Lance Armstrong to be stripped of Tour de France titles and banned from cycling

[kaldaniels]

So what does the evidence say? I don't know who to believe...though I see most believe he doped.

[WMR]

What actual hard evidence do they have that he doped?

Seems like a sham to strip him based on the case they haven't been able to prove.

Sort of respect Lance for refusing to play their game.

[dougdirt]

There are multiple (I heard earlier that it was 10) eye witnesses who claim to have seen him taking things.

[bucksfan2]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

There are multiple (I heard earlier that it was 10) eye witnesses who claim to have seen him taking things.

I wonder how many of those witnesses were dopers themselves? I also wonder how many of those eye witnesses held a grudge against Lance?

Not saying Lance didn't dope, just find it odd that 7 years after the fact the US doping agency is trying to prove Lance doped.

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by bucksfan2

I wonder how many of those witnesses were dopers themselves? I also wonder how many of those eye witnesses held a grudge against Lance?

Not saying Lance didn't dope, just find it odd that 7 years after the fact the US doping agency is trying to prove Lance doped.

They have been trying to prove it for a long time. They are just now getting people to talk.

I also don't think you get that many people all willing to blatantly lie over a grudge.

[NJReds]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

There are multiple (I heard earlier that it was 10) eye witnesses who claim to have seen him taking things.

And hundreds of random tests that say he has not.


What if baseball just banned every player mentioned in Jose Canseco's book for life without ever testing them?


Just to be clear, I'm not a fan of cycling, which seems to be overrun by cheats. And for Armstrong do be so dominant against a bunch of other cheats, logic says that he had to be doing something himself. But it does seem that there was a concerted effort to get Lance at any cost.

[dougdirt]

I am not saying it was right NJ, just that it was the evidence they had. And it is different than Canseco's book, where only one person was tossing things around. The USADA reportedly has 10 different people who have said they have first hand knowledge that Lance was doping.

[NJReds]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

I am not saying it was right NJ, just that it was the evidence they had. And it is different than Canseco's book, where only one person was tossing things around. The USADA reportedly has 10 different people who have said they have first hand knowledge that Lance was doping.

True. They obviously had enough evidence to have Lance bail on defending himself.

But I still think they may have an issue with their testing if they couldn't catch him for a decade.

[Hoosier Red]

Originally Posted by bucksfan2

I wonder how many of those witnesses were dopers themselves? I also wonder how many of those eye witnesses held a grudge against Lance?

This is an argument Clemens/Bonds/Rose etc all tried for their various alleged transgressions. I've never understood how someone could have so many people with such axes to grind that they'd be willing to lie in court just to get him.

Again, it doesn't make him guilty, but I generally find the defense weak.

[jojo]

Originally Posted by fearofpopvol1

http://espn.go.com/olympics/cycling/...cycling-career

Thoughts??

I think it should be proven that he cheated before he is penalized for cheating.

The USADA has managed to make themselves look worse than the athletes they want to demonize.

There needs to be strong anti-doping measures and stiff penalties for using PEDS, but first and foremost there needs to be fairness.

[jojo]

Originally Posted by Hoosier Red

This is an argument Clemens/Bonds/Rose etc all tried for their various alleged transgressions. I've never understood how someone could have so many people with such axes to grind that they'd be willing to lie in court just to get him.

Again, it doesn't make him guilty, but I generally find the defense weak.

Bonds wasn't actually convicted of perjury based upon the testimony of others. The only thing the federal government was able to win was one count where they argued that he answered a question by giving a response that was too long therefore he was trying to be misleading.

The Bonds trial was a huge egg on the face of those who wanted jurisprudence to punish PEDs users.

[jojo]

Originally Posted by WMR

What actual hard evidence do they have that he doped?

Seems like a sham to strip him based on the case they haven't been able to prove.

Sort of respect Lance for refusing to play their game.

It seems vindictive to me.

[jojo]

Here's a quote from the judge who ruled on LA's attempt to block the USADA:

U.S. District Judge Sam Sparks acknowledged "the appearance of a conflict on the part of both organizations creates doubt the charges against Armstrong would receive fair consideration in either forum." But that doesn't mean federal courts should intervene, the judge said, adding that "these matters should be resolved internally, by the parties most affected. "If these bodies wish to damage the image of their sport through bitter infighting, they will have to do so without the involvement of the United States courts," Sparks said.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/23/sport/...html?hpt=hp_c1

Ouch USADA. Ouch.

[bucksfan2]

Originally Posted by Hoosier Red

This is an argument Clemens/Bonds/Rose etc all tried for their various alleged transgressions. I've never understood how someone could have so many people with such axes to grind that they'd be willing to lie in court just to get him.

Again, it doesn't make him guilty, but I generally find the defense weak.

The thing that was different with Lance than Clemens and Bonds is the 500 clean test that Armstrong has to his credit. Rose was a liar and lied for a number of years even though the evidence supported his gambling problem. Lance very well may have cheated on the drug test. Lord knows there are scientist out there on a daily basis trying to beat drug tests.

I can see the French Doping agency going after Lance. The Tour happens in France and Armstrong dominating that event. I just don't know why the USADA would make such a concerted effort in order to bring Lance down. What I would like to hear is the eyewitness evidence from 15 years ago.

To me at the end of the day Lance Armstrong and his livestrong foundation has raised over $400M to beat cancer. He used his place of stature to do a tremendous amount of good in society. For that I applaud him.

[Hoosier Red]

Originally Posted by bucksfan2

The thing that was different with Lance than Clemens and Bonds is the 500 clean test that Armstrong has to his credit. Rose was a liar and lied for a number of years even though the evidence supported his gambling problem. Lance very well may have cheated on the drug test. Lord knows there are scientist out there on a daily basis trying to beat drug tests.

I can see the French Doping agency going after Lance. The Tour happens in France and Armstrong dominating that event. I just don't know why the USADA would make such a concerted effort in order to bring Lance down. What I would like to hear is the eyewitness evidence from 15 years ago.

To me at the end of the day Lance Armstrong and his livestrong foundation has raised over $400M to beat cancer. He used his place of stature to do a tremendous amount of good in society. For that I applaud him.

Because he's a US athlete representing the United States. The USADA has a responsibility to protect the clean US athletes who might otherwise be tempted to cheat if a)they know they have the means to cover it up and b) they feel it's necessary to cheat in order to win.

Assume for a moment that he's guilty. Would you feel like the USADA should turn a blind eye to his guilt because after all, he's an American and a great guy, and look how much money he's raised for cancer.

His comeback has been inspiring and the money he has raised to fight cancer is a real accomplishment. But those have nothing to do with whether or not he cheated the system.

Passing the drug tests doesn't really matter if he had a way of beating the system which is what was alleged.

I think in general, if you pass a drug test, absent any other information, you're presumed clean. But I don't think anyone would assume that someone is clean just because they pass a drug test. Many people who were later caught cheating had passed hundreds of drug tests as well, so it's certainly not an absolute method of proof.