I can't seem to muster up any outrage one way or another for a guy that rode a bike.
GL
Observe: rough week for the surname--Lance stripped of awards, Neil dies two days later.
"Rounding 3rd and heading for home, good night everybody"
If this had gone far enough in court, there would've been plenty of people to say Armstrong is guilty. Then there'd be plenty of people with form of evidence or another to back it up (even if it's just a witness testimony). By quitting now, he never has to admit guilt, and his name won't be dragged through the mud. Even if he had won the lawsuit, there still would have been plenty of skeptics out there. Next thing you know, the witnesses are writing books about him and making a bunch of money by saying they saw him dope. This really is his best option. What strikes me as funny is that there are a lot more people saying "he wasn't caught" instead of "he didn't dope". I think it says a lot about our culture.
Get MLBtraderumors Reds updates on Facebook.
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Reds-R...33794710005587
http://i.imgur.com/1bCKpaH.jpg
This is analogous the whole HOF debate. No one is sending Armstrong to jail. They are simply stripping him of honors/privileges which -after analyzing evidence- they decided that he doesn't deserve.
The courts acquitted the Chicago 8. Judge Landis banned them anyway. Good for him and good the cycling authorities.
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals and you know it."
http://dalmady.blogspot.com
Yes, that's what I'm saying. I think in order to sanction someone, you must catch him. I'd hate to think you could be found guilty of speeding if ten folks testified that they saw you going over the speed limit. I understand that sports has a different burden than law in that they can police themselves but I think they're going too far here
I agree with Sea Ray here. Why are they wasting time and money on testing someone 500 times if it's completely discounted because 10 people said "I think I saw him do it."
Whether it's Lance Armstrong or anyone else, I don't understand the point/role of the testing process if it can be completely ignored.
"The players make the manager, it's never the other way." - Sparky Anderson
I don't think it's ignored. It's supplemented because there is verifiable evidence that the test could have been cheated.
No test is taken as an absolute standard, especially if there's evidence someone cheated the test.
And again, Armstrong was (in theory) presumed innocent and was free to challenge the evidence given by those who accused im. He is choosing not to challenge the assertions and because he's not challenging the evidence provided against him, he's found guilty.
I think the "presumed innocent" part is where you're wrong. In a presumed-innocent scenario, the accusers have to prove they're telling the truth. From everything I've read, the USADA accepted the accusations at face value and put the burden on Armstrong to prove the accusers were lying. And if all the passed drug tests aren't good enough, then what could possibly be?
A lot of us have hit this scenario at some point in life, even if it's a six-year-old being tattled on for spitwad-throwing, not saying I ever did such a thing... there's a dispute, the authority figure believes someone else over you, and short of inventing time travel so you can take them back to the time and place of the incident, there's nothing you can do about it.
To paraphrase an article I read, a drug test could lie but people definitely do lie.
Having said all that, I'm not proclaiming Armstrong innocent -- for him to dominate a sport while being the only clean one in the lead pack strains credulity -- but just taking a position on the process.
Last edited by IslandRed; 08-28-2012 at 04:07 PM. Reason: Typo
Reading comprehension is not just an ability, it's a choice
At the same time, if he cheated, then who won those races? If everyone racing in the races cheated, then wasn't it a level playing field? And if it was a level playing field with all of the cyclists cheating, Armstrong still blew away the competition, so who was cheated?
My dad got to enjoy 3 Reds World Championships by the time he was my age. So far, I've only gotten to enjoy one. Step it up Redlegs!
delayed double post after I came back to the website
My dad got to enjoy 3 Reds World Championships by the time he was my age. So far, I've only gotten to enjoy one. Step it up Redlegs!
"Hey...Dad. Wanna Have A Catch?" Kevin Costner in "Field Of Dreams."
From reddit: if officials awarded Lance Armstrong's 2005 Tour De France title to the next fastest finisher who has never been linked to doping, they'd have to give it to the 23rd place finisher.
Get MLBtraderumors Reds updates on Facebook.
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Reds-R...33794710005587
http://i.imgur.com/1bCKpaH.jpg
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |