Armstrong charged and banned

[thom]

Again though that was becoming down to the investigating the actions of a few and speculation. There is the problem that once again it becomes personalised and this masks the true reality

This is really "old news" in that the events happened some time ago.

Rather than speculate, or guess, why not simply sit back for 6 months, open the box, take time to look at the contents and then have an informed and full investigation.

Which of course leads to the question as to who should investigate. All of the present organisations, WADA, USADA, UCI are all in some way tarnished and too close to be independent

Each time you convict a drug cheat it is personalised. I think you find people who care about the issue want to talk about it.
It is not old news by any stretch of the imagination. This personality is the keystone to probably the largest fraud in sporting history.

Have an investigation ? USADA & WADA are about anti doping enforcement. Their investigation is right here and now !
The UCI look tarnished and the emergence of evidence may prove damning and provoke reform. See the other thread.

One of the concerns I heard from a commentator is that over the next few months, while we await evidence to become public, that firstly interest will die down and secondly the guilty protagonists have an opportunity to shift their position and exert some control, principally damage limitation to their commercial interests. This is clear with LA.

Right now is the time for people to show they do care and that pressure is brought to rid cycling of the corruption that has followed it for too long. If you're thinking about shelving this issue for now, face it, you'll never have the stomach to look at it's contents, let alone doing anything about it.

 

[Red Light]

I'm struggling to understand what you and Cunobelin are on about.

'... all we have is USADA hearsay that they have spoken to witnesses that have testified against him but we don't know what they said or who said it and it is no more valid than Phil Liggetts hearsay...

Srsly? The evidence accumulated by the United States Anti-Doping Agency (and the testimony of a dozen former colleagues) is no more valid than the uninformed, ignorant witterings of a half pissed TV commentator?

Until we see the evidence yes. If we hear from Liggetts or USADA sources direct rather than reported anonymously through third party recounting then it becomes testimony. But at the moment they are both saying I've got someone that told me something and that is hearsay.

Remember the school teacher Chris Jeffries arrested for the murder of Joanna Yeates in Bristol. The media and public had a field day not discouraged by the police because "he didn't look right". And then it turns out he was totally innocent. Wait to see the evidence and then lets discuss it.

 

[Red Light]

I think you'll find that if you strip out the moronic drivel from apologists and those people incapable of reading, this thread shrinks down to about 60 pages.

Ah, so anyone who doesn't agree with the Chuffy, Rich P, Noodley etc lynch mob is a moronic, shallow needy individual who can't read. Who was it saying about an Omerta earlier?

 

[yello]

Right now is the time for people to show they do care and that pressure is brought to rid cycling of the corruption that has followed it for too long. If you're thinking about shelving this issue for now, face it, you'll never have the stomach to look at it's contents, let alone doing anything about it.

^^^ I 'liked' it (all of it, not just the quoted bit) but also have to add a .

I like it when people passionate and knowledgeable about the sport speak. thom, you bring something to this discussion that I never could.

 

[Red Light]

One of the concerns I heard from a commentator is that over the next few months, while we await evidence to become public, that firstly interest will die down and secondly the guilty protagonists have an opportunity to shift their position and exert some control, principally damage limitation to their commercial interests. This is clear with LA.

I look forward to you organising a lobby of USADA to publish their evidence asap so this doesn't happen. Its all in their hands now. Meanwhile though the Bruyneel hearing should be an interesting proxy for the LA hearing that won't now happen and should keep the topic alive for you.

 

[Ian H]

There is an interesting blog on it here...

That's a reasonable account. It sets the current situation in an historical context.

 

[thom]

Lance Armstrong: Case Closed
(link from Science of sport)

 

[ufkacbln]

Each time you convict a drug cheat it is personalised. I think you find people who care about the issue want to talk about it.
It is not old news by any stretch of the imagination. This personality is the keystone to probably the largest fraud in sporting history.

Have an investigation ? USADA & WADA are about anti doping enforcement. Their investigation is right here and now !
The UCI look tarnished and the emergence of evidence may prove damning and provoke reform. See the other thread.

One of the concerns I heard from a commentator is that over the next few months, while we await evidence to become public, that firstly interest will die down and secondly the guilty protagonists have an opportunity to shift their position and exert some control, principally damage limitation to their commercial interests. This is clear with LA.

Right now is the time for people to show they do care and that pressure is brought to rid cycling of the corruption that has followed it for too long. If you're thinking about shelving this issue for now, face it, you'll never have the stomach to look at it's contents, let alone doing anything about it.

The concern I have is that the USADA has not come out of this too well.

The moving goalposts, claims that they had stripped titles when they hadn't (and may not be able to), the fact that this has allowed the "Witch hunt" defense some credibility is an issue... and let's not forget thatthe UCI (technically) was followingthe WADA / USADA drug testing regimes at this time.

It really needs to be something independent and removed from the present hysteria.

 

[thom]

The concern I have is that the USADA has not come out of this too well.

Is this your only concern, your principal concern, a secondary concern ?!

Specifically, are you at all concerned about the content of this thread, the LA story, that he is being exposed by USADA as probably the biggest sporting fraud in history ?

 

[PaulB]

Oooh, more books from USPS insiders telling all about the organised doping that went on? Excellent! Please point me towards them, I wish to go shopping.

I don't mean that. I mean books from way before this Pharmstrong stuff came out. Stuff that gives an insight into the mind of the pro cyclist and the ways in which they got into the doping. We all know the ones I mean and a knowledge of them gives a greater understanding of the prevailing conditions of the big tours. If you don't know them, go shopping.

 

[Flying_Monkey]

Cunobelin, Red Light,

You are getting desperate and starting to be more than a little insulting to the intelligence of everyone here. Even a cursory reading of these forums would make you realise that none of the people arguing on this topic (with the possible exception of that new arrival, 1986tourwinner, or whatever he's called) are obsessed by Armstrong or are discussing this to the exclusion of everything else. Most people on this thread have a long, long interest in pro-cycling, a lot of knowledge about it, and are genuinely concerned for the future of the sport. My personal obsession is actually Colombian and Japanese cyclists, which you'd know if you'd been here a while and been paying attention. Armstrong is a giant and unavoidable figure in the sport; it's his stature that casts the shadow here, not the choices of forum members.

However incorrect or misinterpreted what you say is, I still assume you feel the same way about pro-cycling as a whole, so please have the good faith not to start sayings things about other members that are blatantly untrue.

Thank-you.

 

[mickle]

The concern I have is that the USADA has not come out of this too well.

The moving goalposts, claims that they had stripped titles when they hadn't (and may not be able to), the fact that this has allowed the "Witch hunt" defense some credibility is an issue... and let's not forget thatthe UCI (technically) was followingthe WADA / USADA drug testing regimes at this time.

It really needs to be something independent and removed from the present hysteria.

'Not come out of this too well'? Really? By whose measure? Every time Lancey boy signed in to a race he signed in to the duristiction of the WADA (of which USADA is a subsidiary).

Still not entirely sure what point you are trying to make, pehaps you need some better facts.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Is this your only concern, your principal concern, a secondary concern ?!

Specifically, are you at all concerned about the content of this thread, the LA story, that he is being exposed by USADA as probably the biggest sporting fraud in history ?

Is he (being exposed as probably the biggest sporting fraud in history)?

Or is the TdeF, the UCI, and pro-cycling, et al, in general being exposed as the most systematic, institutional, of fraudsters in sporting history.

The amount of collusion that must have gone on to allow any individual to get away with what Armstrong appears to have done; flagrant, repeated and sustained fraud, suggests the sport was rotten to the core. Given how many of that era are still involved, the taint still lingers.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

[QUOTE 2016872, member: 45"]Armstrong has been stripped of his titles and has conceded that he's a cheat. End of.[/quote]
Has he though?

The latest I've read, but may not be fully current, is that ASO sadi ""We are still waiting for important decisions to be taken by the competent authorities with responsibility for this matter, which are Usada and the International Cycling Union, before issuing any further comment."

 

[Chuffy]

I don't mean that. I mean books from way before this Pharmstrong stuff came out. Stuff that gives an insight into the mind of the pro cyclist and the ways in which they got into the doping. We all know the ones I mean and a knowledge of them gives a greater understanding of the prevailing conditions of the big tours. If you don't know them, go shopping.

Your earlier post clearly implied that there were other books which covered the same ground as Hamilton's, eg USPS - and there aren't.

I can see why you (or anyone else) might have a problem with Hamilton. After all the years of lies and unconvincing excuses it's hard to suddenly trust the guy. However, what he seems to be saying, from what we've seen of the book so far, is being corroborated by other riders. Also, he gave testimony to the Federal investigation - do you think he lied to them, and risked jail for perjury? If you've followed the arc of his initial lies, through to his attempted comeback, subsequent ban for another doping offence and treatment for depression then it seems unlikely that he would suddenly start up on a whole fresh wave of untruths.