The new improved Lance Armstrong discussion thread.*

[PaulB]

It's going to get mighty expensive for the Texan http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/oct/11/lance-armstrong-tour-de-france

And on top of THAT $7.5 million, there's the small matter of ANOTHER $7 million he'll now have to pay back to the TdF organisers!

 

[Red Light]

Looks like Red Light has retired, hurt and we now have Dellzeqq in to bat as chief apologist. Oh dear, he's gone first ball........

Actually having a great evening with friends. Meanwhile a few ad hominems is the sum total of your life this evening.

What a ridiculous comment. How do you know what I was doing last night ?

Clearly you were sat at your computer missing my posts and speculating about the reasons. But Dell did sterling work in giving you something to rail against in my absence.

 

[Red Light]

It's going to get mighty expensive for the Texan http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/oct/11/lance-armstrong-tour-de-france

And on top of THAT $7.5 million, there's the small matter of ANOTHER $7 million he'll now have to pay back to the TdF organisers!

But others suspect there is little appetite for a re-opening a prosecution against Armstrong. They argue that the likelihood is that government lawyers had already amassed the same evidence as Usada, but had been put off by the high burdens of proof associated with putting a criminal case in front of a jury.​

​

Sort of sums it up really. The USADA evidence wouldn't stand up in Court even though it might get a conviction in the Court of CycleChat Opinion.

 

[kennykool]

well - I've been off here for a while but thought I'd better "man up" and post a reply!

Its well documented that I am a Lance "fanboy" (as some of you so kindly put it) and I must say - I am absolutely devestated by theis whole affair. I am still digesting the stories that are coming out daily but even I must say "its not looking good" (Understatement of the year?)

This guy WAS a hero of mine. He is the reason I started cycling at the end of the day but he has been well and truly knocked off the pedastal that i had him on. I backed the guy on this forum for a good while and now I feel a little foolish

Strange times - very strange indeed!

It doesnt seem fair that Hincapie, Zabnski & co get a winter ban for "grassing up" their mate. Surely they should all get life bans too?

 

[PaulB]

But others suspect there is little appetite for a re-opening a prosecution against Armstrong. They argue that the likelihood is that government lawyers had already amassed the same evidence as Usada, but had been put off by the high burdens of proof associated with putting a criminal case in front of a jury.​

​

Sort of sums it up really. The USADA evidence wouldn't stand up in Court even though it might get a conviction in the Court of CycleChat Opinion.

Nowt to do with USADA evidence. He committed perjury which he'd find impossible, or more expensive than the cost, to defend against.

 

[Red Light]

Nowt to do with USADA evidence. He committed perjury which he'd find impossible, or more expensive than the cost, to defend against.

Well you'd have to prove perjury in Court. And the only new evidence there is is that assembled by USADA. So if not the USADA files what is your new evidence to prove perjury?

 

[mickle]

Jeezuss Red Light that horse starting to decompose.

 

[Red Light]

It doesnt seem fair that Hincapie, Zabnski & co get a winter ban for "grassing up" their mate. Surely they should all get life bans too?

But that was the sweetheart deal. "You follow the script on Armstrong (and don't forget the I'm think of the children bit - that always plays well with the American public) and you can be back racing again next season."

 

[Red Light]

Jeezuss Red Light that horse starting to decompose.

If the smell's bothering you I suggest climbing down from it.

 

[Crosstrailer]

Clearly you were sat at your computer missing my posts and speculating about the reasons. But Dell did sterling work in giving you something to rail against in my absence.

And wrong again....how can someone be wrong so many times in one thread ?

MOD EDITED

 

[kennykool]

Would it help if we all gave you a virtual hug?

Virtual Group hug would be great thanks

 

[kennykool]

But that was the sweetheart deal. "You follow the script on Armstrong (and don't forget the I'm think of the children bit - that always plays well with the American public) and you can be back racing again next season."

Yeah but that says to me - ok guys you can go out there and dope as a team, but if all of you "grass up" the main man then you'll get a lesser ban and the main man gets shafted

They are all guilty - and have admitted it!

 

[PaulB]

Well you'd have to prove perjury in Court. And the only new evidence there is is that assembled by USADA. So if not the USADA files what is your new evidence to prove perjury?

I wouldn't have to prove anything. It's case closed on this one, despite the decreasingly meagre straws you're desperately clutching at. And the UCI can take back his winnings once they accept his guilt so that's a dead-end too.

 

[Andrew_P]

The catch 22 for LA is that he still has interests alot of them chairtable (I fecking hope there is nothing in the wings on Livestrong & Armstrong) revolving around his 7 Tour wins the others who were all forced (LMAO) to take drugs between 1999 and 2006 and then were able to ride clean as the big bad Armstrong was not holding a gun to their head anymore and have either announced retirement, are retired already or will take a 6 month break. They were all in a position to dig the knife in for whatever reason without any real downside in fact they can cash in further with Books and interviews.

There is no way he could ever come out and confess, he had managed to stay in the limelight since retirement from the sport that made him famous (infamous now surely). No other cyclist still relied on their past glories as much as LA

I still enjoy watching some of the YT videos and think regardless of the drug taking he was a great to watch, and inspired a 1000's to get on their bike, this Vid still helps me get up a few hills despite the "conviction"

 

[Red Light]

I wouldn't have to prove anything. It's case closed on this one, despite the decreasingly meagre straws you're desperately clutching at. And the UCI can take back his winnings once they accept his guilt so that's a dead-end too.

You are if you are going to try him for perjury and as noted above, the USADA files, which are the only "new" evidence, are unlikely to meet the Court's level of proof. Its not clear what might happen in the SCA Case as it was an arbitration hearing not a Court finding and SCA settled with Armstrong before the ruling.

As for your assertions on winnings, time will tell.