kasperhauser
pfm Member
Did I miss the part where this happened with Armstrong?
Lance Armstrong to lose his TDF titles?
- Thread starter Rack Kit
- Start date
sean99
pfm Member
My unfortunate take away from this is that almost all of the big names have been doping. Armstrong, Contador, Landis, Schleck. Cadel Evans has never been accused, neither has Wiggo, but who knows ... how do we tell for sure if Lance evaded sanction for so long ?
As far as the claims by the anti-doping agencies that fans of the sport want it to be clean I have to question this. For sure, fans don't want fit young riders mysteriously found dead in their hotel rooms (seemed to go through a phase of that) nor do they want a superman winning the GC by 10+ minutes year after year with no real competition. But provided nobody dies in mysterious circumstances and provided the races are reasonably close with multiple possible winners I'm not sure the fans really care about doping. I'm not passing comment on whether we should or should not care, just my observation.
The only way you'll get rid of doping is to remove all of the financial incentives, and have all riders paid the same base salary plus expenses, and very modest prize money for winning. That of course will never happen, and would likely greatly diminish the level of competition.
As far as the claims by the anti-doping agencies that fans of the sport want it to be clean I have to question this. For sure, fans don't want fit young riders mysteriously found dead in their hotel rooms (seemed to go through a phase of that) nor do they want a superman winning the GC by 10+ minutes year after year with no real competition. But provided nobody dies in mysterious circumstances and provided the races are reasonably close with multiple possible winners I'm not sure the fans really care about doping. I'm not passing comment on whether we should or should not care, just my observation.
The only way you'll get rid of doping is to remove all of the financial incentives, and have all riders paid the same base salary plus expenses, and very modest prize money for winning. That of course will never happen, and would likely greatly diminish the level of competition.
vuk
\o/ choose anarchy
PsB
Citizen of Nowhere™
The way I understand it, the UCI is a signatory to the World Anti-Doping Code. As a signatory, they are bound to enforce a WADA decision. USADA is connected to WADA. TDF titles are awarded by Amaury SO and the Olympic medals by the IOC, but I don't see how either could avoid stripping Armstrong of the titles if the UCI or the IOC accepts the WADA decision. If the UCI doesn't accept the decision, it goes to arbitration at the international Court of Arbitration for Sport (yes, there is such a thing).
Paul R
pfm Member
You are confusing the legal situation in France, where doping is illegal, with the sporting jurisdiction for international cycling.
This guy is always worth reading,
http://inrng.com/2012/08/lance-armstrong-quits/#more-10570
Paul
Rack Kit
pfm Member
A bit off topic: Team Rwanda http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-19345732
kasperhauser
pfm Member
No, I don't think I am. At any rate, the link you provided repeats (and seems to agree with) this nugget from John (not the awesome guitar player) Fahey:
Can you imagine that his refusal means something else entirely? I can.
Tigerjones
Bagpuss
To get him in the 'racing' mood, Lance's pre tour sound track was always this -
Last edited by a moderator:
PsB
Citizen of Nowhere™
Seems like a pretty clear summary. The point that this is not just about Armstrong but about a whole system of doctors, directeurs sportifs etc. is important.
kasperhauser
pfm Member
I didn't, and I have been. I will break it down for you, as it appears you mis-read.
I had pointed out that Armstrong feels all the physical evidence available works in his favor. Darren555 drew an analogy between Armstrong and David Millar, claiming Millar behaved exactly the same way, but was then caught red-handed by police in a hotel room. I then tried to highlight the failure of the analogy, by suggesting I don't remember Armstrong having been caught red-handed by police in a hotel room, making the two cases not exactly comparable.
That's all.
Edit: I did google "Lance Armstrong caught red-handed by police in hotel room" but didn't find much. If you can point me to something I've missed, I'll gladly and apologetically retract.
kasperhauser
pfm Member
Armstrong asks: "What is the point of all this testing if, in the end, USADA will not stand by it?"
Have all your years of attention to the story given you any insight into an answer?
gassor
There may be more posts after this.
I believe you can only be convicted in court of law, so their is no conviction as such. He has been found guilty of taking banned substances by his the anti-doping agency which is not part of any legal system. He has refused to contest their findings anymore and thereby accepts his guilt.
"the anti-doping agency said Armstrong's decision not to take the charges against him to arbitration triggers the lifetime ineligibility and erased his results from 1 August 1998."
I'm sure you know all this.
I tend to agree with that school of thinking; you are tested prior, during and after the event. If you pass then that's the end of it. If you have taken drugs that couldn't be identified it's irrelevant, even it surfaced later.
A bit like refereeing a rugby or football match, the decision at the time is the one that stands. But to be honest, I know very little about the subject, haven't followed it closely but sad to see the sport dragged through this.
A bit like refereeing a rugby or football match, the decision at the time is the one that stands. But to be honest, I know very little about the subject, haven't followed it closely but sad to see the sport dragged through this.
Paul R
pfm Member
If this was the case then he wouldn't have walked away.
The analogy is that neither of them failed tests, yet we know for a fact that Millar was doping. So Armstrong cannot rely on the tests to demonstrate he wasn't doping.
FWIW Miller wasn't caught in a hotel room.
The substances and procedures are banned. USADA are standing by the testing, but have other evidence of doping.
Armstrong is dissemblng. Again.
Paul
kasperhauser
pfm Member
Your opinion (rather, Fahey's opinion) is noted.
Circumstantial (and as far as I'm aware, alleged) evidence - testimony bought from admitted cheats with promises of immunity or preferential treatment.
That's good enough for you, clearly - I'll hold out for something better, if you don't mind.
I stand by my original assertion that the situation/event/entire sport is broken. Scrap it in its entirety and move on.
vuk
\o/ choose anarchy
well, you're going to be holding out forever.
btw--i am not saying i know either way. i thought landis was innocent, even though i was really pissed off he won the tour (didn't really like him or those awful green and yellow team jerseys). i want to think armstrong is guilty, but it is impossible for any of to know and i really dislike how a lot of this stuff has been handled. the worst instance was rasmussen thrown out of a tour he was about to win, not because of any hard evidence or failed test, but because a journalist said he saw him in italy earlier in the year, FFS!
vuk.
