in praise of USADA

[GrumpyGregry]

I think his first concern after this case will be protecting the mandate of USADA against Congressional restrictions. Cycling clearly isn't the only sport with doping issues - perhaps he'll try to look into these next.

then we must wish him well, because if he tries to take on the vested interests in the sports that Americans care about, and where doping is a problem, football, baseball and basketball, the next time we hear his name may well be in the obituary columns.

 

[thom]

then we must wish him well, because if he tries to take on the vested interests in the sports that Americans care about, and where doping is a problem, football, baseball and basketball, the next time we hear his name may well be in the obituary columns.

Indeed - it's all very perverted there.

I found out something hilarious just today about USADA's process:

LA's agent, Bill Stapleton was the head of the Athlete's Advisory Council when USADA was founded. He had a lot involvement in drawing up the codes and rules that USADA follows.

You just couldn't make it up.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Indeed - it's all very perverted there.

I found out something hilarious just today about USADA's process:

LA's agent, Bill Stapleton was the head of the Athlete's Advisory Council when USADA was founded. He had a lot involvement in drawing up the codes and rules that USADA follows.

Ain't it just!

 

[Longshot]

I'm still prepared to believe that he doesn't believe he is guilty. I think he believes he was just doing that which was necessary to prepare himself properly and to make sure the playing field was level.

In which case, not only was he a dirty cheating scumbag, he was a deluded dirty cheating scumbag.

 

[thom]

Travis Tygart on Youtube :



It seems remarkable that this low-key guy and his USADA org were able to expose this whole thing.

Chapeau.

Edit: oh yes, the UCI are to announce tomorrow.

 

[ufkacbln]

Travis Tygart on Youtube :



It seems remarkable that this low-key guy and his USADA org were able to expose this whole thing.

Chapeau.

Edit: oh yes, the UCI are to announce tomorrow.

This is what concerns me most, although it is an unpopular stance.

Does anyone believe that this is all new to the USADA and that no-one knew anything or had any suspicions of the alleged corruption in the UCI, widespread systematic doping in the Peleton and all the other issues until recently?


Deal with Armstrong for his actions - but then appoint an independent examination into how all these groups failed to prevent / detect doping at this level

 

[Red Light]

Does anyone believe that this is all new to the USADA

Apparently so. Travis Tygart signed a sworn statement on 3 May 2005 that said USADA had never had an adverse finding against Armstrong in all their tests.

 

[kedab]

... just as it didn't when TV coverage was limited to twenty minutes on World of Sport on a Saturday

i was wondering what show it was on!...cheers

 

[johnr]

Travis Tygart on Youtube :



It seems remarkable that this low-key guy and his USADA org were able to expose this whole thing.

Chapeau.

Edit: oh yes, the UCI are to announce tomorrow.

... only takes one honest man to stop an army (or some similar aphorism)

 

[Orbytal]

An unasuming guy with a Super Hero name bringing down one of US biggest stars.

Does he wear a Big T under his business shirt and run into bike sheds to change in a flash then appear from nowhere to take statements from pro riders who are mesmerised that he has come from thin air and say whatever he wants.

Shall the TDF be renamed form the Tour De Lance to the Tygart De France?

Has Dr T won the battle but lost the war?

 

[007fair]

Travis Tygart on Youtube :



It seems remarkable that this low-key guy and his USADA org were able to expose this whole thing.

Chapeau.

Edit: oh yes, the UCI are to announce tomorrow.

Good video Interesting when he said that athletes have only two choices when cornered for doping offences. Deny and fight back (marion jones, and of course the lovely LA - or admit, and move on) Marion Jones went to prison, once she admitted to the offences, due to lying under oath. Same should happen to LA but can a court convict him if he does not admit to it ? If all USADA have is witness statements can they or someone else take LA to court and charge him with perjury?

Surely this won't just drop out of the limelight now he has been stripped of his TdF titles.

 

[thom]

Same should happen to LA but can a court convict him if he does not admit to it ? If all USADA have is witness statements can they or someone else take LA to court and charge him with perjury?

Marion Jones perjured herself - she had denied steroid use to federal agents before 2000 but then admitted doping in 2007 during the BALCO investigation. So she went to jail.

The federal case against LA was dropped and LA avoided going through USADA's dispute process, so he avoided perjury there but he did deny doping in the infamous SCA lawsuit.
SCA will argue that amounts to perjury to claim back around $10 from LA. If they win and demonstrate in a law court that LA committed perjury, that may imply jail time. It will be interesting if LA decides to settle with SCA in a way that avoids the issue...

 

[007fair]

Cheers Thom yes I know about the SCA case and them wanting their money back Had forgotten that that was where LA swore innocence under oath. That will be an interesting case if it becomes reality.

 

[Orbytal]

SCA case was a hearing without legal oath. The case found in favour of LA because the contract did not have a doping condition in it. SCA were aware of this and tried it out anyway losing and paying $7.5million instead of $5 million. They are not entitled to the $2.5 million as down to themselves and the contract would be amended to agree with hearing.

Are SCA able to get anything back based on LA no longer title holder, that depends on final agreement. Normally in cases like these it is full and final with no revisit ability under any conditions.

I would suggest that as only added legal cost were in the final agreement I.e. no damages it was final, however time shall tell. SCA knew last time it was a lost cause but they went ahead anyway so maybe they will do the same again even if it was a final decision in the hope he gives in.

 

[johnr]

I'm not sure you're right Orbytal. The Australian TV documentary's excerpt of the Armstrong affidavit showed the lawyer introducting his questions by checking LPh understood that though they were in a conference room it was the same as giving evidence in a court. I presume, therefore, that an oath was administered.

Given that he was lying to get his mitts on a large amount of dosh, I'd expect a judge to take a dim view. But, of course, if he pays up before it gets to court the question would remain moot.