 You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Given USDA are attempting to force the UCI to strip LA's titles from him (despite him passing tests at the time) "note i am not claiming he was not cheating".
Is it not only fair to put all other riders through the same process and assume all of guilt.
Given USDA only have remit on USA's atheletes they cannot review other nationalities hence the UCI should bin all classifications for those years OR force a full review of ALL riders who at the time were not FOUND to be cheating by the authorities. ??
OR
we all accept ppl will work on the fringes of the rules / cheat in the hope of not being found and accept what happened in the past and aim to drive PED out of the sport through ever rigourous testing...
???
Forget the Lance years, who can actually be awarded the wins for 1960-2010?
The sport still isn't clean now, but I think we can only safely say we've had fully clean winners for the last couple of years for sure, so what to do? Do they just write off 50 years of cycling history?
If nobody else wants the titles I'll have them and the prize money.
Carlos Sastre was clean.
No evidence Jimmy Saville took drugs, let him have them?
Well I've gone for 2002....I was neither in France or racing therefore I am certainly clean......I've also never tested positive............
He had everything else [b]footflaps[/b]
In other news, i'll take the titles.
I've never been positive about anything which year can I have?
The results for all those tours should be declared void.
The results will be unawarded.
If you were to redo the results by throwing out anybody who was known to be a doper then the winner in 2005 was Cadel Evans (who was 8th in the results posted at the time).
The USDA have no authority to strip LA of his titles. As he never tested positive, and he hasn't admitted doping seems to me the UCI just leaves the results as they are.
They should all stand, but put an astrix agains them, mentioning the lack of efective testing for epo ec.
This is a good article on the topic:
[url= http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/blogs/blazin-saddles/;_ylt=AikRdFjyU131gfGBcG2nIw2Lg7V_;_ylu=X3oDMTFuMWV0YnVhBG1pdANBUlRJQ0xFIEJyYW5kaW5nBHBvcwMxBHNlYwNNZWRpYUFydGljbGVCcmFuZGluZ1RlbXA-;_ylg=X3oDMTNnbmZhMW5qBGludGwDZ2IEbGFuZwNlbi1nYgRwc3RhaWQDZjZlZmQzOWYtNTY3MS0zZjEyLTllMDItMzJiNmFiMmY0ZDZkBHBzdGNhdANjeWNsaW5nfGJsYXppbi0zOS1zYWRkbGVzYmxvZwRwdANzdG9yeXBhZ2U-;_ylv=3 ]Blazing Saddles Blog on Eurosport[/url]
The USDA have no authority to strip LA of his titles.
As I understood it, WADA recognise USDA. UCI have to follow what WADA say.
A great blog here about this topic by Paul McConville. He's a Scottish barrister with a healthy interest in all thing interesting...
this was written well before USADA released the dossier of evidence against Lance.
mboy - MemberForget the Lance years, who can actually be awarded the wins for 1960-2010?
Well put.
jambalaya - Member
The USDA have no authority to strip LA of his titles. As he never tested positive, and he hasn't admitted doping seems to me the UCI just leaves the results as they are.
Are you egyptian?
USADAs Reasoned Decision (p155-160) goes into full detail of how and when they have assumed "results management" responsibilities from UCI, partially owing to how events have been investigated. UCI didnt raise a legal arguement to this.