'Dale Posted October 15, 2012 Share USADA already proved him guilty. So who are they waiting to hear from? Intriguing how these USA brands are sticking to their marketing icon.Saxobank stuck with 'Berto even when he was banned from racing recently. Edited October 15, 2012 by ' Dale Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andydude Posted October 15, 2012 Share I made a few comments over the weekend from my mobile which wasn't taken well by some and I've thought about it and almost want to go back to basics. I've tried to do a type of timeline of events below and from there I want to know what you think is wrong and where? My opinions are in bold. 12 June 2012 – Usada notifies Armstrong that formal procedures against him have commenced over allegations he used performance-enhancing drugs. FINE 22 June 2012 – Lawyers for Armstrong ask the agency's review board to recommend Usada end its pursuit of the allegations. IN HIS RIGHTS TO ASK FOR A REVIEW FROM THE REVIEW BOARD 29 June 2012 – Usada's review board unanimously recommends bringing charges, meaning the case will go to an arbitration [see Wikipedia’s definition sources below] hearing should Armstrong elect to challenge the charges. HIS REVIEW WAS DENIED, BUT HE HAS A RIGHT TO REQUEST A REVIEW FROM A HIGHER BODY (SEE 9 JULY) 9 July 2012 – Armstrong files a federal lawsuit seeking to stop Usada from proceeding with its case. However, later the same day, a federal judge dismisses the lawsuit. HE ASKED FOR ANOTHER REVIEW, BUT THIS TIME HE ASKS A FEDERAL JUDGE. AGAIN IT WAS DECLINED, BUT BY THE FEDERAL JUDGE 10 July 2012 – Armstrong refiles lawsuit seeking to stop the Usada's case. ANOTHER REVIEW REQUEST WHICH WAS DENIED ON 20 AUGUST BY A FEDERAL JUDGE 11 July 2012 – Usada gives Armstrong 30 more days to answer charges that he used performance-enhancing drugs. HERE HE RECEIVES THE RIGHT/OPPORUNITY TO PARTICIPATE 20 August 2012 – A US federal judge dismisses Armstrong's efforts to block Usada's investigation. 23 August 2012 – Armstrong announces he will no longer fight the doping charges made by Usada. HE WAIVES HIS RIGHT/OPPORTUNITY TO DEFEND HIMSELF - THIS IS AN IMPORTANT POINT FOR ME 27 August 2012 – THE US Anti-Doping Agency has no jurisdiction or legal right to strip Lance Armstrong of his seven Tour de France titles, according to one of Australia's most senior officials. "If USADA believes Armstrong has a case to answer, the ultimate judge should be the UCI, not a publicity-seeking chief executive hellbent on a witch-hunt to chop down the tallest poppy in our sport." THIS IS AN OPINION AND NOT AN ANOTHER FORMAL REVIEW REQUEST - I THINK IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE VERY IMPORTANT WHAT THE UCI SAYS; I THINK THEY HAVE 21 DAYS FROM 10 OCTOBER TO RESPOND 10 October 2012 – Usada releases a detailed report [10,000 pages and sworn testimony from 26 people] on its doping case against Armstrong and the US Postal team, saying the findings prove the team cheated by using performance-enhancing drugs. TAKEN AS READ BY ALL Articles: http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/oct/10/lance-armstrong-usada-cycling-doping-scandal?newsfeed=true http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-rt-us-cycling-armstrong-doping-timelinebre89917f-20121010,0,5957703.story http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/cycling/2012/10/10/lance-armstrong-usada-reasoned-decision-george-hincapie/1625607/ http://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/cycling/usada-has-no-legal-right-to-strip-lance-armstrong/story-fn8sc2wz-1226458458001 Arbitration: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arbitration and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arbitration_in_the_United_States Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Velouria Posted October 15, 2012 Share I love Twisted Spoke's response:(http://www.atwisteds...kin-dumb-asses/) Gosh, sorry, ethics and morality are such a tough subject that defies the knee-jerk, brain-off approach. Sorry that justice wasn’t delivered on your ideal time table. Sorry that the issues are more complicated and international and cultural and all-too-human for your IQ to keep up. Sorry that you’re still asking for a positive doping test for Armstrong because you think that’s the only proof. Sorry, you don’t understand how the US justice system works. Sorry that it’s hard for you to grasp that people can change from lying to telling the truth. Sorry you’re so susceptible to the Big Lie Armstrong PR machine. Sorry you just haven’t done your homework but still feel confident throwing out your clueless bull***t. Sorry you’re so worked up about Vaughters still running a team after his admissions and three of his riders giving testimony despite the fact that Garmin is the most visionary team in the fight against doping. Sorry you have a hard time with nuance and facts and evidence and human nature and the gradations of guilt and the realities of lying and the necessary fire we have to go through to get to the other side. Bunch of whiners all around. Makes us think about Wiggins’ Tour de France diatribe on “bone-idlers.” Edited October 15, 2012 by Velouria Myra 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotty Posted October 15, 2012 Share USADA already proved him guilty. So who are they waiting to hear from?Thought that was obvious and what the whole thread is about. LA to admit it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fandacious Posted October 15, 2012 Share Thought that was obvious and what the whole thread is about. LA to admit it. I know you're being facetious, but I wonder if he will ever admit it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotty Posted October 15, 2012 Share I know you're being facetious, but I wonder if he will ever admit itDunno, but what i do is that when the claims 1st surfaced a number of Hub'ers speculated that LA had done a deal and would rat on his accomplices at the 1st opportunity. Seems they need to wait a bit longer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyatt Earp Posted October 15, 2012 Share Dunno, but what i do is that when the claims 1st surfaced a number of Hub'ers speculated that LA had done a deal and would rat on his accomplices at the 1st opportunity. Seems they need to wait a bit longer. The day the hubbers declare that they are over it, that is the day the entire fiasco will be wrapped up. scotty and DaLoCo 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwissVan Posted October 15, 2012 Share It is a bit like East Enders, keep wondering when it will ever end Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dracs Posted October 15, 2012 Share Nicolas Roche: ‘If you dope, don’t blame anyone else. It’s your choice. Admit it’ What he said here What I hate about guys who are caught like this is that, first, it takes them 10 years to admit they doped and, second, they say they only did it because everybody did it and they did it to keep up. That's bulls**t. It's not true and it's not fair to the riders that didn't dope and never will dope. and here It p****s me off that eight or 10 years later, after winning the prize money, buying the big houses and the flashy cars, they decide to come clean when they're cornered into it and then still blame somebody else. If you dope, don't blame anyone else. It's your choice. Admit it. and especially here last night David Zabriskie, Christian Vande Velde, Levi Leipheimer, George Hincapie and Tom Danielson only got six-month bans. That will see them back racing in the spring. They'll miss two races. That's no good. Why only six months? There is a lot to be done.more here: http://www.independe...it-3257272.html Yeah, I dont think one should compare the other riders implicated with LA and draw conclusions, they (Leipheimer, Hincappie etc) entered a plea bargain agreement and however limited it may have been they reaped the benefit of that agreement. I have no doubt the same would have applied to anyone who entered an agreement of that nature, including LA. However as he chose not to, he got the whole book thrown at him. Personally I would have expected nothing less, and nor would the other riders, by offering a plea bargain deal they were able to get the information they needed, and the riders implicated got lesser sentences for their confession.Seriously? The deal offered to the others was effectively "nail Lance and all sins are forgiven". You really believe Lance was made any offer like this - how would that work? Fact is he was offered no such deal. Exactly. Baby boy Roche's comments taste of sour grapes.Sour grapes? Explain how stating that an effective 2 race ban for dopers is sour grapes? What is he sour about other than having to compete against confessed cheaters who are given no punishment... Good post. Some clarity in plain language for all the apologists.So Roche is an apologist? For who? The mail you are complementing was in reply to my post which said nothing on Armstrong. Sorry but I just don't get how for some all can be forgiven / excused and believed as long as it supports the downfall of the evil one. And a guy who is speaking pure common sense and who should be aplauded by those claiming to be all for clean cycling somehow is dismissed. Why is this I wonder? All aboard the bandwagon... Edited October 15, 2012 by dracs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoLefty!! Posted October 15, 2012 Share For 10 years it was the Postal /Discovery RadioShack train. Now its the USADA train. They're all just opportunists Danger Dassie 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fandacious Posted October 15, 2012 Share For 10 years it was the Postal /Discovery RadioShack train. Now its the USADA train. They're all just opportunists what gain is there for USADA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirtbreath Posted October 15, 2012 Share USADA following this thread with much interest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'Dale Posted October 15, 2012 Share what gain is there for USADA? Good question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne Booysen Posted October 15, 2012 Share Can you imagine the consequences if they are wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mellow Posted October 15, 2012 Share Can you imagine the consequences if they are wrong? to me its like asking - "can you imagine green being red ?" answer is yes - if you're blind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddy Posted October 15, 2012 Share Seriously? The deal offered to the others was effectively "nail Lance and all sins are forgiven". You really believe Lance was made any offer like this - how would that work? Fact is he was offered no such deal. “Lance Armstrong was given the same opportunity to come forward and be part of the solution. He rejected it.” I am not sure what he means by it, but on the face of it this quote from the statement issued by USADA CEO Travis T. Tygart on the 10th seems to contradict your point. . petatodd and Danger Dassie 2 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