Armstrong charged and banned

[albion]

UCI will do as they are told.

It is how it works.

 

[Flying_Monkey]

This is all very predictable but disappointing. I had hoped that Armstrong would at least have the courage to confront the evidence if he really was innocent or to put up his hand and admit it if he was not. This decision lets him and his dwindling band of true believers continue to live a life of denial and conspiracy theorizing. Still, when the USADA official report is released after the conclusion of the case as a whole (it's not just about Lance, remember), we might get to see a little more of the evidence, though unfortunately we will not get Armstrong's take on it or be able to see him examined on it.

I am, however, pleased that triathlon, the sport I am currently involved in, will not be tainted by his presence.

(Thinking of the long run of course, this decision has interesting political implications. Armstrong is well-known to have political ambitions and being the 'victim of an international conspiracy led by the French' will do him no harm at all amongst his potential core constituency of Texas voters).

 

[thom]

It's quite a stretch to get to that conclusion from the UCI statement. That's not reading between the lines, that's just making stuff up from scratch. There is no way that UCI will risk Olympic status, even if the WADA code chafes occasionally.

Um, I'm not trying to argue the point but it wasn't those lines that were being read into, more so the fact that the UCI had questioned USADA's jurisdiction in a court case. I think some people read too much into that and jumped to the conclusion that the UCI could leave the WADA umbrella but I think after a court ruling, the UCI's line was more so they had wanted to clarify jurisdiction on the matter, rather than challenge it per se.

 

[BJH]

Well hard evidence is better than character assasination and innuendo which is what this thread seems to run on. Some of the worst miscarriages of justice there have been in the UK have been because they were not based on hard evidence but hearsay. And it looks like USADA are going to go down the hearsay evidence route in the absence of any hard evidence.

Surely there would be no need to classify the evidence as hearsay, all it takes is for LA to accept arbitration at which point the evidence will come out?

Surely the very fact that he doesn't want to accept this suggests he believes it's more than hearsay??

 

[Chuffy]

Um, I'm not trying to argue the point but it wasn't those lines that were being read into, more so the fact that the UCI had questioned USADA's jurisdiction in a court case. I think some people read too much into that and jumped to the conclusion that the UCI could leave the WADA umbrella but I think after a court ruling, the UCI's line was more so they had wanted to clarify jurisdiction on the matter, rather than challenge it per se.

My reply was more aimed at Lukesdad than you.
Yes, if the UCI had really pushed hard and ultimately refused to accept the WADA Code then the IOC would have taken a very dim view. But that was earlier in the process and I don't see how anything in their last statement points towards a threat to withdraw from the Code and hence the Olympics, either directly or indirectly.

 

[thom]

Surely there would be no need to classify the evidence as hearsay, all it takes is for LA to accept arbitration at which point the evidence will come out?

Surely the very fact that he doesn't want to accept this suggests he believes it's more than hearsay??

USADA have already pledged to release all the evidence in the future when it is appropriate as regards related legal cases.
I think others have also pointed this out on the board.

 

[BJH]

.......before he got caught too?

Never been any evidence to suggest that so no need to drag LeMond into this, he has been critical of LA for sometime so has always been clear on his position

 

[johnr]

"Some say he's a sociopath"

Did he kill Nixon too?

Now spreading that rumour would be a good way for canny PR people to try and rehabilitate him in the eyes of right thinking people

 

[lukesdad]

Um, I'm not trying to argue the point but it wasn't those lines that were being read into, more so the fact that the UCI had questioned USADA's jurisdiction in a court case. I think some people read too much into that and jumped to the conclusion that the UCI could leave the WADA umbrella but I think after a court ruling, the UCI's line was more so they had wanted to clarify jurisdiction on the matter, rather than challenge it per se.

Actually from the statemant I think its about the limit of juristriction. Re. the stripping of titles and should a third party have the power to do so ? It won't only be the UCI watching this with interest.

 

[Alun]

What makes you think they'll be handed to anyone else?

You think he'll keep them, like Bjarne Riis?

 

[Eager2bSmaller]

Surely there would be no need to classify the evidence as hearsay, all it takes is for LA to accept arbitration at which point the evidence will come out?

Surely the very fact that he doesn't want to accept this suggests he believes it's more than hearsay??

Or he could be so fed up of it all, doesn't believe there is any chance of getting a fair trial, and so there is no point to fighting it, as the outcome has already been decided before it begins.

Personally, without absolute proof of an action, from the actual time of the offence, I do not see how they can strip him of the titles. It seems to me a gross miscarriage.

 

[rich p]

Or he could be so fed up of it all, doesn't believe there is any chance of getting a fair trial, and so there is no point to fighting it, as the outcome has already been decided before it begins.

Personally, without absolute proof of an action, from the actual time of the offence, I do not see how they can strip him of the titles. It seems to me a gross miscarriage.

Innocent of all charges but refuses the chance to hear the evidence, refute it even though by not doing do he'll lose all his TdF wins, his credibility and moral high ground? What are the chances?
Hmmmm...

 

[NickM]

He'll be President of the USA soon. Then USADA had better watch out, and he'll get his titles back.

Or maybe not...

 

[Scoosh]

.....
(Thinking of the long run of course, this decision has interesting political implications. Armstrong is well-known to have political ambitions and being the 'victim of an international conspiracy led by the French' will do him no harm at all amongst his potential core constituency of Texas voters).

Armstrong for US Secretary of State !

 

[festival]

Any reason why the evidence cannot be made public?
Of course Armstrong will use his usual theory that if he says something loud enough and often enough it has to be the truth, backed up by the usual threats of course.
The Armstrong worshipers will pay no heed to the evidence, they won't let the facts get in the way of their devotion of the cheat, but it would be good to get it out into the open.
Mr Phil "Lance is my mate" Liggett seems to be keeping his head down.