Wyatt Earp Posted June 18, 2012 Share It's just sad that he's being prevented from competing based on the hearsay that a number of ex-rivals (or current, as they seem) can produce. Oh, he beat me, but I saw him doing X y & z... yeah. Sorry dude (ex competitor person). You're bitter. Suck it up and go complain somewhere else where you don't look like a complete cnt. I have gone from liking him to totally disliking him to being, oh dare I say it........on the fence.Either way, drugs or not, the guys is an exceptional athlete.We have some S.A. vets who love their substances and still fail to perform. So yeah Cap, I agree with your above statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TNT1 Posted June 18, 2012 Share I have gone from liking him to totally disliking him to being, oh dare I say it........on the fence. Ditto. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Fastbastard Mayhem Posted June 18, 2012 Share I have gone from liking him to totally disliking him to being, oh dare I say it........on the fence.Either way, drugs or not, the guys is an exceptional athlete.We have some S.A. vets who love their substances and still fail to perform. So yeah Cap, I agree with your above statement. yeah. I admire the hell outta him. Did he dope? Maybe. The fact that he still remains unconvicted, despite being tested so bloody much (flame on) says a lot about either his personal strength & resilience, or Dr Ferrari's future proofing in his doping techniques. Funny that some of Dr. Ferrari's other "gerbils" weren't as lucky, then... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zula Posted June 18, 2012 Share It's just sad that he's being prevented from competing based on the hearsay that a number of ex-rivals (or current, as they seem) can produce. Oh, he beat me, but I saw him doing X y & z... yeah. Sorry dude (ex competitor person). You're bitter. Suck it up and go complain somewhere else where you don't look like a complete cnt. That's how it does appear at face value But think of this....................WTU which owns Ironman did comment and state that their rules state that if an athlete is being investigated for doping by an unrelated body then he/she cannot compete in WTU events.If LA were to win another IM and then be found out to test positive there is a chance he could have won IM as a doper. I am sure that WTU would want to prevent that from happening and have the second place man be named the winner etc etc. Bottom line, its one big stuff up of note. I am a big LA fan but you cant help but doubt his innocence this time round. One thing is for sure, there is someone over at USADA that has a serious vendetta against him and will not rest until they prove him to be guilty. Interesting times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Fastbastard Mayhem Posted June 18, 2012 Share That's how it does appear at face value But think of this....................WTU which owns Ironman did comment and state that their rules state that if an athlete is being investigated for doping by an unrelated body then he/she cannot compete in WTU events.If LA were to win another IM and then be found out to test positive there is a chance he could have won IM as a doper. I am sure that WTU would want to prevent that from happening and have the second place man be named the winner etc etc. Bottom line, its one big stuff up of note. I am a big LA fan but you cant help but doubt his innocence this time round. One thing is for sure, there is someone over at USADA that has a serious vendetta against him and will not rest until they prove him to be guilty. Interesting times. Yeah, for sure... but the thing is that he's been investigated for how long now? And never been found guilty. With the latest spate of investigations against him, a lack of proof was cited and that meant the charges weren't going to be pursued. Now the USADA doesn't agree with that ruling, and they're, once again, sharpening their spears in the hope to find a white and silver sparkly 6 legged unicorn that breeds flying pigs. This whole investigation SMACKS of vendetta. If there is some proof out there, then bring it out. There either has to be some irrefutable proof if they are going on like this (and don't cite the tens of ex-competitors who lost to him, and therefore have an axe to grind in order to satisfy their own delusions of grandeur) or they are being headed by somebody who cannot, just cannot, get rid of the half-scale everest sitting on their shoulders. Hearsay is, unfortunately, just hearsay. Edited June 18, 2012 by cptmayhem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garfield2010 Posted June 18, 2012 Share I think the WTU have taken one look at the general state of cycling and realised the hype of LA racing is not worth the risk of bringing (or exposing) drug use in the sport of triathlon. I dont think the testing procedures *** etc in Triathlon is even half as thorough as in Cycling. What will happen the day they actually test all the pro's in Kona for every possible supplement 3 weeks in advance? I am just curious..................... *** I am assuming so I stand to be corrected!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TNT1 Posted June 18, 2012 Share Hearsay is, unfortunately, just hearsay. Yes, but there has been precedent set. Other athletes have been handed bans based on this kind of evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petatodd Posted June 18, 2012 Share USADA have asked him to prove he didn't do it. They have made a case in their 15 page letter to the "accused". It is now up to them to prove they did not dope/do transfussion etc. Read the document. It is not up to USADA to prove he doped. It is up to LA to prove he did not. Surely that won't be hard for him to do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Lofthouse Posted June 18, 2012 Share USADA have asked him to prove he didn't do it. They have made a case in their 15 page letter to the "accused". It is now up to them to prove they did not dope/do transfussion etc. Read the document. It is not up to USADA to prove he doped. It is up to LA to prove he did not. Surely that won't be hard for him to do?Strange stance. Surely you can't presume someone guilty until he proves his innocence. "Innocent until Proven guilty" is the way I always thought it worked, otherwise you could throw around all sorts of accusations and those accusations would be accepted as truth until they were proved otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyatt Earp Posted June 18, 2012 Share USADA have asked him to prove he didn't do it. They have made a case in their 15 page letter to the "accused". It is now up to them to prove they did not dope/do transfussion etc. Read the document. It is not up to USADA to prove he doped. It is up to LA to prove he did not. Surely that won't be hard for him to do? I hear you and I know about USADA's unconventional legal practice. But it could be harder than one thinks, imagine you get accused of something you didn't do ,numerous times and every time you have to bring the same old boring facts.I reckon this is a witch-hunt. If he did dope, I sincerely hope that he will have the BALL to eventually admit to it so we can get this drama behind us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Fastbastard Mayhem Posted June 18, 2012 Share USADA have asked him to prove he didn't do it. They have made a case in their 15 page letter to the "accused". It is now up to them to prove they did not dope/do transfussion etc. Read the document. It is not up to USADA to prove he doped. It is up to LA to prove he did not. Surely that won't be hard for him to do? How can that be done though? By using the very same samples that were taken at the time? By cross-examination of the "witnesses" whose statements, through a normal court of law would not be taken as evidence, as they have previous relationships with the accused and are more than likely emotionally tied to the outcome of the case? Nah, bro. I call BS. I call vendetta. How am I supposed to prove that I didn't speed on the way to work, apart from vouching that I did not? I wasn't caught, I didn't go fast, heck I was stuck in traffic half the time. Did I speed? No. But under that "prosecuting argument" I could be tried and convicted, if 10 to 15 other people, whose speedos could be out or could be m competitors in my same field of work, said I was speeding... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
urbanroyal Posted June 18, 2012 Share The Hub is the sole judge AND jury. Definitely ...and Executioner as well.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
urbanroyal Posted June 18, 2012 Share Besides Armstrong will be at the Olympics this year...... Kristin Armstrong ... http://articles.lati...strong-20120616 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotty Posted June 18, 2012 Share Definitely ...and Executioner as well.. Inquiry not necessary, just send them a link to the Hub. All the facts are here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dracs Posted June 18, 2012 Share Strange stance. Surely you can't presume someone guilty until he proves his innocence. "Innocent until Proven guilty" is the way I always thought it worked, otherwise you could throw around all sorts of accusations and those accusations would be accepted as truth until they were proved otherwise. thats the norm but there are a few exceptions... Iran, Syria, China, and the USADA.... At least they in good company. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tumbleweed Posted June 19, 2012 Share There has been mention here of "hearsay". That's not what USADA is relying on. The testimony of former teammates can be considered anecdotal evidence, which, when set beside any other evidence USADA may have obtained from the federal probe, could be enough to find guilt. Read USADA's letter again. This is not just about proving a athlete doped. It's much wider than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now