Looks like Lance wasn't dealing off the top of the deck.
Dang it ...so disappointing.... even IF cycling 'invented' the art of drug cheating....
Except they've accused him of taking the same substances they caught other people taking with those same tests he passed. This isn't a case of we think he's using something new that we aren't testing for yet. They took it to a grand jury and couldn't get an indictment, the saying that a grand jury will indict a ham sandwich isn't for nothing.
It's a self defeating case, which is why all the other organizations have looked into it and decided nothing was there. If someone didn't have a bee up their ass at the ADA, they'd have done the same.
At least Nike has a brain! http://bottomline.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/08/24/13456962-lance-armstrong-is-still-our-man-nike-says?lite
As to what will really happen that's still quite a bit up in the air. As I mentioned the UCI claims jurisdiction over the cycling world and the ASO is the governing body of the Tour de France itself, both of which feel they should be involved if there's to be any stripping of Tour de France titles.
However while it is true that the USADA does not hold any direct control over what the UCI does it does exert some influence over the UCI which is signatory to the WADA (World Anti-Doping Agency) as is of course the USADA. To add further complication to the matter the WADA has an 8 year statute of limitations which by my calculations would put Lance's Tour de France wins from 1999 to 2004 beyond the statute of limitations and only the 2005 win and 2009 3rd place in jeopardy.
The by laws of the USADA or WADA (I'm not sure which) require that in any action taken without a hearing (as in this case) the USADA needs to supply a "reasoned decision" to all parties involved which in this case would be at least the WADA, the UCI, Lance himself and perhaps the ASO as well.
The UCI's position is that it has no comment on any of these proceedings at least until it receives and has time to digest the "reasoned decision" of the USADA. What it does after that will probably depend upon what's in the "reasoned decision".
In any case this is obviously a topic in which I have a reasonable amount of interest and have been following the discussions going on in various cycling blogs as well as other non cycling related on line discussion and I would characterize most of it as supportive of Lance. In any case my opinion is that this is a witch hunt of some minor nameless bureaucrat at the USADA and casts the USADA in a worse light than it does Lance.
Like most US quangos the USADA has no authority whatsoever. How they can claim to be able to strip someone of titles is unbelievable and a complete embarrassment.
Leave it to the correct international bodies to make any decision, though I suspect they now feel awkward and somewhat irritated by the public actions of the USADA. Perhaps it's the USADA who should have their titles removed...
Guys...this is real simple. Until this committee produces some irrefutable proof of doping. Here is the fact. He crossed the finish line before everyone else in all the events where he was stripped of his medals...which doesn't change the fact that he crossed the line first. And until this committee produces some proof the lack of medals means nothing.
If Nike has pulled the plug he's obviously in the poo big time.
They didn't even pull out on that idiot golfer who couldn't keep it in his pants.
If anyone is left still imagining the sun shines out of his arse....you are in for a big disappointment.
UCI has now pulled the plug.
Armstrong has been written out of the record books.... stripped of all 7 titles.
And a sad thing... for cycling and Armstrong.
I'm far more concerned about the fate of the charity which did so much for cancer victims, and its future.
Despite being a cheat, he is still the best cyclist, because...
Today's logic: Armstrong is guilty of doping. He is also guilty of doping his team mates. Doping is widespread in cycling, therefore...
...if all cyclists are guilty of doping, then they are all equal. So, Armstrong must still be the best. Right?
Don't fuzz with the fuzzball...
The evidence is pretty clear Lance doped.
Unfortunately, given the fact he doped yet no test at the time could detect the dope (it was obviously engineered specifically to defeat the tests), there's no way to know with any degree of confidence who did or did not dope. Heavy investigations went into Lance because he got all the glory from so many championships ... that doesn't mean the #2, #3, #4 guys, etc. didn't dope, but because they didn't get the glory of winning as #1, there hasn't been as much scrutiny on them. Relying on dope tests is an ever-losing game ... the advantage will always go to the dope engineers, as they can always stay one step ahead. I'm betting they have a hand in engineering the tests for dope, so they know exactly how to get around it ... it would be like the manufacturers of Las Vegas anti-cheat devices having a side business in cheating Vegas casinos or anti-malware publishers having a hand in making malware that gets around the anti-malware protection. That's just a hunch, though.
That only means he was the best at doping. Its not a competition of cycling, then, but a pharmaceutical competition.
And I'd bet at least some cyclists don't dope ... they'd be the ones toward the end of the cyclists, the last to cross the finish line.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
