[Closed] A different perspective on the LA controversy

I think we can still remeber the drugs era with fondness, enjoy the battles, the races, etc.

But we can only do it if we accpet that what we were watching, while great entertainemnt, was not the greatest athletes, but the athletes whos bodies responded best to drugs.

Maybe that is why Armstrong should have an asterix like Riis if he just admits what he did.

FTFY 😉 Maybe that is why Armstrong should have an asterix like Riis if he just admits what he "allegedly" did.

Just refer to them as 'the modified years'.

is this a different perspective, or just a clean new thread to ensure your rambling thoughts are not lost in the noise of a twelve pager?

Is STW now a place where if someone has a different view to yours they receive abuse?

now?

do you mean still?

and i would like to point to (hora) and ask if the " abuse " to which he refers can actually be substantiated, i have made myself available to the moderators day and night, at home and while away, and yet i have (nearly) never been directly and successfully accused of actually having been the director of what some might term abuse towards any other posters even tho they deserved it cos they are liars and trolls and their parentage is questionable as are their motives.

so i say again, im clean.

🙂

Lol @ Hora ..... I think soob made a fair point 😉

Edit : actually, a couple of fair points!

Schools out still? Ah you don't go back yet do you soobalias.

i'm not an armstrong fan, but, removing him from first position is not actually feasible imo.

who subsequently gets the win?
zulle? nope
escartin? no positive i heard of
ullrich? no
beloki? no

etc, etc, all through the early 2000's era the top 10 was littered with dopers (which is why i always thought he was cheating)*. It would be nigh on impossible to filter through all the results to find the first clean rider. There's also the problem with the prize money, subsequent sponsorship deals, etc,etc.

I think we have to draw a line, accept that it was a filthy cheating time, that armstrong is a cheat*, but, that his drug fuelled performances* were better than others' drug fuelled performances

unless the wins are awarded to david moncoutie!

or denis menchov.

*not that he WAS cheating, he was obviously so superior! 😮

http://www.uci.ch/Modules/ENews/ENewsDetails.asp?source=SiteSearch&id=ODYzOA&MenuId=MTI1ODA&CharValList&CharTextList&CharFromList&CharToList&txtSiteSearch=lance+armstrong&LangId=1

aa- It doesn't look.

sorry, hora, didnt mean to (seriously) offend, either you or the OP. However i do think this belongs in the LA thread. Still we are here now so...

1. recent results validity - if you enjoy the sport you must believe in the results, else there is no point. When you expect the results to be tainted, you are no longer enjoying the spectacle as it happens, but possibly enjoying the cat and mouse legality aspect.

2. Armstrong vs Ullrich - yes a level (elevated) playing field but the history and drama are now tainted and should be consigned to history. Lets not speak of them again.

3. Re-award 7 TdF titles - dont bother, as above just mark every LA 'win' as tainted, the mess of trying to prove the innocence of any rider in that period is not worth the end result.

AIUI the USADA has no authority over the TdF, so they're not being re-awarded and he won't be scrubbed from history unless the appropriate body (UCI?) chose to do so.

footflaps - did you read the UCI link I've just posted above? It doesn't read good to me.

Maybe that is why Armstrong should have an asterix like Riis if he just admits what he "allegedly" did.

He pleaded guilty. That means he did it.

UCI do not take orders from the USADA, it matters not that the USADA have "taken" jurisdiction as it's not their place to do so (this harks on at USA -World Police theme). The UCI are reserving their right for time being on any actions [i]they[/i] take. As the USADA have no control over the TdF they cannot strip anyone of anything as much as they might like to think they can.... now wheres the international sign of distress....**** yeahhhh.

never be one not to check first

PART 14 ANTI-DOPING
INTRODUCTION
1. Pursuant to amendments adopted by the 115
th
session of the International Olympic Committee in
July 2003, the Olympic Charter stipulates that in order to be recognized by the IOC, an International
Federation must adopt and implement the World Anti-Doping Code (Rules 26 and 44).

SO if the WADA have granted USADA jurisdiction, then the UCI would have to adhere to the USADA requests - -dunno all a bit confusing really as the rules don't really state one way or the other if you read them. I still don't think that an American institution has the right to strip anyone of anything if it's not done on their patch - could they strip Ullriche etc...?

The other thing I don't get is the lifetime ban when someone who gets caught with EPO in their urine gets just 2 years? After wall, we had convicted drugs cheats in our Team GB Olympic cycling squad - no lifetime bans there?

So why don't they just ban Lance for 2 years?

So why don't they just ban Lance for 2 years?

Cycling Politics?

Take down Lance?

also just to add to that, as the TdF wasn't an olympic sport (if we are looking for ways out), then the Charter has no meaning and the UCI would not need to adhere to the WADA and thusly USADA..

Taking down someone who had such an impact on the TdF doesn't help the sport ultimately in my opinion. Its butchery by a Quack Surgeon.

Taking down someone who had such an impact on the TdF doesn't help the sport ultimately in my opinion. Its butchery by a Quack Surgeon.

Taking down someone who had such an impact
on the TdF ultimately benefits the sport as it makes clear that cheats will be persued irrespective of how good they are.

Although the USADA doesn't have jurisdiction to strip TdF wins the UCI does and if they don't they'll need to explain why not (I'm not sure if it would normally be a requirement under WADA's code but I'm sure WADA will ask for a reason why past victories aren't nullified as they have an axe to grind with the UCI). Whilst the UCI can ignore the USADA they can't ignore WADA and they know nothing good will come of trying to defend LA when he's not even defending himself so I can't see any result but them stripping the victories (and likely leaving them vacant).

So why don't they just ban Lance for 2 years?

Because what he was charged by the USADA is not doping alone but more like conspiracy. This carries a possible penalty of a lifetime ban.

I'm with the OP on this one, forget about Lance for a minute, except that if LA doped for a decade and didn't properly get pulled up for it, then we can basically assume the testing is either useless or corruptly infiltrated and administered.

With USPostal, Festina et al now presumably proven to be at it we have to consequently assume coaches, Directors Sportif, organisatoinal staff, all sorts of folk were in the planning, supply and disposal of evidence, all equally guilty of the "fraud" if that's how you want to treat it legally. Impossible to believe too that folk at the top of national team structures weren't keeping an eye on when their athletes would "peak".

Millar was never caught out by testing either but we now know he'd been at it for years before his cosy dinner with Dave Brailsford was interrupted by the police to arrest him and search his flat to find the EPO syringes. Since Brailsford and Millar are historically close and Brailsford is happy for Millar to ride GB, seems odd he was not invited to Sky where his sister works.

Not to take anything away from Brailsford though, looking at him he seems to be standing up to years of vastly demanding and stressful work remarkably well, amazing for the man who has brought such Growth to cycling, a superhuman effort. I hope DB isn't part of the doping machine, but if he is then all the track and subsequent road success is questionable too is it not? If he really is running a clean show then I think he needs to put a lot more distance between the GB/Sky show and anyone tainted.

Millar was only at it for a particular period rather than ages but we all know the tests didnt work. Luckily they're much more effective now and IMO you have to be lucky or doping at a VERY low level to avoid detection.

Sky has a policy of not recruiting anyone with a doping history.

Whether LA took drugs or not doesn't matter to me.
He played by the rules of the day.
He's still the greatest ever TDF rider.

SB

i think millar is more than just a garmin rider i think he has a share of the team/company.

i might be wrong though.

Give One of these a [url= http://www.orangebikes.co.uk ]GOOOOOOOOO[/url]

So did I miss the bit where he provided a positive test then??

Whether LA took drugs or not doesn't matter to me.
He played by the rules of the day.
He's still the greatest ever TDF rider.

+1

It all seems like a personal vendetta at this point; nothing to do with the sport.

technically the rules of the day didn't include blood transfusions, taking epo, hgh, etc. So, he's the best cheating (or the rider whi best responded to drugs) tdf rider ever

Whether LA took drugs or not doesn't matter to me.

He played by the rules of the day.

He's still the greatest ever TDF rider.

FFS he is not even defending himself but he still has some fanboys to do it for him