thehog said:
How could it start in in 2008 when they didn't have enough test data.
Besides the UCI doesn't share passport data with the Federations.
This is the first time USADA have had it in their possession.
Is that interesting enough for you?
You might want to ask why the UCI didn't do anything with the data results.
What do you mean, they didn't have enough information in 2008, but they do now? So it takes several years to determine if someone doped? I call BS. There cannot be a system that's so stacked against someone.
Check out the article on Velonews.com about how House of Representatives member Jim Sensenbrenner, a Wisconsin Republican, sent a letter on Thursday asking ONDCP director Gil Kerlikowske to investigate how the sports doping watchdogs spend about $9 million a year in U.S. taxpayer funding.
This was just posted from the article on Velonews.com from Tygart: “The case against all those involved in the USPS Pro-Cycling Team Doping Conspiracy, including Lance Armstrong was not brought lightly,” the statement read. ”
We are well aware of his popularity and the admirers he has on Capitol Hill and elsewhere, but our responsibility is to clean athletes who demand that USADA protect their right to a level playing field by eradicating drug use from sport. They rightly depend upon USADA to ensure that no matter how famous or anonymous, we will treat each alleged offender the same. USADA accomplishes this directive when it has sufficient evidence and not on any other basis. Any decision to sanction an athlete is the result of multi-level review by persons independent of USADA including a panel of arbitrators following a full evidentiary hearing with a right of appeal where, witness testimony is given under oath and subject to cross examination and which can be open to the public.
“The evidence is overwhelming, and were we not to bring this case, we would be complicit in covering up evidence of doping, and failing to do our job on behalf of those we are charged with protecting. We will reach out to Congressman Sensenbrenner and offer to come in and discuss the process, which is the same in all cases whether it involves high profile athletes or those who are not. We will also offer to brief the Congressman on how USADA is funded and the oversight that is provided by ONDCP. USADA is an open and transparent organization and welcomes to opportunity to fully address the Congressman’s inquiry.”
Tygart states that their mission is to eradicate drug use from sport. That's fine by me, but how does going after Armstrong - part of the 'old school' time - accomplish this?
Second bold point, "we would be complicit in covering up evidence of doping". So they wait until LA has retired from cycling to go after him? Why didn't they investigate him while he was still a professional cyclist if they we so sure of him doping? Hmm...I think USADA would have some explaining to do.
NOTE: I realize LA moved on to Triathlon and that muddies the waters because he is still 'active', but USADA has made no mention of LA's triathlon performances.