Crosstrailer
Well-Known Member
Levi Leipheimer fired by Quick Step.....
The new improved Lance Armstrong discussion thread.*
- Thread starter mickle
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
GrumpyGregry
Here for rides.
"We commend the rider for his open co-operation with Usada and contribution to cleaning up the sport of cycling." So much so that we've fired his ass.Levi's been fired by Pharma Quick-Step. Perhaps he won't be racing next year after all after his 6 month ban ends. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/19969458
Now was he fired for doping or being punished for breaking the Omerta?
Re SCA and a possible comeback. Have just been doing some reading up on the case and read a report that SCA settled out of Court after the judge commented that there was no clause in the contract covering cheating so that even they could prove he cheated, why was he was not still due his money. It may explain why they haven't already slung in a lawsuit despite announcing they were considering it back in June.
Dogtrousers
Kilometre nibbler
The SCA guy on that Aussie documentrary this week said "we had a bad contract ... if he was officially declared the winner we had to pay out, and he was so we had to" (or words to that effect). Perhaps they're waiting for him to be officially DQ'd?
Dogtrousers
Kilometre nibbler
Mr Haematocrit
msg me on kik for android
- Location
- Out of the saddle
the evidence speaks for itself.
That would be my expectation. The settlement was initiated by SCA, not Armstrong, so I would expect it to have clauses which would prevent a re-opening by SCA. If it doesn't then Armstrong needs to find some new lawyers who know what they are doing.
just jim
Guest
Daniel Borochoff, founder and president of Chicago-based CharityWatch, said last week it may take some time for donors to digest the allegations against Armstrong.
"Individuals that admire and support an individual who is later found out to be severely tarnished, don't want to admit it, don't want to admit that they've been duped," Borochoff said. "People, though, do need to trust a charity to be able to support it."
Couple of candidates on this thread for sure
Mercury News
"Individuals that admire and support an individual who is later found out to be severely tarnished, don't want to admit it, don't want to admit that they've been duped," Borochoff said. "People, though, do need to trust a charity to be able to support it."
Couple of candidates on this thread for sure
Mercury News
DogTired
Über Member
- Location
- Floating on a sea of vimto.
Nope. SCA had a contract to pay out bonuses to Tailwind sports if LA won TdFs. $1.5million for 01 and 02, $3 million for 03 and $5 million for a 6th straight win in 04. SCA contested the $5million payment in 2004 when evidence of the use of PEDs came to light. SCA quite rightly chose to contest this on the basis they would not have taken the contract if they were aware of PED use up front, so they chose not to pay fully aware that this would end up in court. As a sign that this was not due to financial reasons they put the $5 million in escrow.
LA naturally took them to court and the decision was that as LA had won the 2004 TdF SCA had to pay up. The contract said if he was declared the winner he got the cash. That's the state until the UCI ratify the USADA decisions. It should also make the inverse true - if LA is stripped of his titles he'll need to pay back the money regardless.
When the court decision was made, the money was released from escrow with interest and costs. Nothing to do with settlements initiated by SCA - they paid up on a contested contract, quite honourably. There is nothing to suggest anywhere that there will be clauses preventing a re-opening by SCA and they have indicated that they are watching this closely.
DogTired
Über Member
- Location
- Floating on a sea of vimto.
Flying_Monkey
Recyclist
- Location
- Odawa
