Armstrong drops fight against doping charges

Discussion in 'Odds & Ends' started by Bartelby, Aug 23, 2012.

  1. dParis

    dParis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2004
    Messages:
    1,747
    All the people wetting themselves with joy over thinking the USADA is going to strip Armstrong of his 7 TdF titles should realize that USADA has about as much authority to strip Armstrong of his titles as you or I.

    This.
     
  2. fundrazer

    fundrazer Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2010
    Messages:
    1,805
    You all are forgetting Lance's failed test from the 2001 tour de Suisse. It was swept under the rug by the UCI, who Lance rewarded with a payment of ~$100,000. Many people actually believe the UCI itself to be corrupt. Things like accepting Lance's payment just tend to further support that.

    The USADA has not harmed cycling at all. If anything, it was the Lance era that hurt cycling the most. That's when all of the contenders for the big races were doped to the gills.

    There also seems to be a big misconception among some of you. Many of Lance's former teammates, one's who are believed to have testified against Lance, have never tested positive either. It's not like they're all jumping on the bandwagon to avoid penalties or whatever. I think one of them is Dave Zabriskie, but the other big name is George Hincapie.

    And Nam, the federal investigation wasn't dropped because they didn't have a case. Word has it that the investigators working on the case were very confident regarding the investigation and the evidence they had compiled. From what I have read, at some point one of the higher ups simply canned the case. The people who had been working on it did not understand, because they were ready to go after Lance.
     
  3. volleygirl

    volleygirl Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2011
    Messages:
    404


    I am just the opposite. I dont see how they cant strip him and still be taken seriously. I also think the MLB should strip all the HR records and MVPs that Bonds won as a cheater and the MVP that Canseco won as he was roiding. Reggie Jackson said that all the HOFers he knows still consider Hank Aaron the all time HR king and Roger Maris the singel season record holder so they dont even acknowldege Bonds and McGuire even existed.
     
  4. Sentinel

    Sentinel Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2008
    Messages:
    31,258
    Location:
    Somewhere under the weather ;)
    Yeah, believing the words of one thief about another. Way to go ! Are these dopers trustworthy enough that their word should be believed ?

    Reduced sentence for one. At least that's the usual thing when dopers testify about other (possible) dopers. See if they have a gain in testifying against him. If they do, then it is suspect.

    He may well be guilty, they usually are and come around it in a couple years, but to keep saying that 'dropping the fight is admitting guilt' is not right. How long can one go one fighting ? I would certainly give up after a while.

    If there are positive samples (A and B), let's see a link.
     
  5. jonnythan

    jonnythan Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2009
    Messages:
    1,356
    No one "forgot" about it. UCI flat-out says there was no failed test. The only reason anyone thinks there was is that Tyler Hamilton said so.

    "Howdy. We hear you saw Lance doping. If you tell us about it and cooperate, we might not say anything about the evidence we have that you were doping with him. What do you say?"
     
  6. NamRanger

    NamRanger G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2005
    Messages:
    13,916


    The Federal Investigation was dropped because they had zero physical evidence.

    And what about former teammates that were caught that are on that list? Hello?

    The Federal Government was successful in catching various PED abusers in various sports, mainly in baseball when everyone was cheating. They FORCED everyone out, and even got guys like Bonds and Clemmens, guys that could never be caught. And yet they DROP the case against Armstrong, predominantly because they KNEW they didn't have a case.
     
    Last edited: Aug 24, 2012
  7. sureshs

    sureshs Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    35,778
    The problem seems to be the power given to the US ADA and the refusal of a court to interfere. Other cyclists being asked to testify in order to avoid a punishment can easily lead to them telling lies. In a regular court, there are checks and balances in place when plea bargains are made, and ultimately the matter can head to a jury. Where are the checks and balances here? Who can determine if the witnesses are lying or not?
     
  8. NamRanger

    NamRanger G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2005
    Messages:
    13,916

    That's the thing, and alot of people have asked the USADA to make their physical evidence available to the public so everyone can know if they really do have evidence that Lance Armstrong cheated. They of course, refuse to make it public for whatever reason. If they do not demonstrate to the UCI that they have definitive physical evidence, the USADA is going to be in deep doodoo when it meets the UCI in a public court of arbitration.
     
  9. Sander001

    Sander001 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2012
    Messages:
    2,517
    Location:
    In the place where there is no darkness.
    Lance Armstrong put cycling on the map. How many previous Tours winners were named athlete of the year? Zero.
    Oh.

    Yeah the charges were dropped because of lack of evidence.
    But that's not stopping the USADA, bless their hearts. They are just so determined to keep their federal funding in these times of government cut backs. It would just be so great if they caught the one and only Lance Armstrong. My, they may even get international recognition and get funding from all over the world!
    Not quite but you're close! Keep trying.
     
  10. smoledman

    smoledman Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2012
    Messages:
    5,492
    Location:
    USA
    Does USADA even have the authority to strip his TdF titles?
     
  11. THUNDERVOLLEY

    THUNDERVOLLEY G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2007
    Messages:
    10,756
    ....yeah, we see how incorrect it was to give him any sort of title.
     
  12. Benhur

    Benhur Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2007
    Messages:
    2,562
    After what I've read on the topic of doping in cycling, I take it for granted it is endemic, all the top cyclists do it and find ways to mask it or do substances that are not yet banned or tested or whatever. The tests by L’Equipe in 2005 may or may not be valid, like any other tests, you can always find reasons why the positive is not 100% certain etc. I believe they are probably accurate.

    My point is elsewhere. If you start allowing all this retroactive digging and witch hunting and testing of old samples for things that were not tested, or maybe weren’t even banned, or maybe weren’t even known when the samples were taken, it will become ridiculous. Why stop at Armstrong? Sometime ago he said: "I know who won those Tours. All my team mates know who won those Tours, and everyone I competed against knows who won those Tours. Nobody will ever be able to change that.” I completely agree. And you could say the same thing of Bonds, although of course this pales in comparison with the Bonds witch hunt. THAT was really something else.
    http://www.thenation.com/blog/15993...h-hunt-how-barry-bonds-became-convicted-felon
     
  13. chrischris

    chrischris Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,974
    This is just a theory and it will cost us money . Lance is prolly being attacked because some want to make a buck.
     
  14. Fearsome Forehand

    Fearsome Forehand Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    Messages:
    1,186
    Location:
    USA
    Does anyone really believe Bonds did not use steroids given his ties to Balco and the drastic physical changes he underwent in a rather short amount of time? As well, the sudden enormous increase in his HR numbers at an advanced age? All coincidental?

    As far as Lance, the jury is out. Bonds, the thing is obvious. Check out his recent photos, he is back to his normal body now. It is like night and day.

    Baseball has had a big steroid problem for awhile especially among power hitters. Bonds was hardly the only one.
     
    Last edited: Aug 24, 2012
  15. r2473

    r2473 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    7,113
    Guess he just doesn't have the balls for it.........
     
  16. NamRanger

    NamRanger G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2005
    Messages:
    13,916

    The accuracy of those particular tests were challenged by Ayotte, a notable scientist who helped catch Floyd Landis. The presence of 100% grade synthetic EPO in the prologue sample was highly unlikely (and in all reality almost impossible) because EPO is a biodegradable substance, and is such dissipates greatly after just a few months, even when frozen. Over a span of 6 years, it becomes HIGHLY suspect that it has managed to maintain such pristine condition. Over such a long period of time, it becomes too difficult to see whether or not the athlete cheated or not. It's not ethical in the slightest.
     
  17. jonnythan

    jonnythan Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2009
    Messages:
    1,356
    Bonds failed a test. Lance didn't.

    Anyway, here is a great article. http://www.washingtonpost.com/sport...940afa-ee0a-11e1-afd6-f55f84bc0c41_story.html

    "For me, if you take personalities out of the equation, you
     
    Last edited: Aug 24, 2012
  18. chrischris

    chrischris Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,974
    Since man cant alter nature , how can he be guilty?
     
  19. r2473

    r2473 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    7,113
    To be honest, its one of the reasons I like Bonds.
     
  20. tenniscasey

    tenniscasey Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2012
    Messages:
    427
    You're looking for nits to pick with a cancer research foundation. Get help.
     
  21. fundrazer

    fundrazer Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2010
    Messages:
    1,805
    Where in that article does it say the case was dropped for lack of evidence. This is what I read:

    "A statement from the U.S. attorney in Los Angeles said the seven-time Tour de France winner will not be charged, but did not explain the reasons for the decision."

    Why trust the UCI says about the test when they basically accepted a $100,000 bribe from Lance Armstrong? The UCI is more interested in trying to protect the image of "cleaner cycling" than it is cleaning up the sport.

    The Lance era did NOTHING to help cycling. True fans of cycling are glad that the era is over. All it did was confuse people into thinking the cycling season was 1 race and lasted 3 weeks. There's actually more races than the Tour de France ya know. Not that Lance ever really tried to win any of them. I'm also tired of ignorant people claiming he's the best road cyclist ever...that honor belongs to Eddy Merckx.

    Doesn't it strike any of you as odd that Johan Brunyneel, team director for US Postal, once said "we aren't going to be doing any of that (doping)." Fast forward to today, how many former US Postal riders have either tested positive or come out and stated that they were doping and that US Postal ran it's own doping program. Let's see, we've got Frankie Andreu, Levi Leipheimer, Tyler Hamilton, Jonathan Vaughters, and Floyd Landis. I might be missing some, but those are the names that come to mind.
     
  22. fundrazer

    fundrazer Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2010
    Messages:
    1,805
    ^^LOL, you knucklehead. Livestrong is in NO WAY a cancer research foundation. Get out of the thread if you're that ignorant.
     
  23. r2473

    r2473 Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    7,113
    I think someone hit her over the head with a coffee cup.
     
  24. Sander001

    Sander001 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2012
    Messages:
    2,517
    Location:
    In the place where there is no darkness.
    I know it's a very long article but you really should read more than the first two paragraphs.
     
  25. tenniscasey

    tenniscasey Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2012
    Messages:
    427
    "We've worked to identify the issues faced by cancer survivors in order to comprehensively improve quality of life for members of the global cancer community."

    http://www.livestrong.org/What-We-Do/Our-Approach

    You're still nitpicking. Again, get help. I'm done with you.
     
  26. fundrazer

    fundrazer Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2010
    Messages:
    1,805
    Learn to read? The article says that in May of 2011 that when called to a federal jury, they did not have enough evidence at the time to proceed. This =/= the feds dropping the case, which didn't happen until earlier this year. Instead of being a smartass, why don't you learn to correctly identify what the article actually says.

    What's nitpicking about pointing out how Livestrong doesn't really do anything to support cancer research? It seems more money gets spent attacking real cancer awareness groups for stupid trademarks than it does supporting cancer awareness
     
  27. West Coast Ace

    West Coast Ace G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2005
    Messages:
    13,746
    Location:
    So Cal
    Great post. If OJ had been... Steve Garvey (or any other high profile white athlete of that time) ... whites would have been just as outraged that he got away with murder. Tommy Lasorda's (Dodger manager) was in Heidi Fleiss' book of 'clients' - glossed over by the mainstream media - had nothing to do with race, everything to do with the fact that he was a likable guy.

    I think Armstrong showed his true, meglomaniac, colors when he abandoned his wife and family and went Hollywood and hooked up with Crow and one of the Olsen Twins (that's scary).

    I think Lance probably used. But really don't care - the whole Tour and how it is run is a farce.
     
  28. fundrazer

    fundrazer Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2010
    Messages:
    1,805
    Taken from an article on the New York Times website:

    "The antidoping agency has said its evidence includes blood profiles from 2009 and 2010 that were consistent with doping, which means that they showed blood results that were outside of his normal range.

    “This is not an adverse finding, but this is certainly a sufficient equivalent to testing positive,” said Christiane Ayotte, the head of a World Anti-Doping Agency-accredited lab outside of Montreal. "
     
  29. NamRanger

    NamRanger G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2005
    Messages:
    13,916


    That still only constitutes at best (if it holds up to scrutiny) a violation of 2009 and 2010, not a violation of his 7 TdF victories.
     
  30. fundrazer

    fundrazer Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2010
    Messages:
    1,805
  31. TomT

    TomT Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    1,954
    Location:
    Fort Lauderdale, FL
    He had an Olsen twin? Oh wow. I really admire that guy. :) Not as much as Hugh Hefner, but still ... an Olsen twin. Cheryl Crow isn't bad either.

    My guess would be that he doped. But I have no way of knowing, and like you I really don't care. I just assume every athlete is on some form of performance enhancing chemicals. Mine are Gatorade, water, bananas, and, well, food in general. Plus I eat a lot of hard candies (especially root beer barrels).

    So I enjoy watching the TDF. The roadside scenery, the drama of competition, the peloton (the peloton?) .
     
    Last edited: Aug 24, 2012
  32. Sander001

    Sander001 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2012
    Messages:
    2,517
    Location:
    In the place where there is no darkness.
    ????????????

    Are you actually serious???? And I'm not being a "smartass", not trying to be condescending or anything of the sort but I have to ask. Or are you trying to save face, avoid embarrassment or something? Un-ironically acknowledging your "Learn to read" question?
    I've helpfully bolded the part you missed.
    The part of article you're referring to is the background. That's why it begins with "In May 2011, Armstrong once again..."
     
  33. Bartelby

    Bartelby G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    Messages:
    12,952
    He tried to block the arbitration and failed and then he avoided it by not challenging USADA's case for which there is physical evidence:



    'The move came after a US court ruled against Armstrong's attempts to block Usada's investigation. He consistently maintained he never failed a test for banned substances, although that is disputed. But Usada said its investigation revealed a systematic programme of drug misuse in Armstrong's team and claimed 10 of the cyclist's former team mates would testify that he was at the heart of it. The agency also told Armstrong it has blood samples from two and three years ago that are "fully consistent" with illegal doping.'
     
  34. jonnythan

    jonnythan Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2009
    Messages:
    1,356
    What physical evidence?
     
  35. Benhur

    Benhur Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2007
    Messages:
    2,562
    The way the law works is incomprehensible to me. First the federal prosecutors were unable to sustain any charges against him. So then they let an organization outside the justice system, and outside the governing body of international cycling, do the lynching pretty muych as they please – while fully acknowledging that many of the USADA methods would not pass muster in federal courts, and adding: “Among the Court’s concerns is the fact that USADA has targeted Armstrong for prosecution many years after his alleged doping violations occurred,” in the words of judge Sam Sparks.

    There are many valid points in Armstrong’s statement:

    Over the past three years, I have been subjected to a two-year federal criminal investigation followed by Travis Tygart’s unconstitutional witch hunt. The toll this has taken on my family, and my work for our foundation and on me leads me to where I am today – finished with this nonsense.

    I had hoped that a federal court would stop USADA’s charade. Although the court was sympathetic to my concerns and recognized the many improprieties and deficiencies in USADA’s motives, its conduct, and its process, the court ultimately decided that it could not intervene.

    If I thought for one moment that by participating in USADA’s process, I could confront these allegations in a fair setting and – once and for all – put these charges to rest, I would jump at the chance. But I refuse to participate in a process that is so one-sided and unfair. Regardless of what Travis Tygart says, there is zero physical evidence to support his outlandish and heinous claims. The only physical evidence here is the hundreds of controls I have passed with flying colors. I made myself available around the clock and around the world. In-competition. Out of competition. Blood. Urine. Whatever they asked for I provided. What is the point of all this testing if, in the end, USADA will not stand by it?

    From the beginning, however, this investigation has not been about learning the truth or cleaning up cycling, but about punishing me at all costs. I am a retired cyclist, yet USADA has lodged charges over 17 years old despite its own 8-year limitation. As respected organizations such as UCI and USA Cycling have made clear, USADA lacks jurisdiction even to bring these charges. The international bodies governing cycling have ordered USADA to stop, have given notice that no one should participate in USADA’s improper proceedings, and have made it clear the pronouncements by USADA that it has banned people for life or stripped them of their accomplishments are made without authority. And as many others, including USADA’s own arbitrators, have found, there is nothing even remotely fair about its process.

    USADA has broken the law, turned its back on its own rules, and stiff-armed those who have tried to persuade USADA to honor its obligations. At every turn, USADA has played the role of a bully, threatening everyone in its way and challenging the good faith of anyone who questions its motives or its methods, all at U.S. taxpayers’ expense. For the last two months, USADA has endlessly repeated the mantra that there should be a single set of rules, applicable to all, but they have arrogantly refused to practice what they preach. On top of all that, USADA has allegedly made deals with other riders that circumvent their own rules as long as they said I cheated. Many of those riders continue to race today.

    The bottom line is I played by the rules that were put in place by the UCI, WADA and USADA when I raced. The idea that athletes can be convicted today without positive A and B samples, under the same rules and procedures that apply to athletes with positive tests, per verts the system and creates a process where any begrudged ex-teammate can open a USADA case out of spite or for personal gain or a cheating cyclist can cut a sweetheart deal for themselves. It’s an unfair approach, applied selectively, in opposition to all the rules. It’s just not right.

    USADA cannot assert control of a professional international sport and attempt to strip my seven Tour de France titles. I know who won those seven Tours, my teammates know who won those seven Tours, and everyone I competed against knows who won those seven Tours. We all raced together. For three weeks over the same roads, the same mountains, and against all the weather and elements that we had to confront. There were no shortcuts, there was no special treatment. The same courses, the same rules. The toughest event in the world where the strongest man wins. Nobody can ever change that. Especially not Travis Tygart.
     
  36. Cindysphinx

    Cindysphinx G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    15,093
    Hook, meet line and sinker.
     
  37. Bartelby

    Bartelby G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    Messages:
    12,952
    'my teammates know who won those seven Tours'

    All of his teammates were lining up to give evidence against him in a public hearing and Armstrong squibbed it.
     
  38. NamRanger

    NamRanger G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2005
    Messages:
    13,916

    Supposed blood tampering that occured in 2009-2010 of course! Then again, the USADA has yet to contact the UCI with any of their so called physical evidence.


    This is actually a very smart move by Armstrong, as by moving the jurisdiction out of the USADA's hands and into the International level, he levels the playing field. Even if he is guilty of cheating, it is actually very smart since he knew that there was no way he could ever get a fair hearing under the USADA's rules; it was obvious that the USADA had no intention of ever finding Armstrong innocent. By getting the USADA to overstep its boundaries, he is forcing the UCI's hand by essentially forcing them to get involved, and they have. They have stated that they are awaiting why the USADA has done what it did, and it wants the evidence that the USADA supposedly has against Armstrong.
     
    Last edited: Aug 24, 2012
  39. sureshs

    sureshs Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    35,778
    Then they should produce it and let experts decide what is normal range and what was the deviation. As presented, it seems to be implying that it is very indirect and not conclusive at all.
     
  40. Bobby Jr

    Bobby Jr Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    7,503
    Of course they don't have physical evidence of most of it. But to call the stories of dozens of people closely related to him throughout his career hearsay is stretching the truth a bit. Many of the testimonies concern Armstrong's first hand involvement in PEDs use, and instructing others to use them or show them how.

    Of course they could all by lying, which is effectively his defence. They're tainted witnesses according to his PR machine. But remember, Carl Lewis and Lindford Christie were in the same boat many years ago - tut-tutting their peers who got caught, accusing people who beat them of cheating etc... and now, years later, it is know that they were also taking PEDs themselves and, in some cases, the American athletics body even helped cover positive tests up.

    I don't know why cycling as a sport would have some moral compass which could distinguish people involved from being any different to athletics or swimming. Cycling has, perhaps even moreso than swimming and far more than most athletics events, the biggest gains to be made through PEDs use (since it's a very low dexterity/skill/technique brute force sport compared to most others).

    Does it mean Armstrong is definitely guilty? No.... But is he guilty? The chances of him being clean are so astonishingly remote to be absurd. I personally don't care - the guy is a legend. Cycling should just stop the hypocrisy where the opinions and accusations of people caught using PEDs are automatically considered tainted.
     
  41. Bartelby

    Bartelby G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    Messages:
    12,952
    The UCI has already brought itself under USADA jurisdiction so if it tries anything untoward it is it that will be further discredited.
     
  42. Bartelby

    Bartelby G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    Messages:
    12,952
    "The UCI (International Cycling Union) notes Lance Armstrong's decision not to proceed to arbitration in the case that USADA has brought against him," said the Swiss-based UCI in a statement.

    "The UCI recognises that USADA is reported as saying that it will strip Mr Armstrong of all results from 1998 onwards in addition to imposing a lifetime ban from participating in any sport which recognises the World Anti-Doping Code."

    "Article 8.3 of the WADC states that where no hearing occurs the anti-doping organisation with results management responsibility shall submit to the parties concerned (Armstrong, the World Anti-Doping Agency and UCI) a reasoned decision explaining the action taken.

    "As USADA has claimed jurisdiction in the case the UCI expects that it will issue a reasoned decision in accordance with Article 8.3 of the Code.
     
  43. Bartelby

    Bartelby G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    Messages:
    12,952
    The case against Lance Armstrong:

    June 2012 - USADA charges Armstrong with doping and taking part in a conspiracy with members of his Tour-winning teams.

    USADA claims to have blood samples from 2009 and 2010 that are 'fully consistent with doping'.

    Agency claims to have at least 10 former team-mates willing to testify Armstrong used doping drugs between 1999-2005.

    Five other cyclists accused of conspiring with Armstrong over 14 years to hide doping activity.

    Four riders named in media as - George Hincapie, Dave Zabriskie, Christian Vande Velde, Levi Leipheimer - allegedly given six-month suspended bans in exchange for implicating Armstrong.

    Former cyclist and Garmin team chief Jonathan Vaughters also alleged to have testified.

    RadioShack team doctor Pedro Celaya, and sporting director Johan Bruyneel are also accused of being involved in the conspiracy.

    Armstrong has also worked with cycling doctor Michele Ferrari - who is serving a lifetime sports ban for anti-doping violations.

    Armstrong dismisses the claims saying he is the victim of a personal vendetta from the anti-doping agency.

    Aside from traces of corticosteroid being found in one urine same in 1999 - Armstrong has never tested positive.

    The corticosteroid amount in the test was not in the positive range and Armstrong provided evidence it came from an approved saddle sore cream.
     
  44. sureshs

    sureshs Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    35,778
    There is another thing to keep in mind: it is clear that the ADA head has a personal issue with Lance, and that there is a lack of checks and balances in the organization. Why couldn't the agency have tampered with the evidence, and encouraged witnesses to lie? Since there seems to be no judicial oversight, what prevents them from fabricating evidence? We routinely hear about rogue police officers planting evidence and beating up innocent people. At least they are under the purview of the law while this agency seems to be a free floating thing.
     
  45. NamRanger

    NamRanger G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2005
    Messages:
    13,916


    Do you even know how to read?


    Do you even know what the bolded means? It means that the UCI is basically telling the USADA you better have a really good reason for doing this, otherwise you're going to be taken to the International courts and are going down in flames. Under the WADA code, the USADA must inform in writing as to why they performed the actions they did, supplying ALL evidence. That is not good for the USADA if they DO NOT HAVE REAL PHYSICAL EVIDENCE. Witness testimony that could have easily been coerced out of the concerned parties is simply not enough to hold in an International Court of Arbitration. This is the reason why Armstrong did not choose to arbitrate through the USADA, because guilty or innocent, he was never going to get a fair hearing anyways when dealing with the USADA. It was an extremely smart move on his part.

    If by tomorrow the USADA does not inform the UCI as to why they performed the actions that they did, or they send a really flimsy ass case, you can bet your house and live savings that the UCI along with Armstrong are going to take them to court, and they are going to win. Period. The USADA better have a bullet proof case, because now it's very apparent that the UCI is barreling down on top of the USADA (along with TdF officials) and is demanding answers, which the USADA has yet to reveal.

    TL;DR, the USADA is dumb to think that they have achieved any kind of victory. This fight is not over; it's clearly obvious that the USADA does not have any real substantial evidence against Armstrong other than testimony out of former teammates who very likely took plea deals that were worked out with the USADA. If you seriously think that what's going on is even remotely fair, you're in la la land. Guilty or not, the USADA is not handling the situation very well, especially when it is violating its own statue of limitations.



    He has never been caught, he has never tested positive except that one instance that was instantly cleared, and all attempts to bring him down on multiple occasions has never succeeded. Either the man is the greatest fraud on Earth or maybe it's just that insanely small chance that he actually is legitimate. Either way, I respect the hell out of the man for what he's done.
     
    Last edited: Aug 24, 2012
  46. sureshs

    sureshs Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    35,778
    It will be thrown out in European courts. They already ruled in favor of an athlete under human rights clauses, like making them responsible for not getting their postal mail when they are not in town (LOL). The US court also expressed skepticism about this case before deciding not to interfere. The Justice Department found no evidence. Outside the US this is going to look like a petty ego problem of a self-appointed policeman with another rich and famous American.
     
  47. Sentinel

    Sentinel Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2008
    Messages:
    31,258
    Location:
    Somewhere under the weather ;)
  48. TomT

    TomT Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    1,954
    Location:
    Fort Lauderdale, FL
    Seems like a pretty weak case to me.

    Anyway, whether Armstrong did or didn't use performance enhancing drugs or blood doping or whatever is unimportant, imo.

    These drug-testing, drug oversight organizations should be defunded and abolished as far as I'm concerned. Virtually all pro athletes use some form of performance enhancing drugs. It's the status quo.

    These drug enforcement agencies are simply tools of selective enforcement of outmoded rules.

    If most all athletes, especially cyclists, are using doping techniques and performance enhancing drugs, then if Lance Armstrong is also doing that, then he isn't cheating. Is he?

    This whole thing is a hypcritical, political, corrupted mess, imho.

    Armstrong's refusal to respond the hypocrisy and corruption of this selective enforcement is a good thing, imo.

    It's like the great hypocritical pushes to separate amateur and pro tennis, and amateur and pro track and field athletes, prohibiting colleges from paying athletes, stripping Jim Thorpe of his medals, the hypocrisy of the Olympics. Just so transparently hypocritical.

    Athletes, most especially world class athletes, use performance enhancing drugs. This is more or less the norm in some sports.
     
    Last edited: Aug 25, 2012
  49. Bartelby

    Bartelby G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    Messages:
    12,952
    The UCI is awaiting a written determination from USADA but not by tomorrow so let's see what, if anything, they do to overturn this.




     
  50. Bartelby

    Bartelby G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    Messages:
    12,952
    Whether PED's should be legal is another issue that is separate from Armstrong's guilt and, in any event, he supports theoretically a drug-free sport.




     

Share This Page