• The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

11 former teammates testified against Armstrong

Page 3 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
cineteq said:
No kidding.

Simon Whitfield (Canadian triathlonist)
One thing missing from statements by George, Levi, Christian & co. is an apology to the athletes of their generation that chose not to.

Simon needs to apologize for pretending to know how to ride a bike (just kidding ;))

I think there is a general apology, but no direct one to those who chose not to dope. No doubt it could have been stronger. Nevertheless, I think it has been a positive turn compared to where things were at. I don't want to change the goal line just because they didn't man up the way I would prefer.

Could anyone have imagined this a few years ago?
 
Oct 16, 2009
3,864
0
0
Visit site
Viking said:
Only six months? I guess you don't count their disqualifications. Leipheimer lost 7 years of results, the majority outside the typical 8 year Statute of Limitations. DZ lost 3 years, one outside the SoL. CVV and Danielson each lost about 2 years.
Because they doped during those years.
 
Jun 18, 2012
181
0
0
Visit site
goggalor said:
Because they doped during those years.

Yes, and losing results for those years was part of the sanction. For many cases, that would have been the only punishment as the infractions were well in the past.
 
Oct 16, 2009
3,864
0
0
Visit site
Viking said:
Yes, and losing results for those years was part of the sanction. For many cases, that would have been the only punishment as the infractions were well in the past.
You don't get to keep results you cheated your way to, that's obvious. But losing them isn't part of the ban.
Escarabajo said:
It is called negotiation.
Terrible negotiation. Good negotiation in this case would be "talk and you may get to ride again before you're forty". The posties had no cards to play, yet they somehow walked away without any real sanctions. It's a joke.
 
Oct 8, 2012
237
1
0
Visit site
Notice how Armstrong's lawyer is all over TV now attacking USADA and making false claims about the evidence.

Armstrong's PR strategy is now to attack the USADA organization. They can no longer use the angle that a couple riders have an axe to grind now that there are 11 teammates and 15 other personnel that have testified against Armstrong.

To Armstrong, it's a Public relations battle.