Lance Armstrong gets life ban,loses 7 TDF,confesses he doped
Comments
-
Richmond Racer wrote:sorry, mfin, non comprende?
WADA response to all this I meant http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/oct/23/lance-armstrong-appeal-usada-uci0 -
mfin wrote:Richmond Racer wrote:sorry, mfin, non comprende?
WADA response to all this I meant http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/oct/23/lance-armstrong-appeal-usada-uciIn Geneva, McQuaid said the UCI recognised the Usada ruling and that Lance Armstrong now "had no place in cycling". But in a document published later the same day on the UCI's website, and personally signed by McQuaid, he delivered a different message.In the four-page "Decision" document, however, McQuaid refers to the Usada report's "overstated language", "incorrect and incomplete statements", and questions whether Usada had a sufficient "degree of detachment" to make a disciplinary judgment.McQuaid suggested that Armstrong "could have contested not only the allegations that Usada made against him but also the jurisdiction of Usada". According to McQuaid, the UCI should have been given Usada's case file for the UCI to decide on what action to pursue.Perhaps the most serious of McQuaid's claims is that Usada deprived Armstrong of the benefit of an eight-year statute of limitations under Wada's Code. Theoretically, this would rule out of court all Usada's evidence of doping violations prior to 2004, the year of Armstrong's penultimate Tour de France victory. McQuaid goes on to note that this statute of limitations could have formed the basis for a partial defence if Armstrong had accepted a Cas hearing on his case. The UCI president adds that while the UCI itself would not appeal to Cas on the basis of this claimed infringement of the statute, Wada should, or could, in his view, make such an appeal for the sake of enforcing compliance. In short, the UCI advises Wada that it has a responsibility to appeal against Usada's ruling against Armstrong's doping operation.0 -
mfin, to answer, here you go
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/wada-te ... bat-doping
specifically:
'According to Fahey, the late arrival of the WADA code in 2004, years into the EPO doping epidemic, "is not a valid excuse for an organization failing to act on evidence of widespread doping", and supported the USADA's decision to pursue charges beyond the Statute of Limitations, saying that the statute is not an excuse to fail to investigate doping that went on more than eight years ago.'0 -
Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0
-
If Armstrong had requested arbitration and gone through the process, he would've kept 5 Tour wins.
But he didn't, so the SoL falls away.Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
all that WADA's statement was missing at the end was 'STFU McQuaid'0
-
Ah, cheers guys. That bit I had missed, so much to keep up on.
I'm surprised it's so concise, but it knocks down the Pat comments quite well.
It would be nice to hear more comment from them on some of the specifics Pat came out with though, but I suppose its unnecessary.0 -
OCDuPalais wrote:Does anyone with a legal background - or a detailed knowledge of the Puerto case - know of any reason why many Spanish cyclists are the only people right now (other than Ferrari) who are still showing support for Armstrong and seeming to condemn the process that has indicted him?
Or can it be explained away as simply a "cultural difference"?
I dunno if I mentioned it before but I was watching a programme about Maradona once and there was a bit where they discussed the fact that in South America it is very much part of the game to pull the wool over the eyes of the officials. Hence Maradona's 'hand of god' was not viewed as anything other than a triumphant moment of inspiration. It's just as much 'part of the game' as a piece of skill or some tactical genius. I suspect that many people around the world just aren't bothered about doping. It's accepted as part of the game. Britain is somewhat different in our disgust at cheating and it's implications but not everyone shares that view. I find it hard to get my head around but there certainly is a cultural difference where this stuff is concerned. Some of the quotes coming out of Spain are laughable but I don't know if they're concerned at all.0 -
http://sports.nationalpost.com/2012/10/ ... ever-give/
Nice little piece. "The apology Lance Armstrong will never give".
I reckon if Armstrong picked out some of those paragraphs, he could get a lot of old fans back on board. Those fans who are looking for an excuse to get back on board anyway.0 -
There's no doubt he could get a lot of respect back from ex-fans and from people who aren't fans/have never been fans, if he confesses.
But will he? hmmmmm...
Id love to hear the resulting sh1t from Pat's mouth if he did though.0 -
http://blogs.reuters.com/sport/2012/10/24/lance-armstrong/For having misled the world of sport, millions of fans, a generation of cyclists, millions of cancer patients, millions of people who read his two autobiographies and wore the yellow Livestrong band and his very own family, I’d go a step further – he has no place in sport.0
-
Surely the simple reason is that Spanish cycling is rotten to the core.OCDuPalais wrote:Does anyone with a legal background - or a detailed knowledge of the Puerto case - know of any reason why many Spanish cyclists are the only people right now (other than Ferrari) who are still showing support for Armstrong and seeming to condemn the process that has indicted him?
Or can it be explained away as simply a "cultural difference"?0 -
LeMond bitchslaps McQuaid - http://velonews.competitor.com/2012/10/ ... aid_262523We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
- @ddraver0 -
Heavymental wrote:OCDuPalais wrote:Does anyone with a legal background - or a detailed knowledge of the Puerto case - know of any reason why many Spanish cyclists are the only people right now (other than Ferrari) who are still showing support for Armstrong and seeming to condemn the process that has indicted him?
Or can it be explained away as simply a "cultural difference"?
I dunno if I mentioned it before but I was watching a programme about Maradona once and there was a bit where they discussed the fact that in South America it is very much part of the game to pull the wool over the eyes of the officials. Hence Maradona's 'hand of god' was not viewed as anything other than a triumphant moment of inspiration. It's just as much 'part of the game' as a piece of skill or some tactical genius. I suspect that many people around the world just aren't bothered about doping. It's accepted as part of the game. Britain is somewhat different in our disgust at cheating and it's implications but not everyone shares that view. I find it hard to get my head around but there certainly is a cultural difference where this stuff is concerned. Some of the quotes coming out of Spain are laughable but I don't know if they're concerned at all.
I think there is a lot of truth in that.0 -
-
Nick Fitt wrote:Heavymental wrote:OCDuPalais wrote:Does anyone with a legal background - or a detailed knowledge of the Puerto case - know of any reason why many Spanish cyclists are the only people right now (other than Ferrari) who are still showing support for Armstrong and seeming to condemn the process that has indicted him?
Or can it be explained away as simply a "cultural difference"?
I dunno if I mentioned it before but I was watching a programme about Maradona once and there was a bit where they discussed the fact that in South America it is very much part of the game to pull the wool over the eyes of the officials. Hence Maradona's 'hand of god' was not viewed as anything other than a triumphant moment of inspiration. It's just as much 'part of the game' as a piece of skill or some tactical genius. I suspect that many people around the world just aren't bothered about doping. It's accepted as part of the game. Britain is somewhat different in our disgust at cheating and it's implications but not everyone shares that view. I find it hard to get my head around but there certainly is a cultural difference where this stuff is concerned. Some of the quotes coming out of Spain are laughable but I don't know if they're concerned at all.
I think there is a lot of truth in that.
Yes and no. In Britain we just favour more manly forms of cheating. In football, "putting a reducer on him" - going out to kick the s*** out of a player to stop him playing is regarded as a fair tactic, just don't let the ref see you doing it. All sports have written rules and unwritten rules. The unwritten rules can vary widely culturally.Warning No formatter is installed for the format0 -
Thats also very true. I do think though that football is a class case in keeping its dirty washing out of the public eye. In attempting to be clean and fair, cycling has raised itself to a level where it can only be kicked. No-one knows what the outcome of this will be. To me much of it is history repeating itself, systematic doping, omerta, rabobank, all been seen before within the sport and it carried on regardless. The trouble is that LA is a massive phenomena and yet, it seems to me many comments (UCI, riders, teams) are no different than before in 'similar' situations. Its as if they feel things will carry on and as we are all now clean, all will be well. I dont believe that the Spanish are riding cleasn, I also think Sky will be in the shit inside 5 years as they open their doors to 'non BC riders more.
Whatever we think the solution is, however eloquent or angry are our rants on here, the change can only be driven by the top and to me, it doesn't seem the top wants to undertake much change. The UCI is not powerful enough to manage the sport, its too big for the amateurs, it needs someone with the drive of Blatter! Crazy but true.
Sport will never be clean, no sport is clean. Cycling will never, ever be clean, the dirt needs managing quietly and in a controlled fashion. Ugly, wrong, deceitful but true. Its all about perception and at this time, Cycling is unable to command peoples perception. This is what needs to change.0 -
Merckx has lost my respect too.... a bit naive response
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/merckx- ... -armstrong0 -
ddraver wrote:LeMond bitchslaps McQuaid - http://velonews.competitor.com/2012/10/ ... aid_262523
"I want to tell the world of cycling to please join me in telling Pat McQuaid to f##k off and resign,"
Brilliant...0 -
tarzan13 wrote:ddraver wrote:LeMond bitchslaps McQuaid - http://velonews.competitor.com/2012/10/ ... aid_262523
"I want to tell the world of cycling to please join me in telling Pat McQuaid to f##k off and resign,"
Brilliant...
It is pretty special. He'll have to cough up that file of evidence, though.0 -
tarzan13 wrote:Merckx has lost my respect too.... a bit naive response
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/merckx- ... -armstrong
"Lance has been very correct all through his career," Merckx had told La Dernière Heure. "What more can he do? All of the controls that he has done - over 500 since 2000 - have come back negative. Either the controls don't serve any purpose or Armstrong was legit. The whole case is based on witnesses, it's deeply unjust."
:shock:0 -
5Live has a follow up to last week's Peddlars - the Dirty Truth prog, on tonight at 1945
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01nvv550 -
-
Nick Fitt wrote:tarzan13 wrote:Merckx has lost my respect too.... a bit naive response
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/merckx- ... -armstrong
"Lance has been very correct all through his career," Merckx had told La Dernière Heure. "What more can he do? All of the controls that he has done - over 500 since 2000 - have come back negative. Either the controls don't serve any purpose or Armstrong was legit. The whole case is based on witnesses, it's deeply unjust."
:shock:
He obviously hasn't read the file, or UCI response else he would have known it's only about 220 tests in total.0 -
YESStanley222 wrote:How did he pass over 220 tests?
Is the testing system flawed?0 -
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/del-moral-denies-involvement-in-armstrong-doping-case
Yes, that sounds wholly plausible."In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"
@gietvangent0 -
Did Leipheimer, Zabriskie, Hincapie, etc fail a test?Stanley222 wrote:Nick Fitt wrote:tarzan13 wrote:Merckx has lost my respect too.... a bit naive response
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/merckx- ... -armstrong
"Lance has been very correct all through his career," Merckx had told La Dernière Heure. "What more can he do? All of the controls that he has done - over 500 since 2000 - have come back negative. Either the controls don't serve any purpose or Armstrong was legit. The whole case is based on witnesses, it's deeply unjust."
:shock:
He has however got a point surely?!
How did he pass over 220 tests?
Is the testing system flawed?0 -
disgruntledgoat wrote:http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/del-moral-denies-involvement-in-armstrong-doping-case
Yes, that sounds wholly plausible.
sounds like hes being very clever with his wording - He is actually correct in that there were no posititives as a result of his 'work' and that there was no organized team doping, as at the time it was only restricted to 3 or 4 riders.dont knock on death\'s door.....
Ring the bell and leg it...that really pi**es him off....0 -
Stanley222 wrote:Nick Fitt wrote:tarzan13 wrote:Merckx has lost my respect too.... a bit naive response
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/merckx- ... -armstrong
"Lance has been very correct all through his career," Merckx had told La Dernière Heure. "What more can he do? All of the controls that he has done - over 500 since 2000 - have come back negative. Either the controls don't serve any purpose or Armstrong was legit. The whole case is based on witnesses, it's deeply unjust."
:shock:
He has however got a point surely?!
How did he pass over 220 tests?
Is the testing system flawed?
Read both the USADA report and Hamilton's book - all will become very clear, and yes it was very very flawed...dont knock on death\'s door.....
Ring the bell and leg it...that really pi**es him off....0 -
0
