Lance Armstrong to be charged with doping?

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Mike F

So, because of ASADA's motives, it doesn't matter that ASADA apparently finally have the goods on him in the form of teammates who lived alongside him day to day through his career reluctantly testifying that he was cheating?

Hypothetically, if Eliot Ness had been going after Capone in order to gain publicity to fuel a run for public office rather than out of any desire to fight crime, would that have turned the prosecution of Capone for tax evasion a witch hunt?

In my understanding, in a witch hunt the prosecutor has little regard for actual guilt or innocence. Say what you want about their motivation to clean up sport, can there be much doubt that ASADA believes Armstrong is guilty?

The difference between capone and armstrong though was Capone was operating outside of the writen and unwriten rules of his sociaty where as Armstrong wasn't, the Tour didn't want a clean feild, neither did the teams or the UCA, this is like prosecuting an employee because his boss had him take the safety guards off a lathe.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Azure;3839539[B

]Hasn't been using for a while, and still a top player. Obviously didn't make much of a difference for him. He was a damn good player in Seattle already.[/B]

Do you live in a fantasy world? What's one thing we've seen become a major issue with A-Rod over the last few seasons? His health. What helps you avoid and recover from injuries? Hmmm.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Cowperson

I think the USASDA will eventually crash and burn on this. A pyrrhic victory that leads to reform within an overly politicized organization. And Armstrong will probably retain or eventually recover the titles.

They seem to have successfully turned a probable doper into an underdog hero.

A pretty typical rebuttal that you're seeing across the media universe, this one in the Washington Post:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports...tml?tid=pm_pop

or this in the Calgary Herald

http://blogs.calgaryherald.com/2012/...nce-armstrong/

Cowperson

From the first link: "Quite independently of Lance, with whom I wrote two books"

Oh, well I'm sure you're going to get a really unbiased piece there

And that second piece is apparently written by someone unable to use google, the plain factual errors are ridiculous.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Azure

Hasn't been using for a while, and still a top player. Obviously didn't make much of a difference for him. He was a damn good player in Seattle already.



One of the few that tested positive.



Never proven. Like really, it call comes from a 'book.' He got into trouble for obstruction of justice, but not for failing a drug test. So, speculation.



Again, just rumored. Never proven.



He was accused by the Mitchell Report, denied it in front of Congress, charged with 6 counts of perjury, and later cleared of all charges. So again, just more speculation.



Admitted to using it to recover from an injury. Never used it afterwards. Everything else is just speculation.

So one player from your list has been caught red-handed. Two have admitted to using it, but have since moved on, and all the others are speculated on.

McGwire, Man-Ram, Ortiz, Giambi.

[troutman]

The Lance Armstrong fallout - questions, denials and doping reactions
http://www.sportsscientists.com/2012...ce+of+Sport%29

The problem is, if you choose to believe Armstrong, that it's a witch-hunt, then you are also a conspiracy theorist, because the only way you can explain all the witnesses who are willing to testify is to say that they are part of a massive conspiracy against him. One that spans the Atlantic Ocean, includes former team-mates, journalists, doctors, administrators, soigneurs, strangers and mechanics. A few people are "easy" to dismiss - Landis and Hamilton are not credible, that's easy. But if USADA had ten more lined up, it becomes more and more difficult to dismiss.

The "never failed a test in 500" defense is irrelevant because it is a) exaggerated, b) shown up as meaningless by the anti-doping climate of the Armstrong era, c) possibly false anyway.

"Let's legalize doping, make it a free for all, and see what happens". I don't want that, I don't know that many do, and so therefore, doping control has a crucial place as a deterrent, to protect the rights of those who do not wish to dope.

We know others doped too. Many have been caught. To allow an athlete to get away with it for that reason is just not good enough. If there is a rule, then it must be enforced as many times as is necessary.

Is it not a bit ridiculous to change the winner of a sport 12 years after the fact? Yes it is, but that's still better than never knowing, and never understanding who the true champion is.

[Zevo]

Originally Posted by troutman

The Lance Armstrong fallout - questions, denials and doping reactions
http://www.sportsscientists.com/2012...ce+of+Sport%29

The problem is, if you choose to believe Armstrong, that it's a witch-hunt, then you are also a conspiracy theorist, because the only way you can explain all the witnesses who are willing to testify is to say that they are part of a massive conspiracy against him. One that spans the Atlantic Ocean, includes former team-mates, journalists, doctors, administrators, soigneurs, strangers and mechanics. A few people are "easy" to dismiss - Landis and Hamilton are not credible, that's easy. But if USADA had ten more lined up, it becomes more and more difficult to dismiss.

The "never failed a test in 500" defense is irrelevant because it is a) exaggerated, b) shown up as meaningless by the anti-doping climate of the Armstrong era, c) possibly false anyway.

"Let's legalize doping, make it a free for all, and see what happens". I don't want that, I don't know that many do, and so therefore, doping control has a crucial place as a deterrent, to protect the rights of those who do not wish to dope.

We know others doped too. Many have been caught. To allow an athlete to get away with it for that reason is just not good enough. If there is a rule, then it must be enforced as many times as is necessary.

Is it not a bit ridiculous to change the winner of a sport 12 years after the fact? Yes it is, but that's still better than never knowing, and never understanding who the true champion is.

Who do they give the title to though? How do they know the next guy was clean, or the next guy after that? If pretty much everyone was doping and not everyone got caught, how do they know anyone was clean.

[troutman]

Witnesses Made Case Against Armstrong Potent


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/25/sp...tles.html?_r=2

Christiane Ayotte, the head of a World Anti-Doping Agency-accredited lab outside Montreal: “We’re at the point that if we’re not using these indirect markers, you can just forget about a case. For example, oral testosterone and microdoses of EPO will be detectable for only 12 hours. You just about have to be there when the athlete is doping to catch them.”

Don Catlin, the former head of the U.C.L.A. Olympic Analytical Laboratory, said there were fewer simple doping cases than ever because drugs are more sophisticated and athletes have more people around to help them dope.

“Athletes, particularly the most successful ones, have a complex network of people around them to figure out how to beat the drug tests,” he said.

The antidoping agency claims that Armstrong’s network included his teammates; his longtime team manager, Johan Bruyneel; two team doctors, Pedro Celaya and Luis Garcia del Moral; the team’s consulting doctor, Michele Ferrari; and the team’s trainer, Pepe Marti. Those people worked together in what Tygart said was a mafia-like scheme to conceal the doping on Armstrong’s teams and to keep those involved quiet about it.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Zevo

Who do they give the title to though? How do they know the next guy was clean, or the next guy after that? If pretty much everyone was doping and not everyone got caught, how do they know anyone was clean.

This is the problem on Wall Street and Bay Street. No one is willing to stop the corruption, because everyone is doing it. Everyone is doing it, because no one is prepared to stop it.

Someone has to care.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by troutman

This is the problem on Wall Street and Bay Street. No one is willing to stop the corruption, because everyone is doing it. Everyone is doing it, because no one is prepared to stop it.

Someone has to care.

The problem with the Tour is it has always been an event that allowed the use of drugs, long before other sports, from the outset riders at the turn of the century would use cocaine suspended in alcohol to get them through the ride.The Tour is pretty much an inhuman event that required drug use to complete as the organisers would pick the most difficult climbs and schedules, the clean tour of the last few years has been dull as ditchwater, like watching toyota Yaris racing after growing up on formula one.

We are all also pretty much aware that everyone riding up until a few years ago (and personally I think still), while Armstrong was winning his tours, was also using, therefore we are going to punish Armstrong for playing the game by the unwriten rules of his sport at the time, and won them on what was an even playing field to boot.

I would agree if the sport decided to asterisk every tour win up until the last few years but to persue Armstrong is frankly unfair.

[metallicat]

Originally Posted by troutman

Witnesses Made Case Against Armstrong Potent


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/25/sp...tles.html?_r=2

Christiane Ayotte, the head of a World Anti-Doping Agency-accredited lab outside Montreal: “We’re at the point that if we’re not using these indirect markers, you can just forget about a case. For example, oral testosterone and microdoses of EPO will be detectable for only 12 hours. You just about have to be there when the athlete is doping to catch them.”

Don Catlin, the former head of the U.C.L.A. Olympic Analytical Laboratory, said there were fewer simple doping cases than ever because drugs are more sophisticated and athletes have more people around to help them dope.

“Athletes, particularly the most successful ones, have a complex network of people around them to figure out how to beat the drug tests,” he said.

The antidoping agency claims that Armstrong’s network included his teammates; his longtime team manager, Johan Bruyneel; two team doctors, Pedro Celaya and Luis Garcia del Moral; the team’s consulting doctor, Michele Ferrari; and the team’s trainer, Pepe Marti. Those people worked together in what Tygart said was a mafia-like scheme to conceal the doping on Armstrong’s teams and to keep those involved quiet about it.

Maybe the team around him was actually just that good, and were able to keep him from testing positive. It's entirely possible I guess. I don't feel like a conspiracy theorist (because god knows I'm not) because I want the doping company to be wrong, I just want them to be wrong because I wanted to see someone clean achieve amazing results when others around him were guilty of doping.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

I would agree if the sport decided to asterisk every tour win up until the last few years but to persue Armstrong is frankly unfair.

It's not just poor Lance that is being pursued. They are prosecuting many athletes.

[Ashartus]

Originally Posted by Zevo

Who do they give the title to though? How do they know the next guy was clean, or the next guy after that? If pretty much everyone was doping and not everyone got caught, how do they know anyone was clean.

Maybe stripping Armstrong's titles and not awarding them to anyone might send a message.

[habernac]

http://espn.go.com/espn/story/_/id/8...worth-honoring


Sure, Armstrong could go to arbitration. But he's already spent over $5 million on his defense, according to friends. And would you go to arbitration, knowing that USADA sets up the rules of arbitration, sets up the rules of what can be admitted into arbitration and approves the arbitrators? Would you go, knowing it could take two or three more years? Knowing that even if you won, USADA could appeal?

That's my problem with this whole thing.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by troutman

Witnesses Made Case Against Armstrong Potent


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/25/sp...tles.html?_r=2

Christiane Ayotte, the head of a World Anti-Doping Agency-accredited lab outside Montreal: “We’re at the point that if we’re not using these indirect markers, you can just forget about a case. For example, oral testosterone and microdoses of EPO will be detectable for only 12 hours. You just about have to be there when the athlete is doping to catch them.”

If the above is true then everyone on an elite team still dopes. The testing is required to keep the level of doping down but going beyond that to pursue specific athletes seems unfair to target one athlete over others.

We all know that Armstrong doped we all know that Carl Lewis doped the test results dont really matter. If you believe that these athletes are clean you will always be disappointed.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by habernac

That's my problem with this whole thing.

Wow. That's your problem with the whole thing? Not that Lance doped, cheated, lied, threw his team-mates under the bus, and fraudulently enriched himself?

Who cares how much he spent on his bogus defence? How much taxpayer $ was wasted by his refusal to tell the truth?

I'm not sure that USADA sets all the rules for arbitration, but even if that were true, it is still subject to judicial review and the rules of natural justice.

[Zevo]

Originally Posted by troutman

This is the problem on Wall Street and Bay Street. No one is willing to stop the corruption, because everyone is doing it. Everyone is doing it, because no one is prepared to stop it.

Someone has to care.

I'm not against stripping him of titles. This long after the fact though, how do they know who to give them to if everyone was doping?

If they do take them they shouldn't give them to anybody.

[habernac]

Originally Posted by troutman

Wow. That's your problem with the whole thing? Not that Lance doped, cheated, lied, threw his team-mates under the bus, and fraudulently enriched himself?

Who cares how much he spent on his bogus defence? How much taxpayer $ was wasted by his refusal to tell the truth?

I'm not sure that USADA sets all the rules for arbitration, but even if that were true, it is still subject to judicial review and the rules of natural justice.

And you still don't know if he doped, lied, cheated, etc. All they have is a bunch of guys who don't like Lance telling someone what they want to hear so they won't be the target of prosecution. Proof. Not a bunch of words. Show me the proof.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by habernac

http://espn.go.com/espn/story/_/id/8...worth-honoring


Sure, Armstrong could go to arbitration. But he's already spent over $5 million on his defense, according to friends. And would you go to arbitration, knowing that USADA sets up the rules of arbitration, sets up the rules of what can be admitted into arbitration and approves the arbitrators? Would you go, knowing it could take two or three more years? Knowing that even if you won, USADA could appeal?

That's my problem with this whole thing.

The USADA is not an omnipotent entity, they are governed by federal law just like many other similar agencies. Armstrong had just as much recourse to due process as anyone else and was rejected at every turn. You can either choose to believe that or you can choose to believe that there's some sort of massive conspiracy theory aimed at him, reaching all the way into the federal courts.

[Flamenspiel]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

The problem with the Tour is it has always been an event that allowed the use of drugs, long before other sports, from the outset riders at the turn of the century would use cocaine suspended in alcohol to get them through the ride.The Tour is pretty much an inhuman event that required drug use to complete as the organisers would pick the most difficult climbs and schedules, the clean tour of the last few years has been dull as ditchwater, like watching toyota Yaris racing after growing up on formula one.

We are all also pretty much aware that everyone riding up until a few years ago (and personally I think still), while Armstrong was winning his tours, was also using, therefore we are going to punish Armstrong for playing the game by the unwriten rules of his sport at the time, and won them on what was an even playing field to boot.

I would agree if the sport decided to asterisk every tour win up until the last few years but to persue Armstrong is frankly unfair.

So your saying that Armstrong was the best doper so he should be allowed to retain his titles! Based on the evidence that is showing up in the NY Times and UK newspapers the USP team had the most sophisticated doping operation going(including a 20 minute warning), you can hardly call that a level playing field.

[polak]

Originally Posted by Flamenspiel

So your saying that Armstrong was the best doper so he should be allowed to retain his titles! Based on the evidence that is showing up in the NY Times and UK newspapers the USP team had the most sophisticated doping operation going(including a 20 minute warning), you can hardly call that a level playing field.

Based on WHAT evidence? Unless I'm missing something here there is no evidence besides one persons word versus another.

So in my opinion, that plus the ridiculous amount of time that has passed should be enough to just drop it.

Maybe we should strip Jesse Owens of his olympic titles because I garuntee we can find some Nazi documents that suspect him doping...