Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [OneGoodLeg] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
OneGoodLeg wrote:
. . . this whole limited confession circus on Oprah. . .

just thought i'd repeat for emphasis. lance still hasn't really 'confessed' in any meaningful sense. he told oprah, in a texas hotel room, that he used to dope. that's a pretty far cry from actually going under oath and on-record and getting square with UCI, le tour, WADA, USADA, IOC, etc.

-mike

____________________________________
https://lshtm.academia.edu/MikeCallaghan

http://howtobeswiss.blogspot.ch/
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [iron_mike] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
But here's the issue, why does he really need to get square with those authorities. Frankly, he's already square with them, because he's sanctioned. Lance doenst need to come clean to the authorities for me to somehow forgive him, or for me to think he's doing this to "clean" up the sport. Sorry, if that were to happen, I would need the UCI to also step up and answer to all the BS that they seem to have been covering up. Such as taking money from an rider, and not seeing any issue with that?

So if Lance wants to or doesnt want to come clean with the authorities, I dont think it really matters. We all know he's got shit on someone, now it's a matter of what the authorities are willing to give up in order to get that info. And as I said, if it's really about "cleaning" up the sport, and it takes Lance getting a pass (as much as I'd hate to see him get into tri's), he deserves a pass if he's willing to rat on the whole system, and we can all then move FORWARD.

Of course he's going to need to confess all the juicy details in order to get a lighter sentence, and he already failed to take that route. He assumed he could just scoff at the charges, and everything bounce off him. But it finally bite him in the ass, and now he's trying to realign so he's in charge. But here is the thing, if we really want a true confession, the authorities are going to 99.9% play ball with him and offer him something in return, or else we wont get all the juicy details that we really need in order to move forward. So, now it's a game of how much is the info Lance has worth it to USADA/WADA?

------------------
@brooksdoughtie
USAT-L2,Y&J; USAC-L2
http://www.aomultisport.com
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [BDoughtie] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BDoughtie wrote:
If this really is all about "cleaning" up the sport so our children can feel good about racing, it's a no brainer for USADA/WADA to work with Lance, *IF* all the info he supposedly has is 90% true.

Work with doesn't mean give in to exactly what he wants, though. Lance has been claiming he'll work with them without any promise of further consideration on their part. In fact his lawyer said as much today in USA Today http://www.usatoday.com/...bonus-money/1890933/

However, when push has come to shove, he twice now (and it looks like the 3rd time will happen in 2 days time) will not do so. and tells only what he wants. If Lance actually wanted to give back to the sport, as he is claiming, he'd be taking a far different tack than he is. I'd be fine with USADA/WADA lessening his suspension, but what we're going to see is Lance's PR tour continue along a path several folks projected a while ago; Oprah (done), a small cycling interview to support oprah (done), an expose with Bill Strickland or similar in Bicycling (i hear this is in the works). He wants to wait to be the big star of a truth and reconciliation process, to be "cycling jesus" the way he was "cancer jesus". As long as UCI has to fear for it's presidents past and present, it's not looking likely to happen, because UCI can't do it without WADA, and the 2 aren't friendly right now.
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [OneGoodLeg] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
But Tygart was on 60 minutes first. I'd prefer not seeing either in the media right now.
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [erik haas] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
erik haas wrote:
TriBeer wrote:
.

Tygart's goal is to clean up sports and not just go after one person.

:)


Yes !

I'd really like to know what other cases Travis is working on now this one has come to its conclusion

Here's a list of athletes sanctioned by USADA in 2012. You'll note that only one of those is named Lance Armstrong.

http://www.usada.org/sanctions/

Not counting the six that were given reduced suspensions for their cooperation, USADA has sanctioned 10 other athletes since Armstrong issued his lifetime ban in August. FIve of those 10 came after issuance of the reasoned decision in October.

As far as what the cases they're currently working on, you'll have to wait until they come to some form of conclusion. But it would be ridiculous to think that there aren't other cases in the works.
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [pick6] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
But if that's what it takes to actually have all the facts, then I see no issue (and I'd hate to see Lance racing again anytime soon). Because as much as Lance is this kingpin hot shot, that's the same way the UCI apparently has run it's business. I said the other day and got blasted for talking about the business side of doping, and got accused of "excusing" it. I'm not excusing doping in any manner. What I'm trying to bring to light is that doping is bad business for anyone and everyone in the sport, and to me the corruptness by governing bodies to hide the doping is as bad as what Lance did. So if it takes giving Lance a free pass in order to get 90% of the "rumors" to the table, than play ball and let Lance be the doping savior.

Again, if we really want the truth out there, so that we can put the pieces back together, I'm not sure what's wrong with playing ball to Lance's standards? It's as if, you dont want to, because then Lance would get off lighter, yet in almost all the other cases, everyone else has as well. So, again, IF we are wanting full transparancy, let's get to the bottom of all the corruptness, and if it takes falling on the sword by giving in to Lance, so be it.

------------------
@brooksdoughtie
USAT-L2,Y&J; USAC-L2
http://www.aomultisport.com
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [pick6] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
you're forgetting about one thing... there are a few very big dominos that still need to fall. Tygart's not looking for new information from Lance, he already knows everything he needs to know. I feel Lance is trying to avoid knocking down those last few dominos, hence the quest to talk to WADA in a TRC environment and not USADA... in other words he doesn't want to talk to anyone who is actually doing their jobs.

And that's the ultimate credibility... cheaters would rather talk to other agencies than the USADA. Chappeau Travis Tygart.


pick6 wrote:
Runguy wrote:
That explains why LA wants to go before WADA and not USADA to testfy.


It's really a multi-fold reasoning:

1. Tygart beat him and it's killing him he got beat, and the last thing he wants to do is play ball with Tygart.
2. Lance thinks he can get around the system by working directly with WADA. Problem is, WADA has already stood behind USADA. USADA is the sanctioning agent, so they have to be the body to reduce the sanction. Further, even if they want to, they have to go to WADA with the "exceptional circumstances" to get it approved. And it has to start with USADA proposing it to WADA, otherwise WADA wouldn't get involved. Now if WADA went ahead and opened A Truth & Reconciliation, then MAYBE lance could work through them, but that's looking less and less likely, because the UCI won't play ball (it's suspected because Lance would rat them out for collusion).

Eric Reid
AeroFit | Instagram Portfolio Coaching and Bike Fitting
Chapel Hill, NC
Aerodynamic Optimized Bike Fitting, Retul Pre-Purchase Bike Fitting, USAT Level 1 Triathlon Coaching, Nutrition
Ask me: Scody Optimized Speed Suits | CeramicSpeed Oversized Pulley Systems | HUUB Skinsuits and Wetsuits |
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [BDoughtie] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BDoughtie wrote:
But if that's what it takes to actually have all the facts, then I see no issue (and I'd hate to see Lance racing again anytime soon). Because as much as Lance is this kingpin hot shot, that's the same way the UCI apparently has run it's business. I said the other day and got blasted for talking about the business side of doping, and got accused of "excusing" it. I'm not excusing doping in any manner. What I'm trying to bring to light is that doping is bad business for anyone and everyone in the sport, and to me the corruptness by governing bodies to hide the doping is as bad as what Lance did. So if it takes giving Lance a free pass in order to get 90% of the "rumors" to the table, than play ball and let Lance be the doping savior.

Again, if we really want the truth out there, so that we can put the pieces back together, I'm not sure what's wrong with playing ball to Lance's standards? It's as if, you dont want to, because then Lance would get off lighter, yet in almost all the other cases, everyone else has as well. So, again, IF we are wanting full transparancy, let's get to the bottom of all the corruptness, and if it takes falling on the sword by giving in to Lance, so be it.

I'm not syaing they shouldn't play ball with him, but what does it say to the next doper if someone avoids detection for years, corrupts the system, and then walks scott free for telling about who they bought off, etc? If they can come to angreement for a reduction of sentence, and get the details on what all he knows, Im fine; but Lance shouldn't be allowed to dictate terms. It doesnt work that way in the legal system, and it shouldnt work that way here.
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [pick6] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Problem with that assessment is this:

A. Lance wont get off scott free. He's already served what a 5-6 month suspension.

B. USADA did exactly what I suggest with the testimony and "light" sentencing of several of the key riders that spoke out against Lance. Did GH actually get sanctioned? I think he was "allowed" to retire, but I dont even think he's an sanctioned athlete.

So if it was good then, I'm not sure why it's bad move now, IF you can get all the info that apparently USADA wants from Lance. If they are that hard up on him, then work with him, and if he gets off at a reduced sentence, that's only par for the course with this type of investigation. So I'm just not sure you can say he's gotten off scott free.

------------------
@brooksdoughtie
USAT-L2,Y&J; USAC-L2
http://www.aomultisport.com
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [BDoughtie] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BDoughtie wrote:
Problem with that assessment is this:

A. Lance wont get off scott free. He's already served what a 5-6 month suspension.

B. USADA did exactly what I suggest with the testimony and "light" sentencing of several of the key riders that spoke out against Lance. Did GH actually get sanctioned? I think he was "allowed" to retire, but I dont even think he's an sanctioned athlete.

So if it was good then, I'm not sure why it's bad move now, IF you can get all the info that apparently USADA wants from Lance. If they are that hard up on him, then work with him, and if he gets off at a reduced sentence, that's only par for the course with this type of investigation. So I'm just not sure you can say he's gotten off scott free.

Ok, maybe scott free was a very slight overstatement; but lets say they came back and he was open to race in 2013, what did that accomplish in his particular case? His ironman dream was delayed not derailed; his in competition punishment was meaningless.

Hincapie got sanctioned just like the rest. it would have happened sooner, but the month plus delay Lance put in the process with his baseless lawsuit is what made it basically a wash for George.
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [pick6] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
USADA opened the door to the "light" sentencing by doing their investigation they way they did it. So whether Lance was this kingpin or not, if the info they are so desperately after really matters, and will be useful in cleaning up and clearing the doping story, I dont see why they wouldnt want to play ball with Lance. Sure, they tried it once, but then it comes down to this:

How important is the info to USADA? If it doenst really matter, they'll scoff at his demands and bits and pieces of the "rumors" will continously float around the rumor mill of how corrupt the sport really is. But if USADA was that hard up on going after Lance, to me nailing the big wigs of an entire sport, that's above and beyond anything Lance did. That's potentially bringing down an entire sports or atleast drastically causing complete embarassment to really high level officials.
ETA: Which means a very high possibility of changing how a sport deals with doping. That to me is the entire issue and if that can be uncovered, bravo to all parties involved (Lance, USADA/WADA/riders).

------------------
@brooksdoughtie
USAT-L2,Y&J; USAC-L2
http://www.aomultisport.com
Last edited by: BDoughtie: Feb 4, 13 13:49
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [pick6] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
He was an sanctioned athlete for whatever time period his punishment will have to be (if they reduce it). That in itself is punishment enough, is it not? This is basically the reasoning for the "light" sentencing of the other riders who testified against Lance, but that was so readily accepted? Why? Because it allowed them to take the big dog Lance down? What if he can provide info to clean up an sports governing body. That to me would be a huge game changer in the doping fight.

So essentially nothing less than a lifetime ban for Lance will work for you?


Lance has basically served the same penalties as the guys that testified against him, and IF he can provide alot of info that USADA wants, I'm just not really sure why you'd be against him coming back. It worked to bust Lance, but it cant work any other times?

I kinda sense a bias being formed here. ETA: I cant stand Lance, but if we are going to allow governing bodies and riders to mix and match penalties based on what info you can provide, I just would have to think, if the info that Lance has is that valuable to USADA, they'd want to play to a somewhat manageable terms that both will come with in order to get what needs to be addressed. Lances wants his ball back, USADA seemingly wants his info. Go get an arbitrator and figure out what it'll take to get both sides to agree. It sounds like from Lance's view, pretty much Kona in 2013 or 2014 has to be part of the package. Doesnt sound like USADA wants to bend that far. So if that's where we are at, all these deadlines are meaningless. They already have Lance, so for him what's the point of talking anymore, if he's not going to get anything in return that he thinks is worth it. He'll simply do as other doped athletes have done, ride off into the sunset and not really ever fully address their doping issue.

------------------
@brooksdoughtie
USAT-L2,Y&J; USAC-L2
http://www.aomultisport.com
Last edited by: BDoughtie: Feb 4, 13 13:55
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [BDoughtie] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BDoughtie wrote:
USADA opened the door to the "light" sentencing by doing their investigation they way they did it. So whether Lance was this kingpin or not, if the info they are so desperately after really matters, and will be useful in cleaning up and clearing the doping story, I dont see why they wouldnt want to play ball with Lance. Sure, they tried it once, but then it comes down to this:

How important is the info to USADA? If it doenst really matter, they'll scoff at his demands and bits and pieces of the "rumors" will continously float around the rumor mill of how corrupt the sport really is. But if USADA was that hard up on going after Lance, to me nailing the big wigs of an entire sport, that's above and beyond anything Lance did. That's potentially bringing down an entire sports or atleast drastically causing complete embarassment to really high level officials.
ETA: Which means a very high possibility of changing how a sport deals with doping. That to me is the entire issue and if that can be uncovered, bravo to all parties involved (Lance, USADA/WADA/riders).

I agree with all of what you've written, but they've actually tried it multiple times, and set the deadline for Tuesday again. They're trying to use his one big thing he wants, (as he said in the interview) "To run the chicago marathon when he's 50" or whatever else competitively, to get him to tell the whole truth. He's clearly not interested in that, at least not on their timetable.
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [BDoughtie] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BDoughtie wrote:
He was an sanctioned athlete for whatever time period his punishment will have to be (if they reduce it). That in itself is punishment enough, is it not? This is basically the reasoning for the "light" sentencing of the other riders who testified against Lance, but that was so readily accepted? Why? Because it allowed them to take the big dog Lance down? What if he can provide info to clean up an sports governing body. That to me would be a huge game changer in the doping fight.

So essentially nothing less than a lifetime ban for Lance will work for you?


Lance has basically served the same penalties as the guys that testified against him, and IF he can provide alot of info that USADA wants, I'm just not really sure why you'd be against him coming back. It worked to bust Lance, but it cant work any other times?

I kinda sense a bias being formed here. ETA: I cant stand Lance, but if we are going to allow governing bodies and riders to mix and match penalties based on what info you can provide, I just would have to think, if the info that Lance has is that valuable to USADA, they'd want to play to a somewhat manageable terms that both will come with in order to get what needs to be addressed. Lances wants his ball back, USADA seemingly wants his info. Go get an arbitrator and figure out what it'll take to get both sides to agree. It sounds like from Lance's view, pretty much Kona in 2013 or 2014 has to be part of the package. Doesnt sound like USADA wants to bend that far. So if that's where we are at, all these deadlines are meaningless. They already have Lance, so for him what's the point of talking anymore, if he's not going to get anything in return that he thinks is worth it. He'll simply do as other doped athletes have done, ride off into the sunset and not really ever fully address their doping issue.

It's not at all an anti-lance bias; put any other athlete in that same space, with those same crimes, and Id want a more severe sentence than those he pushed to do it. If he can bring down the UCI then there's almost no sentence too light; almost. But he still acted to buy off the UCI and that cant go without repercussions, Maybe the cost of getting the UCI is letting lance off, maybe it's not. I guess we'll see. I personally hope its somewhere in the middle; because the UCI wouldnt have accepted the bribe if Lance hadnt offered it.
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [ericM35-39] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ericM35-39 wrote:
you're forgetting about one thing... there are a few very big dominos that still need to fall. Tygart's not looking for new information from Lance, he already knows everything he needs to know. I feel Lance is trying to avoid knocking down those last few dominos, hence the quest to talk to WADA in a TRC environment and not USADA... in other words he doesn't want to talk to anyone who is actually doing their jobs.

And that's the ultimate credibility... cheaters would rather talk to other agencies than the USADA. Chappeau Travis Tygart.


pick6 wrote:
Runguy wrote:
That explains why LA wants to go before WADA and not USADA to testfy.


It's really a multi-fold reasoning:

1. Tygart beat him and it's killing him he got beat, and the last thing he wants to do is play ball with Tygart.
2. Lance thinks he can get around the system by working directly with WADA. Problem is, WADA has already stood behind USADA. USADA is the sanctioning agent, so they have to be the body to reduce the sanction. Further, even if they want to, they have to go to WADA with the "exceptional circumstances" to get it approved. And it has to start with USADA proposing it to WADA, otherwise WADA wouldn't get involved. Now if WADA went ahead and opened A Truth & Reconciliation, then MAYBE lance could work through them, but that's looking less and less likely, because the UCI won't play ball (it's suspected because Lance would rat them out for collusion).

Then why does USADA still want LA to testify under oath?
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [pick6] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
But lance hasn't gotten off. That's kinda the point I'm trying to make. He'll likely be sanctioned more harshly than any other rider in this particular investigation (I think).

The fact that uci accepted a bribe is enough for me to let" off"anyone to blow up and share all the dirt it has on the uci. I'm sorry but an governing body is more responsible for it's actions than one single rider/owner etc., If the uci can't stand on its own and act more responsible than that, we are fucked in the fight against doping.

------------------
@brooksdoughtie
USAT-L2,Y&J; USAC-L2
http://www.aomultisport.com
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [Steve-oH!] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Lance who?
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [Runguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Runguy wrote:
ericM35-39 wrote:
you're forgetting about one thing... there are a few very big dominos that still need to fall. Tygart's not looking for new information from Lance, he already knows everything he needs to know. I feel Lance is trying to avoid knocking down those last few dominos, hence the quest to talk to WADA in a TRC environment and not USADA... in other words he doesn't want to talk to anyone who is actually doing their jobs.

And that's the ultimate credibility... cheaters would rather talk to other agencies than the USADA. Chappeau Travis Tygart.


pick6 wrote:
Runguy wrote:
That explains why LA wants to go before WADA and not USADA to testfy.


It's really a multi-fold reasoning:

1. Tygart beat him and it's killing him he got beat, and the last thing he wants to do is play ball with Tygart.
2. Lance thinks he can get around the system by working directly with WADA. Problem is, WADA has already stood behind USADA. USADA is the sanctioning agent, so they have to be the body to reduce the sanction. Further, even if they want to, they have to go to WADA with the "exceptional circumstances" to get it approved. And it has to start with USADA proposing it to WADA, otherwise WADA wouldn't get involved. Now if WADA went ahead and opened A Truth & Reconciliation, then MAYBE lance could work through them, but that's looking less and less likely, because the UCI won't play ball (it's suspected because Lance would rat them out for collusion).


Then why does USADA still want LA to testify under oath?

The same reason the cops who have a criminal dead to rights still want a confession.
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [Runguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
hmmm, I don't know... any ideas?

Runguy wrote:
ericM35-39 wrote:
you're forgetting about one thing... there are a few very big dominos that still need to fall. Tygart's not looking for new information from Lance, he already knows everything he needs to know. I feel Lance is trying to avoid knocking down those last few dominos, hence the quest to talk to WADA in a TRC environment and not USADA... in other words he doesn't want to talk to anyone who is actually doing their jobs.

And that's the ultimate credibility... cheaters would rather talk to other agencies than the USADA. Chappeau Travis Tygart.


pick6 wrote:
Runguy wrote:
That explains why LA wants to go before WADA and not USADA to testfy.


It's really a multi-fold reasoning:

1. Tygart beat him and it's killing him he got beat, and the last thing he wants to do is play ball with Tygart.
2. Lance thinks he can get around the system by working directly with WADA. Problem is, WADA has already stood behind USADA. USADA is the sanctioning agent, so they have to be the body to reduce the sanction. Further, even if they want to, they have to go to WADA with the "exceptional circumstances" to get it approved. And it has to start with USADA proposing it to WADA, otherwise WADA wouldn't get involved. Now if WADA went ahead and opened A Truth & Reconciliation, then MAYBE lance could work through them, but that's looking less and less likely, because the UCI won't play ball (it's suspected because Lance would rat them out for collusion).


Then why does USADA still want LA to testify under oath?

Eric Reid
AeroFit | Instagram Portfolio Coaching and Bike Fitting
Chapel Hill, NC
Aerodynamic Optimized Bike Fitting, Retul Pre-Purchase Bike Fitting, USAT Level 1 Triathlon Coaching, Nutrition
Ask me: Scody Optimized Speed Suits | CeramicSpeed Oversized Pulley Systems | HUUB Skinsuits and Wetsuits |
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [BDoughtie] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BDoughtie wrote:
But lance hasn't gotten off. That's kinda the point I'm trying to make. He'll likely be sanctioned more harshly than any other rider in this particular investigation (I think).

The fact that uci accepted a bribe is enough for me to let" off"anyone to blow up and share all the dirt it has on the uci. I'm sorry but an governing body is more responsible for it's actions than one single rider/owner etc., If the uci can't stand on its own and act more responsible than that, we are fucked in the fight against doping.

Its always going to come down to individuals; did the UCI make the decision as a whole? probably not. Hein Verbruggen probably said "Sure lance, buy me a sysmex, and we'll be all set". The UCI as an organization from top to bottom, every individual, is likely not corrupt; it's the guys running the not for profit, and seeing the dollar signs everyone else has, is what gets us here. Verbruggen and Mcquaid. Yes, I want to see the UCI taken down, but the person offering the bribe is as corrupt as the person accepting it.
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [pick6] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
But in that instance the cops are out of it. The proceedings habe already occurred and the guys in jail.

I mean nothing lance can say can hurt him at this point. Well maybe publicly from a PR point of view, but he isn't going to get put on Double secret probation. He's already there (lifetime ban).

------------------
@brooksdoughtie
USAT-L2,Y&J; USAC-L2
http://www.aomultisport.com
Last edited by: BDoughtie: Feb 4, 13 14:29
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [pick6] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Yes, I want to see the UCI taken down, but the person offering the bribe is as corrupt as the person accepting it.

_______________

Isnt this the same arguement against busting Lance with testimony from corrupt doped riders?

If you are against Lance's info being used to bust the UCI, shouldnt you have been saying the same thing with the info from the dopped riders?

So what I'm trying to say is, atleast if we are consistent, let's pretty much let Lance off if he can provide the info that USADA seemingly continues to want. They "let off" the doped riders for confessions and info on Lance, so if they can get the same from Lance, I'm just not sure what's the issue if in return they say "Lance you can return in 2013,2014". They've already set the precendent, all I'm doing is holding to essentially the standards they have seemingly set. If we can get some transparanacy out of all of this, to me it'll be worth it for the king pin of doping to be allowed to return. I wont like it, but I'm just basing it on the standards they have *seemingly* gone with (I say seemingly because that's how it looks when I view this from the sidelines).

------------------
@brooksdoughtie
USAT-L2,Y&J; USAC-L2
http://www.aomultisport.com
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [ericM35-39] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
If what you are saying is true that they dont need any info from Lance, then it's a complete waste of time for USADA to still be dealing with Lance. So I hope that if this deadline passes in a few days, this is the last we ever hear of any negoiations between Lance and USADA.

Lance is suspended for life, if he wont talk once this deadline passes, I hope it's demanded that this investigation be moved past. USADA doesnt need to do PR stuff to keep the media and fans knowing it means business. Lance's lifetime ban will and should speak for that. So, I hope that the next few days really decides where all this Lance/USADA stuff will go.

------------------
@brooksdoughtie
USAT-L2,Y&J; USAC-L2
http://www.aomultisport.com
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [BDoughtie] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BDoughtie wrote:
Yes, I want to see the UCI taken down, but the person offering the bribe is as corrupt as the person accepting it.

_______________

Isnt this the same arguement against busting Lance with testimony from corrupt doped riders?

If you are against Lance's info being used to bust the UCI, shouldnt you have been saying the same thing with the info from the dopped riders?

So what I'm trying to say is, atleast if we are consistent, let's pretty much let Lance off if he can provide the info that USADA seemingly continues to want. They "let off" the doped riders for confessions and info on Lance, so if they can get the same from Lance, I'm just not sure what's the issue if in return they say "Lance you can return in 2013,2014". They've already set the precendent, all I'm doing is holding to essentially the standards they have seemingly set. If we can get some transparanacy out of all of this, to me it'll be worth it for the king pin of doping to be allowed to return. I wont like it, but I'm just basing it on the standards they have *seemingly* gone with (I say seemingly because that's how it looks when I view this from the sidelines).

No because using PEDs isnt buying off the federation.

Thats like saying using coke is the same as selling coke is the same as shipping coke as the same growing and exporting coke.

Im fine if they reduce to 2 years, really I am. It punishes him more than everyone else for his much larger role, but gives him credit for the UCI. I hope it's more but, if it's 2 years, Im ok with that.

If all lance did was dope and force others to dope, I'd be ok with him racing in 2013. But there are whole other levels to this; buying off the UCI and transporting, distributing. If anything George should have gotten more as he admitted to procuring EPO and other drugs to share with Lance. I think he was the grey line with Lance on one side and the others on the other side.
Quote Reply
Re: Lance claims unfair treatment [pick6] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
So when should the UCI be held accountable for it's actions in allowing itself to be bought off? Or are they the innocent ones in this just like the other riders that were "forced" to dope? Are you really trying to tell me that only Lance and his close connected friends are the only bad apples in all of this? That if Lance goes away, every thing else will be good to go?

That's kinda the issue I have here. It's as if only Lance is the big bad tough guy here, all others simply bowed down to him or else. BS. This is a governing body that allowed itself to be bought off. If that doesnt raise red flags, I dont know what will.


But here's the overwhelming issue I see in all of this. The dirty little secret that I see in all of this is that no one wants to deal with doping. They all want to bury their heads and not deal with the bad publicity that failed tests bring.

------------------
@brooksdoughtie
USAT-L2,Y&J; USAC-L2
http://www.aomultisport.com
Quote Reply

Prev Next