fully agreed! In fact she should be first in line for reparations. But reality is she will probably be last in line after big press and corporate sponsors! Sadly there may be nothing left when she gets to the top of the line!
He should make a grovelling public apology to Emma first.
Why would he bother give more media time to a self confessed cheat and poor excuse for a man by interviewing him . Armstrong is only sorry for getting caught . He is a professional con man and a disgrace to sport.
David Walsh said the interview will only go ahead if LA tells on others, all the doctors, UCI, sponsors, etc… David also wants to find out why the Feds dropped the case. It is in the interest of cycling and sport in general to find this out.
It would also be a fascinating article to read, it’s not about giving LA more air time it’s about cleaning the sport
It’s clear that David Walsh himself IS the story!
Watched Walshe on tv last night. Anyone in Lance position would have done the same . This guy wanted to bring Lance down and of course Lance was going to do everything possible to stop him.
Im no means a supporter of LA but in the interest of fairness what I understood Walsh said last night was that the £900,000 that the Times is trying to get back from Armstrong could be repaid by an exclusive interview with “all of my questions answered correctly and at length”. I took this as Walsh saying that I’m going to ask all the questions and then I’ll decide whether it’s the truth or not. I also thought the story about when he was airside going to Augusta and having a pop at a complete stranger a bit weird to say the least.
I’m sorry but is anybody else getting a pain in their face listening to this.Really people,this story is just not that important to warrant being newsworthy every single day.Last week there was six different links to stories on this site.
Quite a few people are actually interested, there’s a handy swipe mechanism on tablets and a mouse click on PCs to avoid the story.
I don’t disagree with you JP,I was mildly interested myself at one stage but it’s gone into overkill now.”Too many” articles on a subject that frankly doesn’t warrant it,that was all I was saying.
Until we know how, and by whom, Armstrong and colleagues were allowed get away with this sporting fraud for over 15 years then this is more than a valid story. Not to mention the vindication for the best sports journalism of my time. It’s worth it.