You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
This should apply in all [b][u]contested[/u][/b] cases unless there is an admission of guilt.
Fair enough - but how does that relate to this case.
This case specifically [b]IS NOT BEING [u]CONTESTED[/u][/b]
The USADA should now have to put this in front of a judge or another body or person that is seperate from both sides. This should apply in all contested cases unless there is an admission of guilt.
If Armstrong (or Drs Ferrari and Garcia) had contested the charges that is exactly what would have happened. The evidence would have been presented by USADA and contested by the 'defendants' in front of a panel of three arbitration judges.
This is the process that will apply for Dr Celaya, Trainer Marti and DS/Boss Bruyneel.
I agree but is it their job to judge as well?
LA was offered arbitration in front of a panel consisting of a USADA rep, one of LA's reps (prob one of his ex george bush lawyers) and a mutually agreed on person (ie independent agreed on by both LA and USADA) he turned this down stating it was unfair and knowing full well what the outcome would be.
So yes in this case it was right of them to, and in fact their job to, judge.
Also this is what LA signed up for in the agreement of his US racing licence.
Don't forgeet the UCI had the exact same starting point - testimony from landis and hamilton, but instead of pursuing it they brushed it off stating they couldnt trust the source, USADA pursued it making a case and the UCI look very silly in the process.
Also this is what LA signed up for in the agreement of his US racing licence.
We all tend to forget about these little details when we sign a piece of paper.
My son started fencing earlier this year, and is coming on well. His club want him to enter competitions, so he needs to upgrade his British Fencing membership to a competition membership category - and has to sign up to the WADA code...
At this stage it may be worth pointing out a "coincidence".
The federal investigation into USPS was dropped on the eve of charges being issued due to political pressure. FACT
The lead investigator is puzzled and angry at this as he knew he had a stong case. FACT
The senator responsible for the case is related to Lance Armstrong. COINCIDENCE?
Junkyard
"This charge has been repeated but the federal judge ruled that their processes were sufficient to ensure that LA would get a fair trial - he did not mention that in his refusal to take part press release."
Re read all the judges comments. This system as it stands does not allow independant judgement. That suposedly comes later if you appeal, independance should be first. I am not against the Armstrong prosicution but would prefer to judged by a judge and not the investigators. Would you like to go into an arbitration meeting meeting with a police officer that investgated your alledged crime?
The "you agreed when you signed" is true but who reads how you will dealt with in any disaplinery process at any point of their career unless they are in trouble, let alone the sport they are in. A few years ago to much coffee would have got you banned (and it has) without any viable way round the process without being seen as guilty first. The whole process has to be seen to be fair, this then removes the possibility of the whitchunt claim. I do realise this may not always be possible given the time things take and the leaking of information.
For those who think I'm talking about LA, No. It's the process that I do not like.
On another brighter note, anyone read the story about the guy on the board/director of the Danish Cycling Federation who has had a positive test in a Vets event. He was a team manager at one time also. Do you think his is friends with Riis?
The senator responsible for the case is related to Lance Armstrong.
Is that true?
Not that I doubt you but who is the senator and what is his relationship to the Texan?
glitchy?
A few years ago to much coffee would have got you banned
iirc it was something like a caffeine level equivalent to drinking 15 cups of strong coffee in an hour, so pretty clearly taking caffeine as a stimulant, not just drinking a bit too much coffee with breakfast.
but who reads how you will dealt with in any disaplinery process at any point of their career
I am pretty sure that when Armstrong first got his racing license that may have been the case, but when he came out of retirement I am equally sure that he knew exactly the process he was signing up to.
This system as it stands does not allow independant judgement. That suposedly comes later if you appeal, independance should be first. I am not against the Armstrong prosicution but would prefer to judged by a judge and not the investigators. Would you like to go into an arbitration meeting meeting with a police officer that investgated your alledged crime?
But that's just not true. People are falling for spin.
[i]Q: Does the athlete have the right to a hearing if USADA proceeds with adjudication as a result of a positive or elevated test, or other potential rule violation?
A: Yes. The athlete has the right to contest the sanction sought by USADA.
The athlete may elect to proceed to a hearing before the American Arbitration Association (AAA) using a single arbitrator (or a three-arbitrator panel, if requested by either of the parties) selected from a pool of the North American Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) arbitrators, who shall also be AAA arbitrators. [/i]
So in Armstrong's case, as with so many others, he's been accused by USADA, and has the option to arbitration by the American Arbitration Association.
[url= http://teamjva.com/lance-armstrong-soundboard/ ]When fighting doping charges that are over a decade old just use the Lance Armstrong Legalbot 6000[/url]
Re read all the judges comments.
so he said it was inherently unfair and LA did not need to go ahead with it? My comment stands as to whether the judge ruled it to be fair or not.
are you suggesting that this is what would happen in this case?Would you like to go into an arbitration meeting meeting with a police officer that investgated your alledged crime?
Can you evidence that? as i understand it WADA approved folk would sit on the arbitration they would not have investigated the charge or be the Police.
I
"But that's just not true. People are falling for spin."
Yes that because it's spinable (is that a word?). Us mere mortals and those that want to believe that LA is the worlds best ever bike rider, a Judge, a courtroom and a guilty is what it will take. Like almost all things it's about perception and the spin is that "I know what I did and you people who are picking on me, you can do what you like" (I paraphrase). Those that believe, believe and those that do not understand the system question what is going on. Given that the way those accused of doping are brought to justice are often able to drag the process out or abuse the process until everything becomes cloudy. Where as those that are falsly accused end up in some sort of Kafkaesque novel trying to get there life back (Munchousen by Proxy, if you say you are inocent you must be guilty). Given the situation we regarding LA, getting him in front of a judge would kill the speculation once and for all, no questions, no tantrums, no walk aways. Justice must be seen to be done clearly and fairly, can they not hire a PR team at USADA?
By the way the caffiene positive was for a guy in a time trial (over 40 as I recall) got a positive and banned. Not sure that he ever cleared his name but given the amount of coffee we drink now, you could be nicked for doing your local 10TT after a Costa double shot. 🙂
Us mere mortals and those that want to believe that LA is the worlds best ever bike rider,
No one thinks this surely because its not the truth.
1. Merckx
2. De Vlaeminck
3. Coppi
4. Bartali
5. [b]Arguably[/b] Armstrong
Given the situation we regarding LA, getting him in front of a judge would kill the speculation once and for all, no questions, no tantrums, no walk aways. Justice must be seen to be done clearly and fairly, can they not hire a PR team at USADA?
they tried but after the judge told him it was fair LA declined to contest the charges.
I suggets you address this to LA rather than USADA.
Are you really suggesting it would be fairer if they made him attend arbitration against his will?
alex222 - Member
Us mere mortals and those that want to believe that LA is the worlds best ever bike rider,
No one thinks this surely because its not the truth.
1. Merckx
2. De Vlaeminck
3. Coppi
4. Bartali
5. Arguably Armstrong
Totally agree!
"Are you really suggesting it would be fairer if they made him attend arbitration against his will?"
No just carry on without him and preferably in a court.
Err no.
1. Nicolas Vouilloz
2. Sam Hill
3. Greg Minnaar
4. Steve Peat
5. Cedric as the wildcard 8)
Although Nathan Rennie was a good 'un.
Most of the above can mix different bike disciplines around mountainbiking and for me NV strength is longevity and ability to adapt to different formats within racing.
You said the worlds best ever bike rider. Spinning up a ****ing hill over 100's of miles isn't that definition.
In that case
1.Doyle
2.Aitken
3.Alcantara
4.Reynolds
5.Mulville
6.Duggan
That Steve Peat was useless in Langsett Cycles, good job he could do something else.
[i]No just carry on without him and preferably in a court. [/i]
Why a court and not arbitration? What specifically would the court add to the process? I don't see what standout difference it makes other than making a larger number of lawyers richer. But it's a genuine question - does the court feel more credible in your eyes?
1. Nicolas Vouilloz
2. Sam Hill
3. Greg Minnaar
4. Steve Peat
5. Cedric as the wildcard
😀 No Shaun Palmer?
My heart would still like to believe that he didn't dope but my head is beginning to accept the likelihood is that he did. 🙁
I haven't read all of 24 pages,just the first and last,so if someone's posted this already,forgive me.
http://www.cyclismas.com/2012/06/lance-armstrongs-business-links-a-flowchart-by-dimspace/
the question is always who gains,money usually.
I'm not posting the flowchart on here because I think it's only fair you should go onto the original website,and give them a click,rather than creating content for this website.(our forum thread thoughts).
nobody's mentioned kelly in the greatest cyclists,keeping it to our lifetimes,if you go back to before ww2 there's quite a few more.
coppi,and even more so,bartali had their carreers interrupted by the war,not 6months mil service like havuikainen and levikhonen,but 4-5 years.
quite a few,petit-breton,comes to mind,but there's a few more,died in ww1.
so it's a bit hard to compare like for like.
it'd be good to see some female cyclists in the list,but I think it's cause for another thread.
No just carry on without him and preferably in a court.
Well the case for the defence will be quite short. What on earth do you think anyone would do given only one side ? It would be the most pointless of show trials where we read out the prosecution evidence then we decide on the name of fairness? Cannot happen for obvious reasons
The history of this is that where drug allegations went to court the cases take so long - look at Contador recently for example that you end up with drug cheats competing whilst we wait for the decision and that was within the sports procedure.
Do you propose a court for say when Red Bull are accused of breaching f1 regs and they compete as is till the court decides? Perhaps a footballer going to court to see if it was a red card or a penalty with the outcome meaning we know who won the league? Again nothing illegal [ football rules are not actual laws we need to obey beyond fair play etc] has happened so why would we be going to court?
As far as I am aware taking performance enhancing drugs is not illegal in law but merley violates the rules of a sport so it is rather unclear what he would be charged with. Where would you charge him given he muct have done it numerous countries
lehikonen
still don't think that's right.but it's nearer.
And now things get much more entertaining with [url= http://inrng.com/2012/08/can-liggett-save-armstrong/ ]Phil Liggett claiming it's all a plot to bring down Lance[/url]
Of course, where all this money is coming from to get riders and others to testify is anyone's guess since USADA aren't exactly loaded; part of the reason Floyd Landis kept his defence going for so long was because he hoped USADA wouldn't be able to afford to keep the case going.
LA has actully come out of this as well as he can have hoped for. Trek and Nike stand by him. Donations to Livestrong are way up. The people who hated him and thought he was a doper are now convinced he's a doper - big deal, they thought that anyway. The people who belived he is/was clean and thought he was the greatest cyclist ever now think it's all a consiracy/cover up. The whole situation is so tangled up in legal muddles that no-one bar LA actually has a clue of what really happened anyway.
Sorry but to my mind, LA has more or less won again - this will now drag on for years with claims and counterclaims of conspiracies, cover ups, jurisdiction arguments, internet rumour, myth and it'll all blur with time.
Liggett, voice of Lance's special edition DVDs, business partner, seen in past living the high life on Lance's jet? 😀
Thank god for an unbiased voice, at last!
Thank god for an unbiased voice, at last!
Oh I know what you're saying but Liggett is pretty big in the world of cycling - he's done Tour coverage for the American market since before the days of Greg Lemond and most of America only really woke up to the Tour when Armstrong started winning it so he's a voice that America knows and associates with the Tour and with knowledge of cycling.
I still think Phil is bullshitting though...
Munchousen by Proxy
What, so he's been deliberately harming his kids to get attention? I thought he was just a cheating doper, but that puts a whole new spin on things...
Despite the pages of eloquent arguments from the fine legal minds in this thread, I don't see queues of innocent cyclists fighting to clear their names of unjust accusations, so I reckon USADA, WADA and the other enforcement agencies are probably making a good fist of a very difficult job. Good on them, and I'm pleased to see someone trying to do the right thing for my sport. Armstrong has played the system as far as he could every time he has been challenged, and finally someone boxed him in to a corner that he couldn't just walk away from. Would have been better to see him in court, but probably the best result they could achieve.
The whole situation is so tangled up in legal muddles that no-one bar LA actually has a clue of what really happened anyway.
That kind of knackers the eyewitness statements and the case as a whole a bit, doesn't it?
Good summarising by crazy-legs there. Kind of explains why its hard to give a shit.
"I know what I did and you people who are picking on me, you can do what you like"
Which is a pretty good summary of what he actually said. The interesting thing is, as mentioned (way) earlier, he doesn't say "I didn't dope", he skirts round it, and essentially says "I know what I did, and everyone knows what I did".
It's like on those ads for facial creams: "contains a clinically tested ingredient", which we're supposed to take as "contains an ingredient that's been clinically shown to have an effect on your face".
On the other hand, the French Cycling Federation don't seem to share Mr Liggett's views... 😉
[i]The whole situation is so tangled up in legal muddles that no-one bar LA actually has a clue of what really happened anyway.[/i]
Again, Lance tried to tangle it with his case challenging the process, but he lost the case, which makes it all pretty clear.
Liggett! Clarkson knows more about bike racing than he does!
If/when the titles are stripped, the interesting stuff will start.
The French are already asking for the prize money to be repaid, and SCA who were involved in the court case which went 'You said if I won those tours you would pay me x million dollars, and I won them because you never said I didn't have to dope to do it' might be asking for that money back. As will the Sunday Times, along with David Walsh and Paul Kimmage.
In some ways I feel sorry for Armstrong; he did what he had to to win in a time when winning required him to do what he did, and is therefore as much a victim of circumstance as the other dopers. His harrassment and pursuit of others and his links to those who should really have called a halt temper my view of him somewhat.
The real heroes in the whole sorry saga are those who stuck to what they believed in, namely Paul Kimmage and even more so, Betsy Andreu.
You can buy a hat too!
http://nyvelocity.com/content/features/2011/baas-cap-kickstarter
I still think Phil is bullshitting though...
The goose is about to stop laying the golden eggs and Phils pension may suffer.
Sorry but to my mind, LA has more or less won again - this will now drag on for years with claims and counterclaims of conspiracies, cover ups, jurisdiction arguments, internet rumour, myth and it'll all blur with time.
Maybe, maybe not. It depends what comes out during arbitration for the remaining three and whether USADA publish the evidence they have against Armstrong (and in how much detail).
I very much doubt Armstrong himself will ever admit to what he's done, certainly not in full, but we may reach a point where the pubilished evidence is so compelling that putting his fingers in his ears and going "LA LA LA" just doesn't work any more.
It depends what comes out during arbitration for the remaining three and whether USADA publish the evidence they have against Armstrong (and in how much detail).
Sounds like Tyler Hamilton will beat them all to it...
Just finished reading the death of marco pantani and the fall and rise of david millar. As much as i wish i could believe in Lance - i don't think i can anymore.
Pantani book fascinating - some of these guys in the 90's onwards were riding with 60% heamatocrit levels - amazing they all didn't just drop dead really.
By the way the pantani book has one of the best overviews of doping bloodwork i've ever read.
In other words - let's see his bloodwork - if it is anomalous - game over.
Glitchety
840 posts, can we make the 1000? 😀
840 posts, can we make the 1000?
Hopefully we'll get to 1000 before:
1) any more [u]facts[/u] come out
2) anyone here changes their view
LA has actully come out of this as well as he can have hoped for. Trek and Nike stand by him. Donations to Livestrong are way up. The people who hated him and thought he was a doper are now convinced he's a doper - big deal, they thought that anyway. The people who belived he is/was clean and thought he was the greatest cyclist ever now think it's all a consiracy/cover up.
You seem to have missed off the vast majority of cycling fans who neither hated Lance nor thought he was a god. Like a lot of people commenting on this thread I don't hate LA - I used to be a fan, and have his books. I also used to believe his claims of innocence. However this case has made me realise that he really was a doper. As much as I'd like to be smugly self-satisfied and reckon you need a certain level of intelligence to come to that conclusion from the information available, I don't actually believe that is true.
I'm sure there are plenty of others like me who have had their minds changed. I actually still held a tiny sliver of doubt and hope that he was clean, but the admission of guilt by refusing to contest the charges has extinguished that for me.
jfletch - MemberAt this stage it may be worth pointing out a "coincidence".
The federal investigation into USPS was dropped on the eve of charges being issued due to political pressure. FACT
The lead investigator is puzzled and angry at this as he knew he had a stong case. FACT
The senator responsible for the case is related to Lance Armstrong. COINCIDENCE?
These are interesting FACTS which I would be interested to hear more of.
In other words - let's see his bloodwork - if it is anomalous - game over.
USADA statement indicates that this forms part of their case.
Tyler hamiltons book is out a few days early. Is it full of fabrications and bitter lies or did those blood transfusion get togethers with lance really happen?
Tyler hamiltons book is out a few days early. Is it full of fabrications and bitter lies or did those blood transfusion get togethers with lance really happen?
And if it's full of fabrication and lies about Armstrong, will he sue?
I don't see how he can after giving "You know what? I've had enough of all this" as his reason for not contesting the USADA charges.
And if it's full of fabrication and lies about Armstrong, will he sue?I don't see how he can after giving "You know what? I've had enough of all this" as his reason for not contesting the USADA charges.
Yes - I'm thinking the same...
I suspect that most of Hamilton's grand jury / USADA testimony will be in the book, and I'd also guess that is why LA has hung up the towel.. A quick google suggests there hasnt been any legal bid (yet) to block Hamilton's book...
And Hamilton would be on his way to court (one way or the other) if the book differed greatly from his grand jury testimony. Any major discrepencies between book and testimony and either LA would sue for libel, or the Feds would be after him for perjury
Has not changed my view. Believe and will carry on believeing that Cycle racing is one of the worlds best sports.
Known for a long time that the anti doping system is a failure, it persecutes the innocent allows thew guilty to get away (for a long time).
It has confirmed that the human race is made up of people who will do anything to win, people who want to believe in the extrodinary, and winging gets who do nothing but stand(sit) and do nothing more difficult than being cynical. Of course we need all these people to temper each other. Rather boringly i'm made up of mostly the middle on with an active dose of the latter, while actually wishing I had a bit of the first.
[i]2) anyone here changes their view[/i]
I've changed mine!
(Unfortunately, it was about Carl Lewis 😉 )
Hadn't seen this one before...?
[url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/cycling/lancearmstrong/9501196/Lawyer-says-drugs-raid-on-Lance-Armstrongs-team-hotel-during-2005-Tour-de-France-was-scrapped-at-last-minute.html ]Drug raid on LA TdF hotel called off[/url]
Michel Rieu, the scientific adviser to France’s national anti-doping agency, that Armstrong received up to 20 minutes warning of imminent ‘random’ drug tests
“A French investigation detail came from Paris to carry out a raid. But I have it on good authority that around five in the afternoon, when they were in front of the hotel, the investigators were told to abort. The scheduled operation was called off at the last minute. I do not know who gave the order... But I do know the investigators were furious at having to turn on their heels.”
Article lifted from The Times online
Probably related to
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/aug/28/lance-armstrong-news-international-libel
(walks away again)
rkk01 - Member
Hadn't seen this one before...?Drug raid on LA TdF hotel called off
Nice selective quoting at the end, not difficult to see who the writer supports!
Did I selectively quote - or the original article??? I didn't bother quoting what has already been placed on this thread...
piemonster - that Times online piece is very good. Puts the strident denials in context. LA has squandered the chance of a sympathetic reception because of his agressive stance
rkk01 - Member
Did I selectively quote - or the original article??? I didn't bother quoting what has already been placed on this thread...
The article, he quoted the judge's issues with USADA but didn't mention that was also critical of Pharmstrong and the UCI.
Fair enough.
I have taken the opinion that most journos still seem to be very cautious about reporting on this - the Beeb especially, have been very "conservative"* shall we say. LA's reputation for aggressive legal action obviously still has some weight.
* - Or alternatively, you could venture the opinion that the mainstream media dont want to cover this in a balanced way. few seem to be willing to delve into the detail of the previous (publically availbale) concerns about LA
On the subject of denial...
For f&*ks sake, walk away, walk way away.....
Interesting to see Ned Boulting distance himself from this last night, on Twitter he stated that he disagrees with Liggett
I listeded to the Liggett interview. At around 12 minutes he seems to suggest that he has met cancer survivors who have beaten their illness as a direct result of listening to LA's inspiring speeches!
Time to call it a day Phil.
Phil Ligget sucks ***** in hell (possibly)
[url= http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/usada-responds-to-liggetts-claims-of-bribery-in-armstrong-case ]USADA responds to Liggett[/url]
Interesting that Liggett is seen as having enough 'clout' to warrant a response from USADA, even if it's only a one-liner. I may be wrong but isn't this the first time they've commented on comments?
Paul Sherwin and I believe Phil Liggett are both business partners and very good friends of LA, but still its galling to listen to what he's trying to say..
higgo - Member
USADA responds to LiggettInteresting that Liggett is seen as having enough 'clout' to warrant a response from USADA, even if it's only a one-liner. I may be wrong but isn't this the first time they've commented on comments?
I think it's because in the US Liggett is 'the voice of cycling' so maybe seen as quite influential?
According to the commentator, who has business interests with Armstrong
Hmmmmm
[url= http://mg.co.za/article/2012-08-31-00-lance-armstrongs-loss-is-win-for-clean-cycling ]another excellent, measured piece...[/url]
again, nicely summarises LA's achievements, and downfall...
... tellingly, another commentator who write's LA's sporting "obituary" with sympathy - As part of a generation of dopers, it's not the doping that has actually brought him down, it's the aggressive denials and pursuit of others that have left him looking ridiculous
[i]its about a conspiracy[/i]
Jeez, they ain't helping themselves. Oooh, a conspiracy!
If Liggett's lying (and I'm not saying he is or isn't) why don't they sue his arse?
Time to call it a day Phil.
+1 for that, he was also pretty useless in the Tour commentary this year.
Cards on the table here - I'm a massive Lance fanboi (almost as much as Hora) but there is no way I can now defend or think he was clean. Hopefully all the evidence comes out in the open to end it once and for all.
If anyone has not seen it, Jens has posted power outputs on a recent stage victory in the states [url= http://velonews.competitor.com/2012/08/analysis/power-analysis-jens-voigts-winning-power-file-stage-4-of-the-usa-pro-challenge_235832 ]linkage here[/url] make sure you read the comments 🙂
its about a conspiracyJeez, they ain't helping themselves. Oooh, a conspiracy!
What else do you want to call it? If he was just doping on his own - no conspiracy. Being part of a team system who are all doping and covering it up (and making millions doing it), as well as bullying/intimidating others to keep quiet about it - conspiracy.
Despite claiming to be so bored of this thread you still keep cropping up with LA fanboy posts fairly often. 😆
If Liggett's lying (and I'm not saying he is or isn't) why don't they sue his arse?
Pretty obviously bollocks all this hearsay about mysterious figures with unlimited bundles of cash trying to bring down LA (coming from someone with business interests with LA, hmmmm). Is this guy Liggett mentions willing to go on record I wonder?
Who are these mysterious figures trying to bring down LA and where do they get the money from? The USADA probably won't bother suing as it's patently absurd. Also, by your own argument - if LA is innocent why doesn't he sue the USADA or contest the case?
Just nicked this (below) from the Road cc news page. Is this the same FFC that had there sprinter (Bauge?) ban back dated so he could ride the Olympics, then still wanted him to keep the world title he won during his back dated ban? Yes I know his just missed tests and was not actually positive but you can get kicked out of the tour de france for that. You can even lose your TdF titles without a legal positive test also. The hypocracy is amusing now.
"The Fédération Française de Cyclisme (FFC) has said that it views Lance Armstrong's decision not to take the doping charges laid against him by the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) to arbitration as tantamount to a confession by the 40-year-old that he doped. It also says that the seven Tour de France titles Armstrong won between 1999 and 2005 should not be reassigned, and expressed the hope that the Texan repay some €2.95 million in prize money won in France.
The FFC's views are contained in a press release published today on its website in response to USADA's announcement last Friday that it had banned Armstrong from sport for life and disqualified him from all results obtained since 1 August 1998. That followed Armstrong's anouncemet late on Thursday that he was not seeking arbitration.
In its statement, the FFC said it had been closely following developments, that it "applauds the perseverance of USADA," and that "the refusal of Lance Armstrong not to contest USADA's accusations sounds as a recognition of his guilt with regard to the breaches of anti-doping regulations held against him dating back to 1998."
It went on: "This decision closes the 'black book' of a sombre period for interational cycling. It also demonstrates that the biggest athletes are not sheltered, even with a delay, from sporting sanctions related to breaches linked to the fight against doping.
"The [FFC] welcomes this very strong message sent to the cheats, one full of hope for the vast majority of riders who practise their sport cleanly."
Regarding the potential reassignment of the Tour de France titles won by Armstrong, the FFC said that it "wishes that the places left vacant subsequent to the disqualification of Armstrong should not be reassigned, thereby leaving the palmares of the Tour de France clean for seven years and avoiding any arguments regarding the credibility of potential winners."
It added that it hoped for the restitution by Armstrong of €2.95 million in prize money won at the Tour de France and other races, and that the money to be used to develop cycling at youth level and for anti-doping initiatives."
The voice of dopey roadies and trackies maybe but definitely not the voice of cycling. Liggett opposed the entry of MTB (a popular form of cycling if ever there was one) and BMX into the Olympics.
Because it was rambling nonsense with no specifics?If Liggett's lying (and I'm not saying he is or isn't) why don't they sue his arse?
Is this the same FFC that had there sprinter (Bauge?) ban back dated so he could ride the Olympics, then still wanted him to keep the world title he won during his back dated ban? Yes I know his just missed tests and was not actually positive but you can get kicked out of the tour de france for that. You can even lose your TdF titles without a legal positive test also. The hypocracy is amusing now.
Hypocrisy maybe - they certainly didn't come out of the Bauge affair looking good. But what exactly do you want them to say now?
[i]Liggett opposed the entry of MTB[/i]
I believe his "opposition" was just a comment in an interview.
[i]you still keep cropping up with LA fanboy posts fairly often. [/i]
Yeah? Quote me on one.
Yeah? Quote me on one.
Here you go 🙄
DezB - Member
He's still pretty damn awesome though: Out of all the cheats, he (allegedly) cheated much better than all the others and got away with it for the longest. Go Armstrong!
aracer - Member
I'd expect them to say "we are hyocritical losers who would rather accuse others than figure out how to win legally ourselves". I do live in cloud cuckoo land though.
Seriously after all the steps taken by the French to stop doping after the 1998 I expected things had improved there but it seems not. Can't totally blame the FFC for that though. Apprently some folk are using really round wheels.
TBF, Dezb's "input" (which is not insubstantial) on this thread isn't much more than saying how crap it is 🙄
.
[i]TBF, Dezb's "input" (which is not insubstantial) on this thread isn't much more than saying how crap it is[/i]
He speaketh the truth. S'what boredom does. I keep coming back expecting new revelations, but there's never any so I'll leave ya all to it.
[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/19433990 ]USADA to publish evidence...[/url]
The bulk of that evidence is testimony from at least a dozen of his former team-mates and associates, [b]but it is not, as has been reported, evidence gathered during the federal investigation[/b] into allegations of systematic doping at the US Postal Service cycling team.
This looks like a different twist...
Usada has not had access, despite requests, to the evidence the Food and Drug Administration investigators gathered, and has built its own case.