• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. 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!

Please answer me this question

Why is Jonathan Vaughters still allowed to be director after admitting doping? Why are others being removed with more severe penalties and the tattletales still get to work in cycling? Rees and Vaughters admitted to doping, yet they still work in cycling. So why is it ok for USADA to ban lance for life, UCI is ok with the ban, yet UCI says its ok to allow some a light punishment.

I just don't understand the hypocrisy from everyone organization to ban some for life and not others. If you admit, you are gone. That's the only way to clean house. Now Yates is gone, and this is directly related to doping, even if they say not.

This entire thing stinks of making one guy the scapegoat.
 
Vaughters came in and 'fessed up, so he's getting a pass. Many, many other riders have been implicated and gotten bans. Armstrong was really the last of the major contenders not to have been sanctioned. The US in USADA means they're going to focus on US riders.

There's no scapegoating going on here, it would seem there is only a rectification of long standing wrongs.
 
Jun 26, 2012
84
0
0
Visit site
I asked Vaughters in light of Julich's firing:
Is it fair that you have a job and he does not now?

@Vaughters
no. It is not fair at all.

Maybe he'll hire him next year.
 
Sep 21, 2012
296
0
0
Visit site
Iflanceisbannedbanthemall said:
This entire thing stinks of making one guy the scapegoat.
That's one opinion.
I'm perfectly fine with DopeStrong getting kicked to the curb and banned for life. Well done, USADA.

laf.png
 
Aug 3, 2010
843
1
0
Visit site
Moderators, hello.....another thread of this nonsense? Do your job!

Then again, maybe all of the "witch hunt" , "kangaroo court" crowd will all come here and talk to each other, instead of f*ucking up other good conversations.
 
Oct 14, 2012
63
0
0
Visit site
Iflanceisbannedbanthemall said:
Why is Jonathan Vaughters still allowed to be director after admitting doping? Why are others being removed with more severe penalties and the tattletales still get to work in cycling? Rees and Vaughters admitted to doping, yet they still work in cycling. So why is it ok for USADA to ban lance for life, UCI is ok with the ban, yet UCI says its ok to allow some a light punishment.

I just don't understand the hypocrisy from everyone organization to ban some for life and not others. If you admit, you are gone. That's the only way to clean house. Now Yates is gone, and this is directly related to doping, even if they say not.

This entire thing stinks of making one guy the scapegoat.

Because in all things drug related, to authorities have little change of breaking down the structure of a drug/doping ring without the assistance of those participating. Therefore, they offer agreements to those cooperating for reduced penalties as an incentive to get that assistance. Since Lance is up near the top of a doping ring, he was not offered as much incentive. There are reports that he was offered reduced penalties if he would confess, he made the choice that he had a better chance (we like our credibility) of complete acquittal. He thought wrong, and pays the price.
 
Iflanceisbannedbanthemall said:
If you admit, you are gone. That's the only way to clean house.

You really didn't put any thought into this, did you? The result of a policy like that would obviously be nobody admits and the house stays filthy. I guess for Lance lovers like yourself that would have been a good outcome - just keep on living in a little dream world. Cover your eyes and ears and yell "la-la-la-la" to prevent the truth from somehow making it into your ears. There's probably an executive position in the UCI for you. It must have hurt quite a bit to find out your hero was a fraud.

For those wondering how the Lance lovers argument has evolved, Iflanceisbanned is displaying the latest step. The "500 tests - never failed", "level playing field", "did so much for cancer research", "USADA is conducting a witch hunt" have all fallen by the wayside. Now it's "Lance is a scapegoat. Blame them all." At least they're finally accepting Lance was crooked. But still they grasp at straws...

Yes, they're almost all dirty but nobody was as dirty, as crooked, as powerful, as spiteful, as arrogant, as vindictive as Lance. He had influence over congressman, over the media, over a massive fan base, over the UCI, his cronies run USA Cycling. He had no qualms over using his power to destroy anybody who he perceived as a threat. He used the hero worship (based on his victories, which was based on doping) to exploit his fans and massively enrich himself.

Show me another rider who came close to doing what Lance did in terms of perverting the entire sport of cycling. To say that other riders should be investigated like Lance is lunacy. If you're investigating the mafia you go after the Godfather first. You don't say some low level foot soldier shaking down bookies is just as bad. When those foot soldiers turn against the Godfather, no - they do not get the same penalties as the guy running the operation.

The other cyclists who cheated at least had the self-respect not to say crap like this - when they know very well they were dirty:
"Finally, the last thing I'll say to the people who don’t believe in cycling, the cynics and the skeptics: I'm sorry for you. I’m sorry that you can't dream big. I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles. But this is one hell of a race. This is a great sporting event and you should stand around and believe it. You should believe in these athletes, and you should believe in these people. I'll be a fan of the Tour de France for as long as I live. And there are no secrets — this is a hard sporting event and hard work wins it. So Vive le Tour forever!"

And don't say you're not a Lance lover - that you're just a neutral observer. Admit that you were hurt, you feel cheated, and now you're trying to salvage some pride by finding some way to rationalize what happened to Lance. If you're looking for somebody to blame for your loss of innocence, it's not USADA, it's not the journalists looking for the truth, it's not the cyclists who spoke up, it's Lance.
 
delleErbe said:
You really didn't put any thought into this, did you? The result of a policy like that would obviously be nobody admits and the house stays filthy. I guess for Lance lovers like yourself that would have been a good outcome - just keep on living in a little dream world. Cover your eyes and ears and yell "la-la-la-la" to prevent the truth from somehow making it into your ears. There's probably an executive position in the UCI for you. It must have hurt quite a bit to find out your hero was a fraud.

For those wondering how the Lance lovers argument has evolved, Iflanceisbanned is displaying the latest step. The "500 tests - never failed", "level playing field", "did so much for cancer research", "USADA is conducting a witch hunt" have all fallen by the wayside. Now it's "Lance is a scapegoat. Blame them all." At least they're finally accepting Lance was crooked. But still they grasp at straws...

Yes, they're almost all dirty but nobody was as dirty, as crooked, as powerful, as spiteful, as arrogant, as vindictive as Lance. He had influence over congressman, over the media, over a massive fan base, over the UCI, his cronies run USA Cycling. He had no qualms over using his power to destroy anybody who he perceived as a threat. He used the hero worship (based on his victories, which was based on doping) to exploit his fans and massively enrich himself.

Show me another rider who came close to doing what Lance did in terms of perverting the entire sport of cycling. To say that other riders should be investigated like Lance is lunacy. If you're investigating the mafia you go after the Godfather first. You don't say some low level foot soldier shaking down bookies is just as bad. When those foot soldiers turn against the Godfather, no - they do not get the same penalties as the guy running the operation.

The other cyclists who cheated at least had the self-respect not to say crap like this - when they know very well they were dirty:
"Finally, the last thing I'll say to the people who don’t believe in cycling, the cynics and the skeptics: I'm sorry for you. I’m sorry that you can't dream big. I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles. But this is one hell of a race. This is a great sporting event and you should stand around and believe it. You should believe in these athletes, and you should believe in these people. I'll be a fan of the Tour de France for as long as I live. And there are no secrets — this is a hard sporting event and hard work wins it. So Vive le Tour forever!"

And don't say you're not a Lance lover - that you're just a neutral observer. Admit that you were hurt, you feel cheated, and now you're trying to salvage some pride by finding some way to rationalize what happened to Lance. If you're looking for somebody to blame for your loss of innocence, it's not USADA, it's not the journalists looking for the truth, it's not the cyclists who spoke up, it's Lance.

Great post I'm bookmarking it to quote!
 
Iflanceisbannedbanthemall said:
Why is Jonathan Vaughters still allowed to be director after admitting doping? Why are others being removed with more severe penalties and the tattletales still get to work in cycling? Rees and Vaughters admitted to doping, yet they still work in cycling. So why is it ok for USADA to ban lance for life, UCI is ok with the ban, yet UCI says its ok to allow some a light punishment.

I just don't understand the hypocrisy from everyone organization to ban some for life and not others. If you admit, you are gone. That's the only way to clean house. Now Yates is gone, and this is directly related to doping, even if they say not.

This entire thing stinks of making one guy the scapegoat.

With a criminal syndicate, the crime fighters start at the bottom and work their way up to the big boss or bosses. The lesser, lower on the totem pole players often plea bargain for the vital info that they can provide. Armstrong was given the opportunity to contribute and fess up but of course he chose to continue to deny his part and as the leader or one of the leaders he is facing the brunt of the impact of all these revelations. He foolishly and arrogantly decided to take the path that he's on. He's no scapegoat and this is no witchhunt.
 
Mar 10, 2009
1,295
0
0
Visit site
We see this all the time. Go for the big guy if you want to have the greatest effect. Radar traps don't catch every speeder but if they stop a driver near the front, the entire line of cars behind obey the speed limit voluntarily for a while. So the next speed trap should be timed just right to give the sense of they are catching someone. I know I have argued about the process in this case as I think the ends are justified by the means they are achieved. So Yes the LA conviction has been a targeted prosecution with a level of shock and Awe. Regardless I think they finally nailed his tail to the floor. Unlike the criminal justice system there are far fewer legal technicalities they could use against this decision. As soon as we get past the last appeal date I will rest on this case.
How they treat the others is art of all legal systems as incentives to telling the truth now for a lesser penalty or wait for them to prove something.
The police use it against criminals every day and we see lots of guilty people bargain for lesser sentences by rolling over on someone else.