Lance Armstrong

[RichC]

I get where you're coming from with the refusal to fight but it does appear to be a kangaroo court almost in the mold of the Suarez enquiry with the FA and would I continue to fight if I thought I wouldn't get a fair hearing?
Essentially the evidence needs to be made available for me to make a real judgement call - if it's all based on ex team-mates, and team-mates wives who saw him do this or heard him say that I'd find that pretty poor, of course if there is more then fair enough but it should be absolute - either he's guilty or he's not.

I think this will go to the C of A as the UCI & the USADA are differing in opinions at the moment with the tour saying that they want to see the evidence first which is fair enough.

I agree about the stuff in the nineties, to be honest it should stop with the start/end of the Armstrong era that period is and should be investigated but going back before that doesn't really help anyone

[Neil Young]

I don't think he should be stripped of his titles. As Bob said, just have them asterisked.

The Tour never stripped Virenque of his KoM's or Zabel of any of his six Points jerseys.

[RichC]

I didn't realise Virenque had been done for doping as well.

Either way release the evidence and details of any deals that have been cut with the witnessess as well.

[Neil Young]

Ideally, yes.

[RichC]

interesting article on this

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/cycling/lancearmstrong/9496632/Lance-Armstrong-doping-case-by-USADA-needed-to-be-above-criticism-but-too-many-questions-left-unanswered.html

[Neil Young]

interesting article on this

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/oth...nanswered.html

Thanks for posting that.

There are other ways to interpret the FDA dropping their investigation into Armstrong. It was all very suspicious.

Most of the questions could be sorted if Armstrong fought it. So the fact he decided not to could tell us something, bearing in mind how he has always been in the past.

And most of the other issues could be avoided if it was decided not to strip him of his titles.

A lot of people allege the UCI at the time weren't all that interested in uncovering evidence of wrongdoing.

[RichC]

I can believe the UCI weren't that keen on highlighting the problems with their sport and I can also imagine they'd rather not have the biggest name in the sport for the past 20 or so years shown to be a drug cheat especially after him passing their tests time and again.

Had to google Jeff Novitzky, been involved in chasing down some big names involved in doping

[Neil Young]

Casemore, this is a good article I think - it goes a little deeper than the Telegraph one I reckon and is less equivocal.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/aug/26/was-lance-armstrong-protected-culture-bullying-secrecy

[RichC]

Good article but without the release of the evidence it still isn't conclusive, I am not intentionally defending Armstrong here but I want to see the evidence, how it was pulled together I.e. what was on offer and who is part of it all.

If the USADA are convinced they have him banged to rights there is to me no clear reason not to release the details and surely only Armstrong could block that which would certainly seem to be an admission of guilt.

I have a feeling they've offered deals which in themselves are fundamentally wrong. If you're a drugs cheat you should be banned, no deals on the table to capture others you can and should assist with uncovering fellow drugs cheat but not to your own benefit.

I also get the feeling Travis Tygart is enjoying the limelight a little too much

[Helios Creed]

RIP - we shouldn't let the doping scandal detract from his lunar exploits and superb singing voice :candle:

[BobTheCharmer]

RIP - we shouldn't let the doping scandal detract from his lunar exploits and superb singing voice :candle:

hi bender

[Neil Young]

A couple more interesting, and possibly depressing, links:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/kimmage-uci-needs-root-and-branch-surgery

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/pound-calls-for-truth-and-reconciliation-for-cycling

[RichC]

good articles, but again they need to produce the evidence FFS.

It's obviously well beyond Armstrong in terms of if there has been a systematic breaking of the rules by not only sports "stars" but also the bodies that govern them, I mean if Armstrong is guilty then it's been one of the biggest cons of all time and it will have taken far more than one man or even his group to allow this to happen, the UCI the drug labs etc.... must have been in on it and if that is the case then what does this mean to sport in the wider spectrum - could Bolt be a myth built on a complex lie? Unlikely and I like to believe most of these amazing athletes we've seen over the years have been just that but it does raise the question.

[Neil Young]

Clearly these articles assume guilt, based on Armstrong's decision not to fight the accusations and simply accept whatever punishment he gets. You might get your wish to be able to judge the evidence for yourself assuming Pound is right and some of it comes out in time. But I think it's reasonable to accept things as they are - Armstrong's failure to fight to clear his name means a working assumption of his guilt is reasonable.

As for the wider/wilder conspiracy theories, I don't believe the labs (neither laboratories nor labradors) would have to be in on it. They just test the samples which are identifiable by a code. It's the authorities that tie the sample/result to the specific athlete.

The UCI, yes, that's a different matter. The references to the ASO decision to go with the AFLD's more rigorous procedures in 2008 by themselves suggest the UCI's programmes aren't rigorous enough.

[RichC]

Perhaps, but it's still based around assumption which I don't really like, I might be old fashioned here but surely innocent until proven guilty?

If he is guilty nail him to the ground with all the evidence and then there is no reason for doubt and he'll forever more be known as a drugs cheat.

Perhaps with the labs, I think essentially this is just highlights the need for change. Armstrong and whether he did/didn't cheat is secondary for me as the more this rumbles on the more I believe the governing bodies need to be investegated as there is no way he could have managed this on his own.

Sorry I feel like I am arguing Armstongs innocence here which I am not, I just want to see it laid bare and leave anyone currently cheating through drugs under no illusions that they will be caught and punished.