USADA - Armstrong

[MarkvW]

http://www.deia.com/2012/08/19/deportes/ciclismo/mi-relacion-con-lance-esta-por-encima-de-todo

Johan is out of touch with reality. Says his licenses is a UCI license with the Belgium Fed. USADA cannot do anything to him.

Thanks for the post, but I'm not so sure that Johan is out of touch with reality. The UCI has already chastised USADA and has told it to stop. It has already denied USADA's jurisdiction in the entire USPS Conspiracy matter. The position that Johan now states is entirely consistent with the UCI position, as stated by McQuaid. Johan has also been tight-lipped heretofore. He is a prudent and careful man. I don't think he'd put himself out in front of the UCI.

Sad to say, but it looks like Johan is entirely in touch with reality. It looks like the UCI totally has Johan's back. Anything bad that's going to happen to Johan is only going to happen after something bad happens to the UCI--and all that (if it's going to happen) is a good while down the road.

 

[ChrisE]

Thanks for the post, but I'm not so sure that Johan is out of touch with reality. The UCI has already chastised USADA and has told it to stop. It has already denied USADA's jurisdiction in the entire USPS Conspiracy matter. The position that Johan now states is entirely consistent with the UCI position, as stated by McQuaid. Johan has also been tight-lipped heretofore. He is a prudent and careful man. I don't think he'd put himself out in front of the UCI.

Sad to say, but it looks like Johan is entirely in touch with reality. It looks like the UCI totally has Johan's back. Anything bad that's going to happen to Johan is only going to happen after something bad happens to the UCI--and all that (if it's going to happen) is a good while down the road.

The link is in Spanish, so I am going by what RR writes.

This is similar to CONI/Valverde, so there is precedence which I assume is the basis of his post. I was against that at the time due to potential slippery slopes of one country targeting the riders of another country. That's black helicopter stuff but still IMO it is BS.

The whole thing is a farce. Once more, the sport needs one independent governing body that tests and administers punishment, outside of nationalistic and commercial influence.

 

[poupou]

If they ignore the conclusions of the USADA process, they will be in breach of the WADA code.

The IOC will then be forced by it's own statutes to exclude cycling. Hopefuly the UCI is purged of corrouption, or displaced by a new organization before the IOC is forced to exclude cycling.

I don't see many national federations willing to follow the UCI down the drain.

That would be a matter of juridiction affecting all sports, so that should exclude all athletes under US licences or able to be in a similar case of Lance.

 

[Irish2009]

Looking at this why would Johan say that USADA has no authority but agree to arbitration?

If USADA has no authority over cycling, does it therefore imply that USADA has no authority over any athlete in any sport in the USA?

If the UCI dont come around to accepting a USADA investigation outcome as per the WADA code and the USOC take no action is there a possability of US athletes being not allowed compete in RIO by the IOC?

 

[the big ring]

Looking at this why would Johan say that USADA has no authority but agree to arbitration?

If USADA has no authority over cycling, does it therefore imply that USADA has no authority over any athlete in any sport in the USA?

If the UCI dont come around to accepting a USADA investigation outcome as per the WADA code and the USOC take no action is there a possability of US athletes being not allowed compete in RIO by the IOC?

Interesting precedents.

 

[Big Doopie]

http://www.deia.com/2012/08/19/deportes/ciclismo/mi-relacion-con-lance-esta-por-encima-de-todo

Johan is out of touch with reality. Says his licenses is a UCI license with the Belgium Fed. USADA cannot do anything to him.

it must continue to be noted -- that just like armstrong -- the defense is not: "I did not dope or make others dope", but "the USADA has no jurisdiction".

not the defense of someone who is innocent.

they should both serve long prison terms. they have done such harm to many people. unfortunately...

 

[MarkvW]

Looking at this why would Johan say that USADA has no authority but agree to arbitration?

If USADA has no authority over cycling, does it therefore imply that USADA has no authority over any athlete in any sport in the USA?

If the UCI dont come around to accepting a USADA investigation outcome as per the WADA code and the USOC take no action is there a possability of US athletes being not allowed compete in RIO by the IOC?

The USADA operates on two separate tracks of authority.

One track flows from the US Olympic Committee. They do the USOC's dope enforcement work. Lance and the UCI have not had any luck derailing the process that derives from this track.

The other track flows from USAC (the puppet of the UCI) to the USADA. On this tread of authority, USADA is just plain doing the work of USAC (the puppet of the UCI). This track is seriously under attack by the UCI, and its puppet, USAC. This attack has a long way to play out--and it is a straight contractual fight between the UCI/USADA and USADA.

Lance is trying to shape the fight in this latter track into a battle between UCI/USAC. This is the battle that OUGHT to be taking place in federal court right now. But it's not. Something is going on here that's keeping the UCI and USADA from suing USADA and arguing that USADA is breaching its contract with USAC by hounding poor Lance Armstrong. There's lots of good speculation about that.

The battle in the latter track can be viewed as a battle involving the UCI, USAC, and Lance--with the USOC (right now) playing no part in it. That battle is entirely unresolved. It could be resolved by the UCI/USAC initiating a "back-off" lawsuit, it could be resolved by the UCI/USAC just ignoring anything USADA does, or it could be resolved in a way that I'm not anticipating.

But the kicker is that these two tracks are not isolated from each other. If the UCI destroys (or ignores) USADA's attempts to dope-control USAC (the latter track), then there should (if everything works right) be bad consequences to the UCI/USAC from the Olympic participation angle (the former track). The Olympics have rules (the WADA Code) that say they're not going to let federations who violate the WADA code participate in Olympic events.

Your post looks down the road to the time when the US Olympic Committee is going to have to make up it's mind whether or not it is going to let USA Cycling (the UCI's puppet) participate in the Olympics. If the USOC lets USA Cycling participate, then the IOC is going to have to determine whether or not the USOC is going to allow a defiant violator of the WADA code participate as part of the US Olympic Team.

Lots of palms are gonna get greased along the way.

 

[Race Radio]

Thanks for the post, but I'm not so sure that Johan is out of touch with reality. The UCI has already chastised USADA and has told it to stop. It has already denied USADA's jurisdiction in the entire USPS Conspiracy matter. The position that Johan now states is entirely consistent with the UCI position, as stated by McQuaid. Johan has also been tight-lipped heretofore. He is a prudent and careful man. I don't think he'd put himself out in front of the UCI.

Sad to say, but it looks like Johan is entirely in touch with reality. It looks like the UCI totally has Johan's back. Anything bad that's going to happen to Johan is only going to happen after something bad happens to the UCI--and all that (if it's going to happen) is a good while down the road.

Nope, he has lost it.

No matter how much the UCI is willing to embarrass themselves to save The Hog it does not change the fact that USADA can, and will, sanction him. This sanction will be recognized world wide.

Didn't work for Valverde, will not work for the Hog

 

[QuickStepper]

The link is in Spanish, so I am going by what RR writes.

This is similar to CONI/Valverde, so there is precedence which I assume is the basis of his post. I was against that at the time due to potential slippery slopes of one country targeting the riders of another country. That's black helicopter stuff but still IMO it is BS.

The whole thing is a farce. Once more, the sport needs one independent governing body that tests and administers punishment, outside of nationalistic and commercial influence.

Here are some excerpts from the same article, but I've used Google Translate to get at least an approximation in English. Not the best translation and some of it comes out as gibberish, but it's better than nothing if one simply does not speak Spanish.

"Armstrong's return in 2009, this tour so tense, was the trigger for his break with Alberto.

"But my relationship with Lance is above everything. He is the godfather of my son. What we have lived together and created something unique. Come one come in the future may not be the same as what I have with him. I know it will be impossible to have the same close relationship with any other broker, nor seek it because it is not something you need. All this was 'post Lance' is hard for me, but I have done and what we have lived.

"Is your friendship with Armstrong is hurting?

"I think not. It is also a personal choice. If I wanted I would split with him, but I will not do it. He's my friend. I've been with him when he has been necessary and, conversely, he has always been there when I've needed. Neither USADA Novitzky or nobody is going to break our friendship.

"Does he play his race? [No real idea what the question is here]

"My career is already made.

"How does it affect the issue of USADA?

"For me it's a distraction, but not something that worries me a lot, simply because the USADA is an organization with which I have not had any relationship I have.

"But you can punish. [I presume the actual question was "But they can punish you."

"I have a license with my federation, Belgium, and is a UCI license. All they can do me and I have done is moral damage, but in my career and have given me and sticks everywhere east of the USADA is like a soft stick. These weeks are hard for me because my best friend has had a bad fall cycle and is likely to stay paraplegic. You understand then that this whole USADA and everything else not be so important to me?"

 

[Race Radio]

The USADA operates on two separate tracks of authority.

One track flows from the US Olympic Committee. They do the USOC's dope enforcement work. Lance and the UCI have not had any luck derailing the process that derives from this track.

The other track flows from USAC (the puppet of the UCI) to the USADA. On this tread of authority, USADA is just plain doing the work of USAC (the puppet of the UCI). This track is seriously under attack by the UCI, and its puppet, USAC. This attack has a long way to play out--and it is a straight contractual fight between the UCI/USADA and USADA.

Lance is trying to shape the fight in this latter track into a battle between UCI/USAC. This is the battle that OUGHT to be taking place in federal court right now. But it's not. Something is going on here that's keeping the UCI and USADA from suing USADA and arguing that USADA is breaching its contract with USAC by hounding poor Lance Armstrong. There's lots of good speculation about that.

The battle in the latter track can be viewed as a battle involving the UCI, USAC, and Lance--with the USOC (right now) playing no part in it. That battle is entirely unresolved. It could be resolved by the UCI/USAC initiating a "back-off" lawsuit, it could be resolved by the UCI/USAC just ignoring anything USADA does, or it could be resolved in a way that I'm not anticipating.

But the kicker is that these two tracks are not isolated from each other. If the UCI destroys (or ignores) USADA's attempts to dope-control USAC (the latter track), then there should (if everything works right) be bad consequences to the UCI/USAC from the Olympic participation angle (the former track). The Olympics have rules (the WADA Code) that say they're not going to let federations who violate the WADA code participate in Olympic events.

Your post looks down the road to the time when the US Olympic Committee is going to have to make up it's mind whether or not it is going to let USA Cycling (the UCI's puppet) participate in the Olympics. If the USOC lets USA Cycling participate, then the IOC is going to have to determine whether or not the USOC is going to allow a defiant violator of the WADA code participate as part of the US Olympic Team.

Lots of palms are gonna get greased along the way.

When it comes to doping USAC is USADA's *****. When it comes to saddle angle USAC is the UCI's *****.

No matter how much smoke and mirrors Lance and his paid liars try to introduce this does not change

 

[MarkvW]

Nope, he has lost it.

No matter how much the UCI is willing to embarrass themselves to save The Hog it does not change the fact that USADA can, and will, sanction him. This sanction will be recognized world wide.

Didn't work for Valverde, will not work for the Hog

I'm not saying that you're wrong on what's ultimately going to happen. I'm just saying that Bruyneel is behaving quite rationally--he hasn't "lost it."

 

[QuickStepper]

Nope, he has lost it.

No matter how much the UCI is willing to embarrass themselves to save The Hog it does not change the fact that USADA can, and will, sanction him. This sanction will be recognized world wide.

Didn't work for Valverde, will not work for the Hog

When you say it will be "recognized world wide" doesn't that presuppose that the UCI is going to enforce such a sanction in Europe and wherever else the UCI sanctions international races?

Let's suppose that MarkvW's analysis is right and the UCI simply chooses to ignore any sanction that USADA imposes on Bruyneel. What is USADA going to do about it other than through the first "track" (IOC) that MarkvW has identified?

What if the Belgian Federation also ignores USADA's sanction? What then?

 

[thehog]

I'm not saying that you're wrong on what's ultimately going to happen. I'm just saying that Bruyneel is behaving quite rationally--he hasn't "lost it."

If only you knew how much they have "lost it". Both of them are going spare.

 

[Race Radio]

I'm not saying that you're wrong on what's ultimately going to happen. I'm just saying that Bruyneel is behaving quite rationally--he hasn't "lost it."

His position has no basis in reality and not just on this topic. I talk with people who have to engage with him on a regular basis and have said for the last year that he has become increasingly irrational on many topics.

It will be good to see him banned from the sport

 

[hektoren]

USAC should have no say in this case with the close relation between LA/Weisel/Johnson and financial interdependencies clearly documented. http://www.sfweekly.com/2005-09-07/news/tour-de-farce/
Sparks has good reason to feel animosity towards LA's counsel and USAC

 

[Race Radio]

When you say it will be "recognized world wide" doesn't that presuppose that the UCI is going to enforce such a sanction in Europe and wherever else the UCI sanctions international races?

Let's suppose that MarkvW's analysis is right and the UCI simply chooses to ignore any sanction that USADA imposes on Bruyneel. What is USADA going to do about it other than through the first "track" (IOC) that MarkvW has identified?

What if the Belgian Federation also ignores USADA's sanction? What then?

Very simple, If the UCI ignores the sanction then cycling will be kicked out of the Olympics.

Some in the IOC have pushed for this for years. They came very close in 2007 and the message has been communicated clearly that they are at risk.

It will be interesting how far Pat is willing to push this. They are trapped between a rock and a hard place as either way they will be exposed

 

[thehog]

USAC should have no say in this case with the close relation between LA/Weisel/Johnson and financial interdependencies clearly documented. http://www.sfweekly.com/2005-09-07/news/tour-de-farce/
Sparks has good reason to feel animosity towards LA's counsel and USAC

I don't know a lot but with Federal Court filings do they require you declare interests beforehand?

 

[Velodude]

USAC should have no say in this case with the close relation between LA/Weisel/Johnson and financial interdependencies clearly documented. http://www.sfweekly.com/2005-09-07/news/tour-de-farce/
Sparks has good reason to feel animosity towards LA's counsel and USAC

This guy went to some lengths to flow chart the conflict-of-interest financial relationship between the main players in US cycling and beyond.

http://www.cyclismas.com/2012/06/lance-armstrongs-business-links-a-flowchart-by-dimspace/

 

[Berzin]

Would you jeopardize your career for him (Armstrong)?

"My career is already set."

"How does it affect the issue of USADA?

"For me it's a distraction, but not something that worries me a lot, simply because the USADA is an organization with which I have never had, past or present, any relationship with.

"But can they punish you?"

"I have a license with my federation, a Belgian (license), and it is a UCI license. All they can do and have done is ruin my reputation, but in my career I have received knocks from all sides and this one from the USADA is like a soft stick.

These weeks are hard for me because my best friend has had a bad fall from his bicycle and is likely to remain a paraplegic. You understand then that this whole situation with the USADA and everything else isn't of much importance to me?"

A little help with the translation to clarify things.

 

[python]

This statement by bruyneel is irrelevant except the physhing value to collect intelligence as is coordinated by armstrong and now fully committed on his side uci team.

Armstrong, bruyneel and the uci are one combined team. If anyone had any doubts, you were out to lunch.

Bruyneel did not cancel his intention to USADA hearing. he knows if he did, there would follow an automatic hammer and he would be useless as an intelligence collector for his boss.

All is really simple so far...

 

[thehog]

His position has no basis in reality and not just on this topic. I talk with people who have to engage with him on a regular basis and have said for the last year that he has become increasingly irrational on many topics.

It will be good to see him banned from the sport

One only has to look at the way the Shleck debacle(s) were handled and playing hide & seek at the ToC to note the guy is 2 cans short of a 6 pack.

He's been anything but normal all year.

Income is drying up. Fast.

 

[MarkvW]

This statement by bruyneel is irrelevant except the physhing value to collect intelligence as is coordinated by armstrong and now fully committed on his side uci team.

Armstrong, bruyneel and the uci are one combined team. If anyone had any doubts, you were out to lunch.

Bruyneel did not cancel his intention to USADA hearing. he knows if he did, there would follow an automatic hammer and he would be useless as an intelligence collector for his boss.

All is really simple so far...

If the UCI and Armstrong were on the same team, then the UCI would be involved in Armstrong's lawsuit right now.

The UCI is allied with Armstrong's team, but it is not a part of Armstrong's team. The UCI has to worry about the Olympics--Armstrong doesn't have the slightest care about the Olympics.

 

[ToreBear]

That would be a matter of juridiction affecting all sports, so that should exclude all athletes under US licences or able to be in a similar case of Lance.

What are you talking about? If the UCI does not follow an USADA ruling they are in breach of the WADA code. That means all sports organized by the UCI are ineligeble for the olympics.

I might be wrong, but I'm pretty sure I'm not.

 

[sniper]

A little help with the translation to clarify things.

thanks berzin and quickstepper.

These weeks are hard for me because my best friend has had a bad fall from his bicycle and is likely to remain a paraplegic. You understand then that this whole situation with the USADA and everything else isn't of much importance to me?"

Sheesh, Armthong and Hog are just making a sport out of using other people's suffering to mitigate and trivialize their own crimes.

 

[Page Mill Masochist]

USAC should have no say in this case with the close relation between LA/Weisel/Johnson and financial interdependencies clearly documented. http://www.sfweekly.com/2005-09-07/news/tour-de-farce/
Sparks has good reason to feel animosity towards LA's counsel and USAC

Sparks did refer to stinking fish.