Lance offered donation to USADA

[mountainrman]

Irrelevances.

Well actually Benotti - Why I care is simple.

Tygart is right about one thing.

The potential for the good of cycling if Lance Armstrong had been part of the solution would have been massive.

That is why it annoys the hell out of me that Tygart seemingly did his level best to frustrate it , despite what he says, so I find it nauseous that he then pretends he gave the man the "same opportunity" and it was a "low moment for him" He did not. The evidence is there in the transcripts. Read it. 6 june - first conversation between intermediaries aimed at getting LA to come talk - 2 working days later plus a weekend the charging letter - lance was stated as out of the US at the time. So No attempt given for diplomacy at all.

I do not think he played the cards he had nearly as well as he could for the good of the sport. There should have been at least several "off the record conversations" and a couple of weeks before he could claim he exhausted the opportunity. He should at least have waited for LA to return and offered an "unconditional" dialogue.

The ends in law DO NOT justify the means.

Tygart is playing the media and is creative with truth. So I take his comments about the donation with deserved scepticism.

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

Tygart is playing the media and is creative with truth. So I take his comments about the donation with deserved scepticism.

Are you willing to accept Armstrong's comments with an equal scepticism?

 

[enrecul]

Anyone have a link to the full interview?

 

[mountainrman]

Are you willing to accept Armstrong's comments with an equal scepticism?

I take everything Armstrong says with extreme scepticism - and I always have.

If you read his statements in media over the years - take the issue over Landis - he said "we like our story better" he was clearly trying to avoid stating what he had said was "true" just that he "liked it better". I have seen that similar "double speak" for over a decade.

I still think a solution embracing Armstrong would have done far better for the sport than leaving him out on a limb.

 

[frenchfry]

I take everything Armstrong says with extreme scepticism - and I always have.

If you read his statements in media over the years - take the issue over Landis - he said "we like our story better" he was clearly trying to avoid stating what he had said was "true" just that he "liked it better". I have seen that similar "double speak" for over a decade.

I still think a solution embracing Armstrong would have done far better for the sport than leaving him out on a limb.

It is difficult to "embrace" someone who is intent on destroying the institution that you represent.

Somehow I doubt that even the baby mommas really manage to "embrace" Wonderboy.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

I see the troll is up to his "I won't defend Armstrong in any way so I can troll like a madman about Tygart" shtick. The sad thing is that he continues to feed his mental illness by trolling intertube forums when his cause is lost. Oh well, psychotropic medication can't fix everything...

 

[Benotti69]

....... I criticise Tygart while ignoring the huge and terrible damage Armstrong has done........

all in the name of fairness, allegedly.

go away trollboy.

IOC, WADA, USAC, UCI, AFLD and other relevant sporting bodies have not defended Armstrong nor have they sought to overturn USADA's decision.

The only people calling Tygart out are Trollboys (like you), Armstrong, his paid shills, Sally the Hack Jenkins, Watson, and other LieStrong minions who are up there with the Branch Davidians.

Your emotional investment in a fraud is pitiable.

 

[ebandit]

trouble ahead

I still think a solution embracing Armstrong would have done far better for the sport than leaving him out on a limb.

maybe..............but lance did not wish to be part of a solution

he just wanted to be declared 'clean' so he could carry on fleecing the

american masses......................and continue competing in his speedo

 

[rhubroma]

Anyone have a link to the full interview?

Yes, that would be nice, as I've only gotten blurbs of it on youtube.

 

[Fortyninefourteen]

I still think a solution embracing Armstrong would have done far better for the sport than leaving him out on a limb.[/QUOTE]

That option was always and is still available. He is the one obstructing the solution that will be best for cycling.

Going on Oprah is nothing more than the same old tired routine of never confronting the truth, but rather perpetuating a scripted set of talking points with the sole purpose of presenting himself as a victim of authorities, journalists, jealous rivals, teammates bla bla.

By the way.....all of this....is being done to expedite a way back for him to compete. No other reason. None.

 

[mountainrman]

maybe..............but lance did not wish to be part of a solution

he just wanted to be declared 'clean' so he could carry on fleecing the

american masses......................and continue competing in his speedo

Maybe - Maybe not.

The point I made on the basis of the evidence in the transcripts is that Tygart never gave it a chance, so him saying it was a "low point for him" when LA would not oblige was clearly false. Look at the dates.

 

[reginagold]

I'm so glad Lance and the others came forward to share the information they had about doping at USPS. Nice the system allows some less severe penalties for those that accept the invitation to help the sport. It is good the athletes that think they are being treated unfairly by the system have the right to confront the evidence against them in an arbitration proceeding that meets the US constitutional requirements of due process.

What? Lance refused? Oh my goodness, what was I thinking. He seemed so kind and helpful - a patron even.

Well, perhaps between Oprah, Bill Clinton and his other "contacts', he simply didn't ever need to use the plebian protections built into the system.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Maybe - Maybe not.

The point I made on the basis of the evidence in the transcripts is that Tygart never gave it a chance, so him saying it was a "low point for him" when LA would not oblige was clearly false. Look at the dates.

That's a lie.
You even refer to the dates in your previous post. Bock attempted to get in touch with Herman and the correspondence shows that they offered LA a chance to discuss his role on doping, which LAs legal team declined.

 

[ebandit]

evidence?

Maybe - Maybe not.

i believe 100% that all reports seen highlight that lance's position was so entranched in lies / fraud that he was unable to help negotiate a better solution for cycling

but remember lance is the guilty party.................not tygart

 

[martinvickers]

i believe 100% that all reports seen highlight that lance's position was so entranched in lies / fraud that he was unable to help negotiate a better solution for cycling

but remember lance is the guilty party.................not tygart

Are there any rules or protocols in this forum on 'ignore' listings? Should you make it known, not make it known etc...?

genuine question.

 

[D-Queued]

Argument #1: You guys need to accept that Tygart is playing a masterful game of manipulating media and all is not quite what it seems.

Argument #2: I take both sides with a pinch of salt.

Argument #3: If there had been verifiable substance to the claims of attempted "donations", it would have appeared in the reasoned decision as a footnote alongside the UCI donations, and the fact it did not, demonstrates that is probably just hearsay. That is: Tygart did not take the call, and whoever did is not willing to put it in writing - so there is clearly a question mark over who said what.

...Troll stuff...

Argument #1: Fail

I think most here have acknowledged Tygart's skill at working with the media.

Argument #2: Fail

Then provide more 'balance'.

Argument #3: Massive fail

Why?

Why would this have appeared in the Reasoned Decision?

Where does it say that the 1,000 pages included ALL EVIDENCE OF ALL KINDS?

Why would the Saugy discussion with Tygart need to be included?

Are you some sort of qualified expert in what should or should not be included in a Reasoned Decision on a doping case? Have you prepared this kind of documentation before?

Why should we take your opinion on this?

Weren't there enough pages in the reasoned decision already? How many thousand more pages do you think should have been provided?

By limiting themselves to merely 1,000 pages, it certainly appeared that the USADA included only the information specific to a 'positive', analytical or non-analytical.

Here is what the 1,000 pages included:

USADA said the evidence includes "direct documentary evidence including financial payments, emails, scientific data and laboratory test results that further prove the use, possession and distribution of performance enhancing drugs by Lance Armstrong and confirm the disappointing truth about the deceptive activities of the USPS Team, a team that received tens of millions of American taxpayer dollars in funding."

How Lance may have learned how to avoid an EPO positive is extraneous to whether or not he was doping. How he may have learned how to avoid an EPO positive is not a financial payment, not an email, scientific data or lab test results.

Did the Reasoned Decision discuss the obvious Basso bribe? Did it talk about Lance' roid rage incident? What about the Mike Anderson's testimony on the avoided test?

That it was not included in the Reasoned Decision, of course, does not mean that there isn't a smoking gun that should be further investigated.

In fact, we have no idea how much more information there is that should be investigated.

It appears quite likely that there is more than enough additional information to keep Tim Herman employed for decades.

Dave.

 

[mountainrman]

Then provide more 'balance'
Dave.

I am indeed providing balance to the mob view. I do not sit under Tygart's backside to wait for the sun to fall on me - because what comes out is not sun.

There are serious doubts about what he says. Take this today.

http://espn.go.com/sports/endurance...ndal-martial-saugy-disputes-usada-accusations

Quote Saugy - "I would like to ask him (Tygart), really personally, why did he say that, because personally it was not the case." In short Saugy says that Tygart is lying.

My main question for Tygart is simple: the same one I put to UCI.
Why did you do NOTHING for so long when there was a clear problem?
They UCI and USADA including Tygart are jointly guilty of fiddling whilst Rome burned. And then having done nothing for so long why did he not even allow a few days of diplomacy to persuade Armstrong to come clean, he did not even give it a chance. 48 hours to come in on his terms when Armstrong was not even in the country.

 

[mewmewmew13]

Oh


Lets try to ramp up this smearing and discrediting of Travis and USADA!

We know Lance is going to go full tilt at this on Oprah.

rah rah!

 

[Benotti69]

I do not sit under Tygart's backside to wait for the sun to fall on me - because what comes out is not sun.

<snip>.

you sure have your macroglossia up wonderboys

 

[Race Radio]

Quote Saugy - "I would like to ask him (Tygart), really personally, why did he say that, because personally it was not the case." In short Saugy says that Tygart is lying.

My main question for Tygart is simple: the same one I put to UCI.
Why did you do NOTHING for so long when there was a clear problem?
They UCI and USADA including Tygart are jointly guilty of fiddling whilst Rome burned. And then having done nothing for so long why did he not even allow a few days of diplomacy to persuade Armstrong to come clean, he did not even give it a chance. 48 hours to come in on his terms when Armstrong was not even in the country.

Saugy needs to get his story straight. He told completely different versions of the events to various groups. It was only after the UCI sat him down and talked to him that he changed it

Pretending that USADA did nothing and never gave lance a chance is just absurd.

WADA was in charge for 7 months of Lance's 1st career. The UCI was actively sued the head of WADA and working hard to disrupt their ability to police the sport.

 

[Race Radio]

Oh


Lets try to ramp up this smearing and discrediting of Travis and USADA!

We know Lance is going to go full tilt at this on Oprah.

rah rah!

Oh, didn't you hear? It is all Travis' fault lance doped.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I am indeed providing balance to the mob view. I do not sit under Tygart's backside to wait for the sun to fall on me - because what comes out is not sun.

Seems you just lost your balance.

I
There are serious doubts about what he says. Take this today.

http://espn.go.com/sports/endurance...ndal-martial-saugy-disputes-usada-accusations

Quote Saugy - "I would like to ask him (Tygart), really personally, why did he say that, because personally it was not the case." In short Saugy says that Tygart is lying.

Indeed, Saugy "says"..... It's irrelevant, he has already admitted that he did indeed meet LA & Bruyneel.

I
My main question for Tygart is simple: the same one I put to UCI.
Why did you do NOTHING for so long when there was a clear problem?
They UCI and USADA including Tygart are jointly guilty of fiddling whilst Rome burned. And then having done nothing for so long why did he not even allow a few days of diplomacy to persuade Armstrong to come clean, he did not even give it a chance. 48 hours to come in on his terms when Armstrong was not even in the country.

Until Landis USADA had very little on LA - compare and contrast how USADA & UCI treated Landis answers the rest.

Again - USADA allowed LA plenty of time to address them, his legal team refused it.

 

[jam pants]

I am indeed providing balance to the mob view. I do not sit under Tygart's backside to wait for the sun to fall on me - because what comes out is not sun.

There are serious doubts about what he says. Take this today.

http://espn.go.com/sports/endurance...ndal-martial-saugy-disputes-usada-accusations

Quote Saugy - "I would like to ask him (Tygart), really personally, why did he say that, because personally it was not the case." In short Saugy says that Tygart is lying.

My main question for Tygart is simple: the same one I put to UCI.
Why did you do NOTHING for so long when there was a clear problem?
They UCI and USADA including Tygart are jointly guilty of fiddling whilst Rome burned. And then having done nothing for so long why did he not even allow a few days of diplomacy to persuade Armstrong to come clean, he did not even give it a chance. 48 hours to come in on his terms when Armstrong was not even in the country.

When a public figure takes a nosedive, there are a select few who will still latch on to even a disgraced former hero. Lance will love that you're still willing to be his buddy unconditionally.

You're not unique, and what you're doing is transparent. You have a chance to touch your star as he plummets to Earth - we get that. Just know that if you're going to play the role of opportunistic fly that there are turds which aren't currently being flushed down the toilet you can latch on to.

 

[D-Queued]

Saugy needs to get his story straight. He told completely different versions of the events to various groups. It was only after the UCI sat him down and talked to him that he changed it

Look, we know your goal is to troll and disrupt but pretending that USADA did nothing and never gave lance a chance is just absurd.

WADA was in charge for 7 months of Lance's 1st career. The UCI was actively sued the head of WADA and working hard to disrupt their ability to police the sport.

If you are going to spew nonsense at least try to write something that is so obviously trolling

Just to put a finer point on this:

1. UCI last to sign WADA Code

The UCI did not sign the WADA Code until July 2004, agreeing to do so in its management meeting 22-23 July 2004. In so doing, the UCI was the last International Sports Organization to sign the Code prior to the 2004 Athens Games. Signing the Code was a pre-requisite to all sport participations at Athens.

Notably, the 2004 TdF had completed prior to the UCI's agreement to sign the Code, conveniently keeping the 2004 TdF and the Pro Peloton away from WADA and the newly created National ADA's such as USADA.

2. USADA Recognized by Congress in 2001

USADA was recognized by Congress in 2001 as "the official anti-doping agency for Olympic, Pan American and Paralympic sport in the United States." This came after the 2000 Games, obviously, where Lance participated. Due to the UCI's hold-out on signing The Code, the USADA was not empowered to monitor cyclists until barely weeks prior to the 2004 Games.

3. Availability of Evidence / SCA Depositions were in 2006

Sworn depositions about Lance's doping practices did not appear until the SCA Arbitration in 2006. Odd, of course, how all of Lance's teammates stopped doping that year.

4. Further considerations

Given the evidence we already have of payments and payment offers, it is quite possible that a certain Lance Armstrong may have directly or indirectly influenced the UCI's decision to hold off on signing the Code until late July 2004.

It certainly would have been in the best interests of Lance and the possibility of further donations to the UCI do hold off on signing the Code. Hard to think of anyone that would have benefited more.

Dave.

 

[Microchip]

Any hope of a link to the Scott Pelley's show, this early after airing?