Lance folds on drug charges

41 to 60 of 318 messages
24/08/2012 at 17:00

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/lance-armstrong-wont-fight-usada-charges

Article gives some of the arguments about who has the rights to do what.

24/08/2012 at 17:19

Stripping Armstrong of TDF titles is just a load of cac. What's the point apart from sticking one on a guy who's happened to make millions of dollars riding a bike. You may as well say history never happened. 

I've had an idea! lets get a picture of someone burning a copy of Armstrongs book 'its not about the bike'.  In the words of Hugh Porter, "Lance Armstrong is on fire!!!".

24/08/2012 at 17:32

As has already been said elsewhere, if Lance is stripped of his wins I would like to see the titles unassigned which offers a strong statement while affording (perhaps) a modicum of closure for the time period of the two speed peleton.

24/08/2012 at 17:44

from the UCI:

"The UCI will now await the “reasoned decision” which the USADA must issue as the next step in its anti-doping case against Lance Armstrong. Only then will the international federation have a further comment on the case, it said.

In a statement issued Friday afternoon, the UCI said that it noted Armstrong's decision not to go to arbitration, and also that USADA is reported to have said it will strip Armstrong of his results since 1998 and give him a lifetime ban.

The UCI cited the World Anti Doping Code article which “states that where no hearing occurs the Anti-Doping Organisation with results management responsibility shall submit to the parties concerned (Mr Armstrong, WADA and UCI) a reasoned decision explaining the action taken.”

It went on to say that it “expects that it will issue a reasoned decision in accordance with Article 8.3 of the Code."

so if the UCI don't like what USADA says - and bearing in mind that UCI were to an extent backing LA in his case against them - then expect the CAS to come into play.

it ain't over yet

24/08/2012 at 17:46

So onwards to CAS?

Should be nicely cleared up circa 2023.....

24/08/2012 at 17:56

2ps on this :

- I think it's silly to trust LA's former teammates as base for accusation.

- Barne Rijs admitted doping in 1996 and he is still declared the winner.

- Is Jan Ulrih, who is at least "not very clean" going to be declared winner of 3 tours?

Ref. I heard that Cavendish and Wiggins, the Sky team trained in the Teide mountain in the canaries where no bio-passport test can be taken. Not saying they are not clean but they could do something naughty if the wanted.

24/08/2012 at 18:42

Interesting interview this evening on Radio 4 with the former Doping Chief of TdF.  He stated that only UCI can 'strip' him.  Pretty much poo pooed everything that USADA have said and done.  

Going to turn into a big battle between USADA and UCI from the sounds of it ...

24/08/2012 at 20:17

I've come to the conclusion that if they throw out all those that partook of the substances they would have to give the titles to the bloke driving the Autobus

cougie    pirate
24/08/2012 at 22:22
Jose - why do you say that about the canaries ?
TR
24/08/2012 at 23:00

I'm not sure of the full extent of what his cancer battle did to his body, but I used to wonder given Lance's battle with Testicular cancer if he had to take snythetic Testosterone just to be "male ", a guy I work with has to, which happens if someone cant produce his own anymore. I find it strange that this never gets mentioned, and if he does have to then how would they distinguish between what would be legal or illegal.

cougie    pirate
24/08/2012 at 23:10
That wouldn't be allowed. Boardman had a similar problem - but you can't take artificial testosterone even if your natural levels are low. Boardman retired - partly because of that.
The Silent Assassin    pirate
28/09/2012 at 14:44

And so it starts again

The UCI have expressed concerned that they still haven't seem the papers, the USADA say they are still "gathering evidence"

How can they strip Lance of his title when they are still "gathering evidence"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/19749763

 

28/09/2012 at 14:57

USADA can't strip him of his medals, can they?

cougie    pirate
28/09/2012 at 15:39
No they can't - the uci has to based on the evidence from USADA.
Lee the Pea    pirate
28/09/2012 at 15:51
The Silent Assassin wrote (see)

And so it starts again

The UCI have expressed concerned that they still haven't seem the papers, the USADA say they are still "gathering evidence"

How can they strip Lance of his title when they are still "gathering evidence"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/19749763

 

I was just thinking the other day that no evidence was suddenly produced after Lance stopped contesting.  Funny that......  The whole thing is a shambles. The longer they take to produce this 'evidence' the less likely it seems that there is anything concrete

30/09/2012 at 09:07

I don' t know what to think but if cheating is gaining an unfair advantage over fellow competitors via whatever means and consensus seems to be that doping was rife in professional cycling at the time then even if he did dope he wasn't getting an unfair advantage at the time - not saying its right just he was competing on an even playing field. 

30/09/2012 at 18:57

UCI dont seem to be an independent party in this. They seem to have a foot quite firmly in one lucrative camp.
Latest news looks like UCI positioning themselves in a PR war.

http://www.cyclesportmag.com/news-and-comment/comment-i-support-paul-kimmage/

citizen 146    pirate
01/10/2012 at 17:02

maddy, don't think they were all doing it , at least 5% would have been clean and pretty angry at the back of the peleton, the problem is it is a team sport and you keep your head down even if you are clean just to have a job as a pro

flyaway    pirate
02/10/2012 at 08:51

Maddy - part of the problem is that even if the entire peloton dopes, it DOESN'T make it a level playing field. Different physiologies respond differently to different "flavors" of doping, so some people can get more of a benefit. For example, if you can boost "Measureable outcome x" (be that PCV, power output, whatever you want to measure that results in you being stronger/faster) by 5%, then the higher your starting values for X, the higher the level of "boosted-X". If you naturally have a pretty low PCV/ Hct, you can take more EPO/blood and end up with a bigger improvement, that someone who has an already high PCV, therefore ending up with a bigger gain. In addition, it comes down to who is willing to go furthest into the danger zone - if drug Y's effect increases in direct proportion to the amount you take, along with the risky side effects, Athlete A might be willing to take more risks (by taking more drug) than Athlete B, who is a bit more wary.If you said "Previously illegal substances e, f, and g are now allowed, but only up to z kg/bwt cos after that there is a high risk of death", you'd get people taking z+1 kg/bwt, because that would give them a tiny potential advantage.

So the playing field, even if "everyone dopes", is far from even.

02/10/2012 at 09:05
Forget the science. Forget whether a certain phrase is correct. No good will come from raking up the past in a sport which we know was corrupt. In the same way that referees were corrupt in football in the past. We should let Real Madrid etc keep their trophies and Lance keep his titles and us keep our heroes. They should be focusing on the present and how to keep cycling clean and draw a line under the past.
Edited: 02/10/2012 at 09:05
41 to 60 of 318 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 competitions

RW Forums