Lance Armstrong vs. USADA
Discussion
London424 said:
Interesting interview with Lance and O'Reilly meeting up.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/othersports/artic...
Finally we are getting into what is the root cause of the issue hopefully all will be judged accordingly. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/othersports/artic...
So it looks like Armstrong is determined to throw as many people under the bus as possible. I bet Fat Pat will be sweating b
ks over the coming weeks. As far as I'm aware, Hein Verbruggen is on the board of the IOC, quite possibly an organisation more corrupt than the UCI. I guess he must feel very at home there. Bent officialdom, bent riders, bent sport.
ks over the coming weeks. As far as I'm aware, Hein Verbruggen is on the board of the IOC, quite possibly an organisation more corrupt than the UCI. I guess he must feel very at home there. Bent officialdom, bent riders, bent sport.mcelliott said:
So it looks like Armstrong is determined to throw as many people under the bus as possible. I bet Fat Pat will be sweating bks over the coming weeks. As far as I'm aware, Hein Verbruggen is on the board of the IOC, quite possibly an organisation more corrupt than the UCI. I guess he must feel very at home there. Bent officialdom, bent riders, bent sport.
I know nothing about this case: I've never read nothing.ks over the coming weeks. As far as I'm aware, Hein Verbruggen is on the board of the IOC, quite possibly an organisation more corrupt than the UCI. I guess he must feel very at home there. Bent officialdom, bent riders, bent sport.However, I have known circumstances where people have known about skeletons in cupboards and have used this to gain an advantage.
The thought that goes through my mind is that LA is an intelligent sort of chap and might well feel that throwing as many people as possible under the bus is a wasteful exercise. Much better, one might think, to throw one person under the bus when applying for leniency.
As I say, I have no source of information here but that was the first thought that went though my mind when I heard of his story about the IOC chappy.
But then, I'm probably just suspicious of his motive.
I like many bought into the post Cancer miracle but I also bought into the Tommy Simpson story. Cycling is such a demanding sport and they race so many times in a year with today's 12 month calendar meaning no real winter break.
that aside cheating is what it is and professional sport in general seems to have a problem with cheating not just cycling.
I think Lance will have plenty of stories to tell should they try to burn him.
that aside cheating is what it is and professional sport in general seems to have a problem with cheating not just cycling.
I think Lance will have plenty of stories to tell should they try to burn him.
Is anything Lnace says really going to be a surprise though? He may "out" a few more riders but then as we have pretty much established that the entire peloton (bar Moncoutie and Bassons?) were doping through that period, we'll all just roll our eyes and then get back to life.
Lance will say that Verbruggen and McQuiad knew all about it, probably encouraged it and didnt do a thing to stop it, well again we know that already so thats no big surprise. He'll try to drop Vaughters in it, how come he gets away with it, has the audacity to form a team of ex-dopers and then be allowed back into the sport whilst Lance sits there in Austin on his own as a social pariah?
Ironman and the ITU have said he's not welcome there so he has no life if he cant weasel his way back into pro cycling.
If he starts knifing people like Betsy Andreau it could get messy....
Lance will say that Verbruggen and McQuiad knew all about it, probably encouraged it and didnt do a thing to stop it, well again we know that already so thats no big surprise. He'll try to drop Vaughters in it, how come he gets away with it, has the audacity to form a team of ex-dopers and then be allowed back into the sport whilst Lance sits there in Austin on his own as a social pariah?
Ironman and the ITU have said he's not welcome there so he has no life if he cant weasel his way back into pro cycling.
If he starts knifing people like Betsy Andreau it could get messy....
How can one sporting body ban an individual for life from other sports?
Let's say he took up wrestling or boxing what is the ban period for doping?or let's say he somehow wanted to compete in the 100m sprint Dwayne Chambers and others show that you do not get lifetime bans for drugs
They do not have the power to give lifetime anans from any sporting competition.
Heck he could turn into a rally driver or circuit racing driver.
Let's say he took up wrestling or boxing what is the ban period for doping?or let's say he somehow wanted to compete in the 100m sprint Dwayne Chambers and others show that you do not get lifetime bans for drugs
They do not have the power to give lifetime anans from any sporting competition.
Heck he could turn into a rally driver or circuit racing driver.
Lance was a triathlete before he became a pro cyclist, and Ironman wouldn't want a tainted athlete in their ranks... Besides, cycling is a fairly major part of Triathlon!
As for the other sports, I can imagine UCI covers most cycling bases, and I can't see him doing many other sports to a high level.
As for the other sports, I can imagine UCI covers most cycling bases, and I can't see him doing many other sports to a high level.
Welshbeef said:
How can one sporting body ban an individual for life from other sports?
It's not the sporting body that have banned him from Ironman, it's WADA. As the WTC (who run the Ironman brand) are signed up to WADA, any ban imposed on an athlete by WADA stands in any sport falling under their umbrella. Fourmotion said:
It's not the sporting body that have banned him from Ironman, it's WADA. As the WTC (who run the Ironman brand) are signed up to WADA, any ban imposed on an athlete by WADA stands in any sport falling under their umbrella.
Fair enough. As I've said personally I don't care one but about how good or bad his situation is its utterly irrelevant to me however from a principle perspective I'd want equal treatment for the same crime to be applied if not why not.
He may be the worlds biggest w
ker and utterly nasty person who has really harmed people's careers - sue him in court rightly. But to hang him out to dry from what I can see on par with Peados no way -
Welshbeef said:
Fair enough.
As I've said personally I don't care one but about how good or bad his situation is its utterly irrelevant to me however from a principle perspective I'd want equal treatment for the same crime to be applied if not why not.
He may be the worlds biggest wker and utterly nasty person who has really harmed people's careers - sue him in court rightly.
But to hang him out to dry from what I can see on par with Peados no way -
The penalty is consistent. He must come clean and name names to be given a similar penalty to the other cyclists, but even then they will have to take into account the fact that he accused everyone else of telling lies, denying he'd taken drugs even when the evidence was overwhelming. Further, he attacked the sporting body. I'm pretty sure that's rather silly.As I've said personally I don't care one but about how good or bad his situation is its utterly irrelevant to me however from a principle perspective I'd want equal treatment for the same crime to be applied if not why not.
He may be the worlds biggest w
ker and utterly nasty person who has really harmed people's careers - sue him in court rightly. But to hang him out to dry from what I can see on par with Peados no way -
His offences are a step above the other recent riders who've admitted drug taking/performance enhancing.
He knew the risk when he took on the ADA and it didn't pay off. He must be aware of the course of action he must take to get the lifetime ban lifted.
His recent out of court settlement tends to suggest that he's in damage limitation mode. One wonders what his tactics will be for the US PO.
Regardless of one's personal preferences, he's been punished according to the normal criteria in such cases. Had he not been I feel sure a judicial review, or whatever, would have been his first option.
Quite apart from that, drug taking gives a performance boost that lasts after the drugs leave the system. We've seen enough athletes take a sabbatical and then return much better at what they do. Only other regular drugs abusers could compete with Armstrong on a level playing field. So not a small group to choose from.
Derek Smith said:
The penalty is consistent. He must come clean and name names to be given a similar penalty to the other cyclists, but even then they will have to take into account the fact that he accused everyone else of telling lies, denying he'd taken drugs even when the evidence was overwhelming. Further, he attacked the sporting body. I'm pretty sure that's rather silly.
His offences are a step above the other recent riders who've admitted drug taking/performance enhancing.
He knew the risk when he took on the ADA and it didn't pay off. He must be aware of the course of action he must take to get the lifetime ban lifted.
His recent out of court settlement tends to suggest that he's in damage limitation mode. One wonders what his tactics will be for the US PO.
Regardless of one's personal preferences, he's been punished according to the normal criteria in such cases. Had he not been I feel sure a judicial review, or whatever, would have been his first option.
Quite apart from that, drug taking gives a performance boost that lasts after the drugs leave the system. We've seen enough athletes take a sabbatical and then return much better at what they do. Only other regular drugs abusers could compete with Armstrong on a level playing field. So not a small group to choose from.
Hypothetically what happens if your unluckily enough to be the last one to speak out by a matter of a phone call you get lifetime ban the chap who called seconds before he gets 3-6months..His offences are a step above the other recent riders who've admitted drug taking/performance enhancing.
He knew the risk when he took on the ADA and it didn't pay off. He must be aware of the course of action he must take to get the lifetime ban lifted.
His recent out of court settlement tends to suggest that he's in damage limitation mode. One wonders what his tactics will be for the US PO.
Regardless of one's personal preferences, he's been punished according to the normal criteria in such cases. Had he not been I feel sure a judicial review, or whatever, would have been his first option.
Quite apart from that, drug taking gives a performance boost that lasts after the drugs leave the system. We've seen enough athletes take a sabbatical and then return much better at what they do. Only other regular drugs abusers could compete with Armstrong on a level playing field. So not a small group to choose from.
US PO well either hey were complicit in it or not but the buck sits with the owners they need to pay big time too. When will they be sued ?
Remember Honda cheating the drivers Button and another stripped of points and from racing for the year plus huge fine for the team. Diabolical cheating but everyone involved with it punished weather they knew about it or not. Why not same for PO US or any other riding team? The teams in an untenable position and has benefitted commercially from it so they need to be fined heavily and also challenged how they allowed that to happen under their watch
Its not as simple as LA being the last to put his hands up to it and in doing so gets the lifetime ban though is it. He had every opportunity to 'fess up and avoid all that. He chose to continue his lies in the hope it would all work out for him. It didn't.
They take into account the fact you admit to it etc etc when dishing out the bans, its only realistic that refusing to co-operate and being totally obstructive of the process was also taken into account when LA was given his ban. I can't see how LA or anyone here for that matter thinks he's been treated unfairly. The punishment totally fits the crime.
Using banned substances, coercing others to use them, back dating prescriptions to cover up the use of banned substances, premeditated organised transfusions and EPO use in which LA most certainly led the way. Lifetime ban seems reasonable to me. The fact hes a sociopath doesn't even need to be taken into account when justifying it IMO.
Its not LA being hard done by, but I think there are possibly some who got off a bit lightly though.
They take into account the fact you admit to it etc etc when dishing out the bans, its only realistic that refusing to co-operate and being totally obstructive of the process was also taken into account when LA was given his ban. I can't see how LA or anyone here for that matter thinks he's been treated unfairly. The punishment totally fits the crime.
Using banned substances, coercing others to use them, back dating prescriptions to cover up the use of banned substances, premeditated organised transfusions and EPO use in which LA most certainly led the way. Lifetime ban seems reasonable to me. The fact hes a sociopath doesn't even need to be taken into account when justifying it IMO.
Its not LA being hard done by, but I think there are possibly some who got off a bit lightly though.
Welshbeef said:
Hypothetically what happens if your unluckily enough to be the last one to speak out by a matter of a phone call you get lifetime ban the chap who called seconds before he gets 3-6months..
US PO well either hey were complicit in it or not but the buck sits with the owners they need to pay big time too. When will they be sued ?
Remember Honda cheating the drivers Button and another stripped of points and from racing for the year plus huge fine for the team. Diabolical cheating but everyone involved with it punished weather they knew about it or not. Why not same for PO US or any other riding team? The teams in an untenable position and has benefited commercially from it so they need to be fined heavily and also challenged how they allowed that to happen under their watch
Do you mean the McLaren fine after Ferrari employee Stepney took information and touted it up the pit lane?US PO well either hey were complicit in it or not but the buck sits with the owners they need to pay big time too. When will they be sued ?
Remember Honda cheating the drivers Button and another stripped of points and from racing for the year plus huge fine for the team. Diabolical cheating but everyone involved with it punished weather they knew about it or not. Why not same for PO US or any other riding team? The teams in an untenable position and has benefited commercially from it so they need to be fined heavily and also challenged how they allowed that to happen under their watch
I do not think that can be used as an example of fair play or reasonable punishment. The biggest difference is that McL cooperated with the authorities all the way through.
It is right to say that the various sponsors benefited from LA's drug taking although they did have to pay for it. And at a rate that did not take into account the fact that he, not to mention the team, was cheating. The sponsors have no obligation, nor ability, to check the procedures and processes of the teams. Prove that they knew and all sorts of problems arise.
From what I can understand the punishment is reasonable, whatever the discipline (one can't use the Mosley dominated F1 period as an example of probity.) One of the tests is whether the offender is likely to reoffend. If LA denies having done anything wrong and continues to argue then the implication is that he has not learnt his lesson and might do something similar in the future.
I accept that those who 'confess all' and prostrate themselves are probably doing so under advice from a legal team, but that's what the officials want.
LA hasn't complied, the implication being that he sees himself as somehow better than the rest and able to set his own rules.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula...
No not Mclaren BAR Honda see link above deliberate cheating that had been engineered into the car - very very naughty rightly banned
No not Mclaren BAR Honda see link above deliberate cheating that had been engineered into the car - very very naughty rightly banned
Welshbeef said:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula...
No not Mclaren BAR Honda see link above deliberate cheating that had been engineered into the car - very very naughty rightly banned
Right. Got that. But I think my point still stands about not using Mosely's period in F1 as any form of probity. No not Mclaren BAR Honda see link above deliberate cheating that had been engineered into the car - very very naughty rightly banned
I've been involved in discipline proceedings as subject, witness and board and the one thing that is demanded at the end of the day is the acceptance of wrong doing. It doesn't have to be true of course, just documented.
The example of the Stepney case is an exception, where the letter to the FIA from McL said that virtually everything the FIA had accused them of was wrong but they did accept a couple of points and this allowed Mosley to let it go, although with a certain degree of loss of face.
All LA has to do is accept the evidence, say sorry (Winfrey doesn't count) and then he can appeal against the penalty.
I can see his problem. If he does say 'I was the biggest drugs cheat ever in cycling' then any OOC settlements in cases for damages from sponsors and those whom he harmed are going to be considerably higher.
Despite the thrill of watching him at the time, the realisation of the degree of cheating means that I have no sympathy for him. I can still bring to mind a number of times when he came back from the dead on a climb. I was with a group of mates watching him once on TV when we all applauded. The memory is now funny. But I do feel a bit along the lines of: What did you expect?
IroningMan said:
Did what?
Read David Millar to get a sense of whether the pressure on Armstrong's team-mates to use PEDs was any different to the norm at the time.
He's talking about Omerta.Read David Millar to get a sense of whether the pressure on Armstrong's team-mates to use PEDs was any different to the norm at the time.
In other news. Former Ironman World Champ Chris McCormack is currently trying to organise racing Lance at Iron distance. I can think of nothing worse! More LA apologist s
te! It's all designed to try and redeem Lance in the public (predominately American) eye. He's slowly finding out that being banned is not as bad as being forgotten. It's driving him nuts! And if it goes ahead McCormack will have sunk even lower in my opinions! 
Gassing Station | Sports | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff