The case against Lance Armstrong

[ghost]

I think it's inevitable.  Most of these guys were essentially press-ganged into doping and I think a lot of them really regret it (example:  Dave Zabriskie).  

Addendum-  And I think this may be one of the things that irritates me the most about the way the USADA went after Armstrong.  It's not like he was the only one in the peloton doping.  It's very likely that 75% of them (or more) were doping.  That shouldn't excuse his actions, however the American public (who are generally uneducated on the subject of cycling) don't understand that doping has been rife in cycling since the sports inception. 

[sickrubik]

Well, most of them didn't win 7 TdFs and didn't live in the public light.

[ghost]

Yeah, I understand that, but I think it is doing a disservice to their message.  I mean, they are trying to use Armstrong as an example to get help get rid of doping in cycling (and in all sport) I would assume.  And by doing so they should be pointing out that it was a problem that was rampant, not only within Armstrong's team but within the entire peloton.  By not doing so it certainly makes their motives seem less than honorable. 

[Trippy]

That would be the UCI's job. The USADA just wanted to make an example of Lance as a warning to US Olympic athletes.

[ghost]

And that brings up another way that the USADA could be utilizing this-  to show how unethical and corrupt the UCI is.  But that apparently won't happen either.

[Ingmar]

Well it isn't really their job. Why would they spend a bunch of money trying to clean up someone else's mess?

[ghost]

Well it isn't really their job. Why would they spend a bunch of money trying to clean up someone else's mess?

That attitude is part of why sports are in this mess.   

This is a prime opportunity to unmask a corrupt organization and demonstrate that a sport like cycling needs to be cleaned up.  Surely there's a moral imperative there. 

[Ingmar]

I'm not going to hold my breath for a non-profit, even a government funded one, to spend their money tilting at windmills that are outside their organizational purpose. The USADA is concerned with doping by US athletes only; the UCI is the international governing body for cycling. Even if they wanted to they couldn't really go after French or Italian riders, or whatever.

[ghost]

Well shouldn't they be going after every American in cycling that doped?  That alone was spread across multiple teams over multiple years. 

[Trippy]

All the important ones testified against Lance or are already known cheaters

[ghost]

This is true.  I just get annoyed with the "it's not their job" type comments.  I do think it would be their job to call the UCI to the mat for not appropriately policing their athletes because a good number of them are US citizens.

[ghost]

Greg Lemond is a complete jackass, but he's getting a whole lot of "I told you so" time right now. 

Lemond calls for UCI heads to resign. 

It's interesting that Trek bought Lemond bicycles and basically shut them down due to the flap with Armstrong. 

[Ginaz]

Looks like Lance is thinking about admitting to doping.

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/OtherSports/2013/01/04/20473461.html

[Paelos]

Fuck him. If he does it just so he can get into racing again, let him go the Bonds route.

[ghost]

I don't think he has any interest in bicycle racing again, but I do think he'd like to compete in triathalons. 

[Paelos]

I don't care if he wants to compete on the international tiddlywinks scene. He's been an insufferable douche throughout this entire process, and there's no virtue in admitting a mistake when you've been browbeaten by evidence.

[ghost]

I think it's pretty clear that he doesn't have any virtues.  I'm just explaining what his motives are, bro.

[Korachia]

Not even if he made the walk to Canossa should he ever be allowed near sport in any capacity.

Well maybe american wrestling would be alright.. acting and doping is already something he excels at.

[Tale]

Aaaand... Oprah!

[ghost]

That could be worth watching. 

[shiznitz]

Maybe he will sacrifice his one remaining testicle for forgiveness, live on TV!

[Tale]

[ghost]

Now that Lance is letting it be known that he may "come clean" in his interview with Oprah, this has changed into a must watch.  Lance could easily tear cycling down to its foundations with fully disclosing his actions.  For instance, if he happened to have bribed the UCI due to the supposed failed test in Switzerland that is big fucking news.  Hein Verbruggen should be shaking in his shoes over this.  I can't wait to see the interview.

[Margalis]

You know it's going to be the "I don't want to talk about specifics, I've made some mistakes in my life" kind of bland crap you always get from these sorts of things.

[ghost]

I don't think so.  Why would he agree to an interview now, if that was the case?  His back is against the wall and he's the kind of guy that will try to take everyone down with him. 

[Ingmar]

Naming names in an Oprah interview doesn't seem like the sort of shit she'd allow.

[Tale]

You know it's going to be the "I don't want to talk about specifics, I've made some mistakes in my life" kind of bland crap you always get from these sorts of things.

He has said she can ask him anything. However, I believe he will come armed with medical evidence of how doping did not help him that much, and he actually had to put in the work as well. Plus testimonials of how his act helped thousands of cancer patients. He is a very charismatic, convincing public speaker and he will win a significant support base from this appearance, even if it's all lies.

[ghost]

Naming names in an Oprah interview doesn't seem like the sort of shit she'd allow.

You're probably right.

I still don't believe he's going to come in and deny anything.  The jig is up.  He's done.  I just don't see any way for him to try and squirm out of this.  

I could see him coming in with evidence that you have to dope to win in cycling and pounding on the drum that everyone does it (which they do).

[ghost]

Hah.  I was right.  

No way. Armstrong confessed to Oprah on Monday — in taping for a show to be aired on Thursday — that he did take performance-enhancing drugs.

Reports are that it was an emotional moment. I’m sure it was, with Armstrong and his handlers figuring out beforehand exactly when was the best moment for tears.

And now, Armstrong reportedly will turn snitch and offer up evidence of other doping cheats, theoretically officials and guys in suits who made money off of him.

Which one do you think is more likely? He is turning others in to clear his conscience? Or he’s doing it because of a rule that says a suspension can be cut down dramatically if evidence is given to help bust others?

Yeah, it's going to get very, very interesting in the cycling world soon.  I can't wait.  I love the drama. 

The UCI has issued a brief statement after a report in the New York Times suggested that Lance Armstrong is ready to testify against "officials from the International Cycling Union, the worldwide governing body of cycling, about their involvement with doping in cycling, but he will not testify against other riders."

The NY Times base the story on "people familiar with his plans" suggesting Armstrong is considering supplying detailed evidence and accusations in an attempt to mitigate his lifetime ban so he can compete in triathlons.

[sickrubik]

It's worse than we thought.

[Trippy]

He did have chemo. Not a big deal.

[ghost]

That's fucking awesome. 

[ghost]

Lance stripped of Olympic Bronze medal.  Seriously?  It took this long?

[Tale]

Oh, no reactions here?

I think Betsy Andreu's reaction speaks for me: http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2013/01/18/ac-armstrong-andreu-reacts-to-intv.cnn

[tgr]

Well, at least he didn't call her fat!