briantrumpet
Legendary Member
- Location
- Devon & Die
Since I decided that Red Light is the intellectual alter ego of dennisn (from the 'other place'), I have no difficulty in finding his posts entertaining.
The new improved Lance Armstrong discussion thread.*
- Thread starter mickle
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Panter
Just call me Chris...
- Location
- Sittingbourne, Kent
Once you've all left, and the lights are off, I'm going to hang a Lance Armstrong poster on the wall 
Flying_Monkey
Recyclist
- Location
- Odawa
You miss the point. And please don't start trying to pretend you are being victimized. It is the unattractive last resort of someone who cannot admit they are wrong. In that sense you have something in common with Lance Armstrong, at least.
philipbh
Spectral Cyclist
- Location
- Out the back
This language is (IMO) entirely consistent within the context of arbitration in general (the point of which is to reach a resolution vs. endless and / or obfuscatory legal argument) and the CAS code in particular (see procedural rules R.46 R47 R48 and R49)
Parties either accept (or acknowledge) the ruling as final (as per code) or appeal the ruling (within 21 days) providing their legal grounds for appeal (although no additional evidence is allowable)
I dont think Mr President is being clever - just using the language of the process
GrumpyGregry
Here for rides.
Fat lady isn't singing quite yet, there is still a teasing hint of more fun to come in the full decision
2. Recognition and implementation of the USADA decision
UCI will recognize and implement the decision of USADA, which implies that all competitive results achieved by Mr Armstrong in cycling since August 1, 1998 will be disqualified, including his seven Tour de France wins.
This recognition is subject to the following:
a. The recognition does not alter UCI’s position on the issue of the statute of
limitations as exposed above;
b. The recognition also depends on whether Mr Armstrong or WADA will appeal
USADA’s decision to CAS. If Mr Armstrong or WADA appeals to CAS, the UCI
must wait until CAS delivers its award: the USADA decision might be overruled in
whole or in part by CAS.
So my question is How long a period does LA have to appeal to CAS?
2. Recognition and implementation of the USADA decision
UCI will recognize and implement the decision of USADA, which implies that all competitive results achieved by Mr Armstrong in cycling since August 1, 1998 will be disqualified, including his seven Tour de France wins.
This recognition is subject to the following:
a. The recognition does not alter UCI’s position on the issue of the statute of
limitations as exposed above;
b. The recognition also depends on whether Mr Armstrong or WADA will appeal
USADA’s decision to CAS. If Mr Armstrong or WADA appeals to CAS, the UCI
must wait until CAS delivers its award: the USADA decision might be overruled in
whole or in part by CAS.
So my question is How long a period does LA have to appeal to CAS?
david k
Hi
- Location
- North West
yes, I remember that
Flying_Monkey
Recyclist
- Location
- Odawa
Indeed. But not how you thought.
I suppose one can only really aspire to stand on the shoulders of a giant such as yourself with the erudite wit and charm.
Andrew_P
In between here and there
Russell Allen
Well-Known Member
My biggest concern now is not LA but how we're going to bulk out this thread to reach the magic hundred pages..... I had hoped for something a little less categorical from the UCI.
Pat McQuaid's pontificating about how he wants to work towards cycling to be clean, how he has always been anti doping, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah were for me very hollow. It sounds very much like the argument that the current problems of the single European currency are a good reason for closer European integration .......The man is a spinner par excellence but I believe he is now on borrowed time ...... If he is still in charge in a years time I will be very surprised.
Lets not pull our punches here, if Pat McQuaid thought he could have fought the USADA decision he would have done, he is now in damage limitation/survival mode. The sooner the big teams and sponsors tell him he's part of the problem rather than the solution and force him out the better. His recent revelatory conversion will not be enough to save "saint Pat the apostle"
Russell
Pat McQuaid's pontificating about how he wants to work towards cycling to be clean, how he has always been anti doping, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah were for me very hollow. It sounds very much like the argument that the current problems of the single European currency are a good reason for closer European integration .......The man is a spinner par excellence but I believe he is now on borrowed time ...... If he is still in charge in a years time I will be very surprised.
Lets not pull our punches here, if Pat McQuaid thought he could have fought the USADA decision he would have done, he is now in damage limitation/survival mode. The sooner the big teams and sponsors tell him he's part of the problem rather than the solution and force him out the better. His recent revelatory conversion will not be enough to save "saint Pat the apostle"
Russell
But are the very teams that are the perpetrators of the doping scandals the best Jury?
Noodley
Guest
Surely you mean "turn the Red Light off"...
