• 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!

Tygarts angry reaction to UCI criiticism of his kangaroomcourt

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
mountainrman said:
Too many organisations. Too many agendas, No clear set of rules. Not even lipservice to normal justice.

You should have given that information before the "person who you don't support" decided not to contest the charges against him.
Poor fellow. Being a victim of incompetent organizations :mad:

shhhh...Don't tell him now, he might make your life ****ing hell.
 
Oct 13, 2012
46
0
0
Visit site
mountainrman said:
On that we can agree! But the fiasco proves the rule book is not well enough defined, there are too many organisations, and IMHO , UCI should have no part in it.

Hey Mr Empfield, in case you are too senile to remember you own Forums, here's the link:

forum.slowtwitch.com

Do us all a favor and go post there.
 

mountainrman

BANNED
Oct 17, 2012
385
0
0
Visit site
mutschi said:
Many might not like it but mountainman has a point. Reading the German media there is momentum building from law experts who question the process of USADA. Maybe that's also where the feds struggled a bit. And none of them are Armstrong fans. However, as mentioned earlier, the more important race is that for public opinion and at this stage Tygart is clearly giving Pat and LA "the look" and gapped them big time - he will win this important stage. Lets hope he will keep the advantage all the way to Paris.

For the record, neither am I an Armstrong fan, but having seen an athlete I knew who was an innocent victim destroyed by such organisations as these, and later acknowledged as innocent , but bankrupted just the same because of the impossibility of fighting several arguing organisations, with no defined process and overlapping jurisdiction, I am a proponent of justice too - for all - not just those who can afford it. My view the structure is wrong in athletics not just cycling.
 
ToreBear said:
So the UCI said OK we accept usadas decision.

Then Mcqaid is dumb enough to later put up a post stating "but we really don't like it and think USADA are wrong, but we did'nt have the guts to say so in front of the press so we attach this letter instead".:eek:

This forum needs a serious facepalm icon.

Seems Pat is hell bent on making himself look monumentally stupid.:D

I thought he was trying to make himself look intelligent. The result being somewhere between Laurel and Hardy and Waiting for Godot.

didi+gogo.jpg


Dave.
 
Aug 31, 2012
10
0
0
Visit site
mountainrman said:
For the record, neither am I an Armstrong fan, but having seen an athlete I knew who was an innocent victim destroyed by such organisations as these, and later acknowledged as innocent , but bankrupted just the same because of the impossibility of fighting several arguing organisations, with no defined process and overlapping jurisdiction, I am a proponent of justice too - for all - not just those who can afford it. My view the structure is wrong in athletics not just cycling.

Innocent victim?

LOL
 

mountainrman

BANNED
Oct 17, 2012
385
0
0
Visit site
SlowtwitchLeaks said:
Hey Mr Empfield, in case you are too senile to remember you own Forums, here's the link:

forum.slowtwitch.com

Do us all a favor and go post there.

For the record, my name is Mike and I live in Northern UK. until this last month I have not been on cycling forums at all. I am a keen ultra mountain runner, and bike for fun, I no longer race at either, my career cut short by too many injuries, and have watched pro cycling for twenty years- I also know a considerable amount about aerobic performance and I know/ knew a lot of top class athletes, and have been on training camps with them. I saw Riis at Lanzarote on a camp the year before he won TDF, and I did not like him then ! My pinup is Nioole Cooke who I saw race to victory near my home in the commonwealths,And it hurts me to see what has happened to cycling and womens cycling even more.

Who you think I am, I have no idea. - I can assure you I am not.
 
mountainrman said:
For the record, my name is Mike and I live in Northern UK. until this last month I have not been on cycling forums at all. I am a keen ultra mountain runner, and bike for fun, I no longer race at either, my career cut short by too many injuries, and have watched pro cycling for twenty years- I also know a considerable amount about aerobic performance and I know/ knew a lot of top class athletes, and have been on training camps with them. I saw Riis at Lanzarote on a camp the year before he won TDF, and I did not like him then ! My pinup is Nioole Cooke who I saw race to victory near my home in the commonwealths,And it hurts me to see what has happened to cycling and womens cycling even more.

Who you think I am, I have no idea. - I can assure you I am not.

I am not who I think I am either!

Points well taken.

Knowing anything about aerobic performance should tell you all you need to know about the donkey to racehorse miracle.

If not, then as someone else once said, I am sorry you don't believe in miracles.

Dave.
 
Jun 18, 2009
1,225
1
0
Visit site
it's probably best to stick to that triathlete forum with this stuff; I think it still plays with a small fraction of those guys, all this "kangaroo court" nonsense. Most people in cycling understand that everything Tygart says about the UCI is true because, well, it is...
 
Jul 12, 2012
649
0
0
Visit site
McQuaid's subsequent comments are a bone thrown back to Armstrong and an attempt to deflect attention away from the UCI.

He has failed on both fronts. He does as many flips as Mitt Romney.
 
D-Queued said:
I am not who I think I am either!

Points well taken.

Knowing anything about aerobic performance should tell you all you need to know about the donkey to racehorse miracle.

If not, then as someone else once said, I am sorry you don't believe in miracles.

Those donkeys were innocent. They had their careers destroyed by lynch mobs. One day they were doing an honest day's work dragging carts of vegetables to market, and the next day they were hauled off to the glue factory by black hearts from the USADA. It was a terrible injustice that can only be salved by letting Armstrong off the hook. Keep in mind we are not in any way and never were fans. We simply believe in fairness.
 
Oct 12, 2012
169
0
0
Visit site
If I have to read more of McQuaids pointless, crooked-to-the-bone drivel , I swear it'll be worth the 25 years in jail to just fill the void, where his ****ing brain's suposed to be with lead.
That friggin lowlife makes me physically sick :mad:
 

mountainrman

BANNED
Oct 17, 2012
385
0
0
Visit site
Lukenwolf said:
If I have to read more of McQuaids pointless, crooked-to-the-bone drivel , I swear it'll be worth the 25 years in jail to just fill the void, where his ****ing brain's suposed to be with lead.
That friggin lowlife makes me physically sick :mad:

if you do we will contribute to the lukenwolf fairness fund, and that is a promise.

We cannot encourage you to, but only because that would make it conspiracy , making us all guilty.

PS please do it before the Kimmage trial.
 
Oct 12, 2012
169
0
0
Visit site
mountainrman said:
Wrong. i am no supporter of Armstrong, but neither do I support lynch mobs,

Wrong Again. You ARE a Seventh Win Apologist. Your posts prove it. now get back sticking your nose into LA's and McQuaids nether orifices. :mad:
 
Lukenwolf said:
Wrong Again. You ARE a Seventh Win Apologist. Your posts prove it. now get back sticking your nose into LA's a McQuaids nether orifices. :mad:

1. I don't think he/she is (but have been wrong before)

2. The mods have been pretty good at allowing 'artistic freedom' since the decision came down. At the same time, the threads have been remarkably light of crap.

Can we move on with the dialog, and past the ad hominems?

Dave.
 

mountainrman

BANNED
Oct 17, 2012
385
0
0
Visit site
Lukenwolf said:
Wrong Again. You ARE a Seventh Win Apologist. Your posts prove it. now get back sticking your nose into LA's and McQuaids nether orifices. :mad:

It seems you cannot read. My comments have been nothing short of caustic about Armstrong intimidation and the rest, but that does not mean I have to be happy with the current ( in ) justice system .Two wrongs do not make a right.

Because of the lack of proper process or definition of rules I expected and predicted on these threads an undignified argument between agencies, furher bringing the sport into disrepute at a time it needs to sing with one unified voice. The recent interagency exchanges bitterly prove my point - not to mention WADA who no doubt will join the bun fight soon.

This inter agency argument will ensure yet more Rabobanks voting no confidence by closing their wallets.

The system needs fixing, and to be made credible again, which it is not.
Postcode lottery should not apply, but it does in cycling. Small wonder dopers flock to Spain.

Do not shoot the messenger.
The enemy of your friend , is not the friend of your enemy.
 
Jun 18, 2009
1,225
1
0
Visit site
mountainrman said:
It seems you cannot read. My comments have been nothing short of caustic about Armstrong intimidation and the rest, but that does not mean I have to be happy with the current ( in ) justice system .Two wrongs do not make a right.

Just exactly what is it in the USADA process that's so broken? I've yet to hear anyone articulate this in an intelligent manner. Hint: yelling "kangaroo court" isn't "discussing it in an articulate manner".

The argument some have made is that USADA/WADA doesn't adhere to the exact same due process standards as a US criminal court. Let me tell you, as someone bound by these rules, I DO NOT WANT ANTI-DOPING AGENCIES TO BE BOUND TO THE SAME DUE PROCESS STANDARDS AS THE US CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM! Why not? because the standard of proof to put someone in jail shouldn't be the same as sanctioning someone for doping. The stakes are different: individual liberty vs. sporting competition. In the game of fairness, it's a balance--balancing the rights of those who dope, or are accused of doping to a fair hearing, vs. those like me who aren't doping, and a right to compete on a truly level playing field. Adhering to the same due process standards as US criminal law would be untenable, and shift the advantage heavily to those willing to cheat. I really don't want that, but thanks for being concerned about my rights.

So, I'll ask again: what exactly is so draconian about the USADA/WADA policies?
 
Jun 16, 2009
60
0
0
Visit site
This is a complete non-issue. It is completely erroneous to suggest that WADA and by direct extension through Armstrong's US license, USADA don't have absolute jurisdiction. It is clearly written and was confirmed by Judge Starks. End of story.

The only reason that the UCI is throwing this lifeline is to HOPEFULLY placate LA and save their own asses from being implicated as complicit in the whole ordeal.

That's not how it will go down though. LA will hit rock bottom and try to blow up anything and everything that he can. His ego won't allow otherwise.
 
Sep 6, 2012
65
0
0
Visit site
mountainrman said:
It seems you cannot read. My comments have been nothing short of caustic about Armstrong intimidation and the rest, but that does not mean I have to be happy with the current ( in ) justice system .Two wrongs do not make a right.

Because of the lack of proper process or definition of rules I expected and predicted on these threads an undignified argument between agencies, furher bringing the sport into disrepute at a time it needs to sing with one unified voice.

The system needs fixing, and to be made credible again, which it is not.
Postcode lottery should not apply, but it does in cycling. Small wonder dopers flock to Spain.

Do not shoot the messenger.
The enemy of your friend , is not the friend of your enemy.

If you like I'll find a moral or ethical problem with just about every piece of law in existence. Laws evolve as they are tested because we humans have a funny knack of exploiting weaknesses.
You can be as unhappy as you like about the law but you need to be a little more practical about the difference between the current situation and your black and white wishes.
The world is distinctly grey and always will be.
Part of the popularity of sport is/was the relative simplicity of it's laws.
Unfortunately PED's render them relatively unenforceable in their current state.
The system doesn't need "fixing" - it's time it evolved.
Another way of putting it might be time to say it need a progressive leadership because the conservative leadership we've been "enjoying" has been static for too long. Unfortunately the system has been engineered to disable any democratic way of achieving that.
 

mountainrman

BANNED
Oct 17, 2012
385
0
0
Visit site
eyemgh said:
This is a complete non-issue. It is completely erroneous to suggest that WADA and by direct extension through Armstrong's US license, USADA don't have absolute jurisdiction. It is clearly written and was confirmed by Judge Starks. End of story.

The only reason that the UCI is throwing this lifeline is to HOPEFULLY placate LA and save their own asses from being implicated as complicit in the whole ordeal.

That's not how it will go down though. LA will hit rock bottom and try to blow up anything and everything that he can. His ego won't allow otherwise.

You need to research the legal context of that lawsuit, it is not what you claim at all. Sparks indicates that the only way that Armstrong can be granted relief from his own assent to USADA proceeding is if " immediate irreperable harm " is done to Armstrongs constitutional rights regarding property or freedom. Because of the possibility of arbitrated appeal, and only because of that, the court considered harm would not be either irreperable or immediate. Sparks actually slates the process in the conclusion soecifically saying that because of jurisdictional arguments he felt it UNLIKELY Armstrong could get a fair hearing with ANY of them, and if you were a court watcher you would know how damining that is an indictment of all the agencies concerned, for all that stating Armstrong had to exhaust the arbitration process first. It was a long way from expressing satisfaction at the process to that point or anticipated. Sparks also questions dubious motives by USADA too.

Reality is the lack of coherence is making yet another farce at a time cycling needs to sing with a unified voice to stop sponsors runnng for cover.