Armstrong Ban

1 to 20 of 52 messages
Dubai Dave    pirate
14/06/2012 at 05:21

So Armstrong gets suspended two weeks before his IM debut. Whilst there must always be a strong suspicion of cheating over Armstrong (and anyone who has read lance to landris will probably be fairly convinced that he did) it seems to me that USADA are waging a personal vendetta on Armstrong in bring this up yet again when to be fair the man has never failed a drugs test. If the USADA have firm evidence they should tell us all what it is. The Washington Post states " blood samples taken in 2009 and 2010 that were "fully consistent with blood manipulation including EPO use and/or blood transfusions." 

So why bring this up now and not in 2009 / 2010? For one I hope that Armstrong fights this if only so that we can see the evidence. The real shame is that were not going to get to see what he can do at the IM distance, at least not in the short term and for Lance the time bomb of age is getting close.

Edited: 14/06/2012 at 05:22
14/06/2012 at 05:48
How can they ban someone without a +ve? I just think he is a freak of nature hes currently handing it to a lot of tri pros over the 70.3 are they by implication a doper? Chrissie W is streets ahead of the other girls is she a doper until he tests +ve i give him the benefit of the doubt
14/06/2012 at 06:08

Marion Jones, David Miller, Dwain Chambers. Just some dopers who also never failed a drug test. As in a court of law, being found not guilty doesn't mean you didn't 'do it' just that 'it' cannot be proved. It seems to be forgotton that the modern clamp down on drug use in sport wasn't about winning prizes but an attempt to stop athletes killing themselves on account of their ambition.

Doozer.    pirate
14/06/2012 at 06:56
I'd like to be a romantic and think that he is clean, innocent until proven guilty and all that. He has so much credibility to lose if he has doped after all the times he has insisted he didn't!

It's a shame as cyclings adverse publicity is now going to cross over into our sport of triathlon, lance has brought so much positive attention this year. I hope this is not a vindictive witch hunt but it does seem to be at the moment!
14/06/2012 at 07:08

I think it's outrageous that he's been banned before being found guilty of anything - who else have they done this too? It does look very much like a vendetta - no new evidence has been presented and the evidence that is known to exist was considered insufficient to proceed with before.

14/06/2012 at 07:53
Little M.iss Happy wrote (see)

I think it's outrageous that he's been banned before being found guilty of anything - who else have they done this too? It does look very much like a vendetta - no new evidence has been presented and the evidence that is known to exist was considered insufficient to proceed with before.

Completely agree. I know that it takes time to analyse the requirements and results of the allegation but it's 2012. For me, it's innocent until proven guilty and although i think he's a freak of nature for being so good- that doesnt make him guilty of doping.

14/06/2012 at 08:45

On the face of it, it does appear to be a vendetta against Armstrong. If you don't believe the subject under investigation is worthy of such attention, then vendetta it is. But what if it was murder being investigated. The time scales between incident and accountability become irrelevant. In one court case I remember a unreliable (witness) on hearing the list of crimes he had committed being read out, declared 'that those don't mean anything now since they were all in the past', the judge pointed out that if that was the case none of us would be accountable for anything.

cougie    pirate
14/06/2012 at 08:52
http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/armstrongcharging0613.pdf

I don't really see the value in this. And if he did dope in his comeback years he didn't do it very well.

They can't really strip his titles off him. I'm struggling to think of any of his rivals who haven't been implicated in some doping scandal....
Cheerful Dave    pirate
14/06/2012 at 09:05

Who would those TdF wins pass to?  Ulrich? Pantani?

It's all a waste of time now.  I doubt there was a TdF winner in the last century who wasn't on the juice in some form or other - it was either legal or untestable most of the time.  If Armstrong came through those years without ever having dabbled in EPO yet still beat all the others by a long way then I'd be amazed, but if he did dope then he's a genius at that too because he never tested positive while all those around him (including many former teammates) have been busted.

Whether he did or not, he's a phenomenal athlete.

14/06/2012 at 09:07

there's an interesting view on this affair over in Slowtwitch

http://www.slowtwitch.com/Opinion/Armstrong_and_USADA_2848.html

like Cougs, I can't see what USADA hope to achieve by this - the evidence if anything is flimsy, it's been used before and not proven, and a lot of it relies on other people's comments (we saw LA doping with EPO etc) - many of whom are already banned and are probably peed off that LA has come through unscathed.

as someone else said on twitter - he's passed over 500 blood tests - so he's either clean or the smartest drug user known to the world.

and remember - it's not just LA that has been fingered but Johan Bryneels (his ex team manager) and various medics, but LA is clearly the headline act.

what will be will be

cougie    pirate
14/06/2012 at 09:26

V interesting article there.  I really wanted him to do IMFR, so the timing of the ban is very annoying.

Crash Hamster    pirate
14/06/2012 at 09:54

<sometime in 2013>

'Congratulations, you've won the 1999 TdF!'

Ludicrous.

cougie    pirate
14/06/2012 at 09:56

Oh here's a good graphic illustrating the podiums and scandals : 

http://www.cyclingtipsblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/armstrong1150px.jpg

14/06/2012 at 09:57

Im completely pissed off by this.

Either way i am annoyed. If he is guilty then fed up with him.. if not guilty then with all the accusations and subsequent ban preventing him racing in France.

14/06/2012 at 10:06
cougie wrote (see)

Oh here's a good graphic illustrating the podiums and scandals : 

http://www.cyclingtipsblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/armstrong1150px.jpg

someone's had a lot of time on their hands!!  good summary though

Crash Hamster    pirate
14/06/2012 at 10:11

Blimey! It's a nightmare! Nice graphic though!

<sometime in 2021, several court cases later>

'Congratulations on your 1999 TdF win, Mr Armstrong'

14/06/2012 at 10:36

here's another interesting article - http://inrng.com/2012/06/usada-charges-armstrong/

I like this bit at the end:

  • Like loyal footsoldiers, fans will take their cues and soon start tearing strips off each other. I can understand both sides. But go for a ride to let off steam as there’s little new evidence here for now.
  • Finally there is a good chance this all drags on and on, ending up in the Court of Arbitration for Sport in 2013 or beyond.
14/06/2012 at 10:54

Reading the letter sent to Armstrong I'm left with the impression that this is being brought because he was the only one who didn't co-operate with USADA's enquiry.  But, when you look at how USADA has treated him in the past, I don't think I'd be inclined to co-operate if I was him!

There doesn't seem to be any new evidence offered.  However, the best thing for all concerned is to hear ALL the evidence, put it out in the open, and let there be a judgement.  That way everyone will know one way or the other.  But the whole saga is damaging for all sport, not just cycling and Tri.

For me, perhaps I'm naieve, I believe he's innocent.  I would be extremely upset and angry if he wasn't!  Innocent until proven guilty.  Lets all hear / read the evidence please.

14/06/2012 at 11:01

I don't think they're fingering LA for non-cooperation at all - that's just part of their argument

the case is being brought against a number of people, LA included, who were members of the US Postal team and which was part govt. funded.    

14/06/2012 at 11:08

The letter says, I think, he's the only rider who they contacted who didn't co-operate.  I accept he's only part of the 'team' that the action has been brought against.  I suspect that none of those on the 'team' co-operated.  The inference is that, because they didn't co-operate, they must be trying to hide something.  Reading between the lines it seems that he was given the opportunity to confess or put his contra argument; decided not to and so they've brought the action.  

I'm willing to be corrected!  

1 to 20 of 52 messages
Previously bookmarked threads are now visible in "Followed Threads". You can also manage notifications on these threads from the "Forum Settings" section of your profile settings page to prevent being sent an email when a reply is made.
Forum Jump  

RW Forums