USADA - Armstrong

[BotanyBay]

Armstrong to sue Stapleton

On Bill's to-do list for this year:

1) Next time I'm asked to sit on a committee that drafts rules regarding Lane's current sport, include a crafty loophole that allows Lance to weasel his way out of trouble.

 

[Fortyninefourteen]

This would be wrong under US labor laws. Lance needs to establish that he met all rules of employment. He was tested by races,sponsors and doctors treating him before during and after a life threating illness.

His employer and workplace established rules. That he not only complied with,but accelled at in every expectation. In any right to work environment Armstrong is the victim. He has to be able to work. If the boss says misuse a forklift.work thru lunch,or anything else illegal it is wrong but can hardly be his sole responsibility to air it.Even if he gained the most,million times more than everybody else,it's not his job to change the flow of the 100 year old river that is pro cycling.

We are just now seeing labor laws. In the US step in for NFL ,MLB and NBA players that went with the flow only to find out it led over Niagra Falls..
Armstrong wrong? Absolute. but he did not set up this system.

His working conditions included the various behavioral requirements for ongoing and continued employment in his field. While certain aspects of 'labor law' may be deemed applicable, his violations of the contact between him and the various authorities would be considered a deliberate willful breach. I seriously doubt that a labor law argument would be his attack on a USADA or CAS decision.

 

[BotanyBay]

Does Ashenden have credibility with the IOC? I ask because I keep hoping the IOC will weigh, very forcefully and publicly, on WADA/USADA's side. Now perhaps the IOC has flexed its muscles behind the scenes, and this explains why UCI has backtracked from McQuaid's comments. One hopes that is the case. But I would love to see it verified with a public statement.

McQuaid chickened-out of that fight within 2 hours of Sparks' decision. Clearly he'd been drinking the night he fired-off those letters.

 

[fatandfast]

Correct. That would be Bill Stapleton, Lance's agent. Bill sat on the committee that drafted the actual adjudication procedure that Lance is now claiming is unjust.

Moral gravity. If your Home Depot boss asks you to lift a bag over 40lbs..outside your jobs description..wrong everywhere. Company,boss and you. Safe guards everywhere,employee handbook,training,union rules,common sense..eve rything out the window if you think your job depends on complying. Why Pharmstrong,with the most toys and wealth is a stopping point is absurd. If you want a safe workplace it is attainable. Thet workers don't need to do it. Dude Ceasar Chavez brother..PS have ridden in CapeCod(Eastham) E.Hampton and Silverlake Maine in the last 3 weeks,being back in NYC is bringing me down. Watched the race highlights and wondered just how low Lance must feel not being able to rub bags w all the pro racers riding by his house..that has to be punishing.

Lance give up. Be the victim.ask Eddie to testify about pressure or another loved guy maybe Mig or Delgado..cry a tear together about "just couldn't say no" you have decades of unsafe workplace practices on your side..just do it
V

 

[Page Mill Masochist]

This would be wrong under US labor laws. Lance needs to establish that he met all rules of employment. He was tested by races,sponsors and doctors treating him before during and after a life threating illness.

His employer and workplace established rules. That he not only complied with,but accelled at in every expectation. In any right to work environment Armstrong is the victim. He has to be able to work. If the boss says misuse a forklift.work thru lunch,or anything else illegal it is wrong but can hardly be his sole responsibility to air it.Even if he gained the most,million times more than everybody else,it's not his job to change the flow of the 100 year old river that is pro cycling.

I know I'm sounding like a broken record this morning, but the IOC is the key to all good. The IOC's embrace of WADA/USADA -- really, just a strong confirmation of its agreements with WADA -- has the power to make Armstrong radioactive no matter what happens in U.S. courts. No sport with Olympic aspirations will touch Armstrong again. He'll be reduced to the Leadville 100 and other minor competitions. Or he'll start some breakaway league that will be seen as the freak show it is.

 

[D-Queued]

1) Trek did NOT lose, the case was settled, you sound like Lance after the SCA settlement.

2) It was 2009, not within the past year.

3) YaY, you got it! LeMond argued Trek undermined his brand.

Wrong!

Trek first lost a decision on a request to dismiss the case.

A federal judge in Minnesota has ruled that only a jury trial or voluntary settlement can resolve some of the thorny arguments in the competing lawsuits between former Tour de France winner Greg LeMond and the Trek Bicycle Corporation - a long-running fight that centers on doping allegations involving LeMond's rival, Lance Armstrong.

They did settle, but with a settlement to Lemond.

Not sure where you come from, but when you have to pay someone else they are typically held as the 'winner'.

The settlement came in 2010, not 2009.

While it was 2010, this is still recent behavior. You are correct, though, it was not in the past year.

If we are talking about Armstrong's ability to pull the strings and his influence with his 'sponsors' (which is what I was responding to from Quickstepper), however, then this part is highly relevant:

DiBoise subpoenaed Armstrong's ex-wife, Kristin Armstrong, in October and has vowed to subpoena Lance Armstrong for a trial if Armstrong comes within reach of the U.S. District Court of the District of Minnesota.

One can only imagine that Lance may have 'suggested' to Trek they settle, rather than having to face that subpoena.

Dave.

 

[Berzin]

Have I missed anything?
Is it time for us to put up our Travis avs??

It's noon EST. Still way too early in the day.

I guess I have no choice now and must go ride my bike like the fanboys keep telling me to do.

Well look at this-I've been sitting in front of my computer hating Armstrong for so long without respite, I haven't noticed that I still have those pedals with the straps on my bike!!!

I've gotta get out more...

 

[LauraLyn]

This would be wrong under US labor laws. Lance needs to establish that he met all rules of employment. He was tested by races,sponsors and doctors treating him before during and after a life threating illness.

His employer and workplace established rules. That he not only complied with,but accelled at in every expectation. In any right to work environment Armstrong is the victim. He has to be able to work. If the boss says misuse a forklift.work thru lunch,or anything else illegal it is wrong but can hardly be his sole responsibility to air it.Even if he gained the most,million times more than everybody else,it's not his job to change the flow of the 100 year old river that is pro cycling.

We are just now seeing labor laws. In the US step in for NFL ,MLB and NBA players that went with the flow only to find out it led over Niagra Falls..
Armstrong wrong? Absolute. but he did not set up this system.

Jurisdiction was decided by Judge Sparks in Austin.

It is clear that without USADA arbitration there is no possible recourse to the US courts.

 

[fatandfast]

I know I'm sounding like a broken record this morning, but the IOC is the key to all good. The IOC's embrace of WADA/USADA -- really, just a strong confirmation of its agreements with WADA -- has the power to make Armstrong radioactive no matter what happens in U.S. courts. No sport with Olympic aspirations will touch Armstrong again. He'll be reduced to the Leadville 100 and other minor competitions. Or he'll start some breakaway league that will be seen as the freak show it is.

Agreed. There is a period after him. No more to be won at any level in sport.
Lots of other greats have faded. He will also..the shame should be shared not shouldered by Armstrong. From the predictions the cheating will continue only at a far higher molecular level.
Right now it is postured as cheaters against the authorities..lots of other factors .watched the BBC about German football rules..once the 1400 a month was gone all hell broke loose. One guy said a career can be made from a multi goal month w good TV coverage. If Horner becomes the the new Roll.we can expect many years of ignoring the elephant that has been in the room all along.

 

[JRTinMA]

Wrong!

Trek first lost a decision on a request to dismiss the case.

A federal judge in Minnesota has ruled that only a jury trial or voluntary settlement can resolve some of the thorny arguments in the competing lawsuits between former Tour de France winner Greg LeMond and the Trek Bicycle Corporation - a long-running fight that centers on doping allegations involving LeMond's rival, Lance Armstrong.

They did settle, but with a settlement to Lemond.

Not sure where you come from, but when you have to pay someone else they are typically held as the 'winner'.

The settlement came in 2010, not 2009.

While it was 2010, this is still recent behavior. You are correct, though, it was not in the past year.

If we are talking about Armstrong's ability to pull the strings and his influence with his 'sponsors' (which is what I was responding to from Quickstepper), however, then this part is highly relevant:

DiBoise subpoenaed Armstrong's ex-wife, Kristin Armstrong, in October and has vowed to subpoena Lance Armstrong for a trial if Armstrong comes within reach of the U.S. District Court of the District of Minnesota.

One can only imagine that Lance may have 'suggested' to Trek they settle, rather than having to face that subpoena.

Dave.

Everybody first tries to have the case dismissed, this is not a loss. So based on your logic lance won against SCA? He didn't, it was settled. A settlement does not imply a winner thats why its a settlement, case dismissed. Maybe you are right on lance suggesting a settlement, i will grant you that.

 

[BotanyBay]

Jurisdiction was decided by Judge Sparks in Austin.

It is clear that without USADA arbitration there is no possible recourse to the US courts.

He'll be back in Federal court even if he doesn't decide to appeal the jurisdiction issue. The reason he'll go back to federal court is that he hasn't been injured yet by any process on the part of USADA, so he has nothing to ask of them until USADA adjudicates and punishes him.

 

[D-Queued]

Everybody first tries to have the case dismissed, this is not a loss. So based on your logic lance won against SCA? He didn't, it was settled. A settlement does not imply a winner thats why its a settlement, case dismissed. Maybe you are right on lance suggesting a settlement, i will grant you that.

Not trying to pick a fight, or even be overly argumentative, but wasn't SCA settled through arbitration, with a major, effectively punitive, award against SCA and to Lance?

Further, that the subject of doping or not, was found to be irrelevant since it was not explicitly contained within the bonus contract?

If we asked SCA who won, pretty sure they would say Lance.

Alternately, if we asked them if they won or lost, pretty sure SCA would say that they lost.

Dave.

 

[Benotti69]

Agreed. There is a period after him. No more to be won at any level in sport.
Lots of other greats have faded. He will also..the shame should be shared not shouldered by Armstrong. From the predictions the cheating will continue only at a far higher molecular level.
Right now it is postured as cheaters against the authorities..lots of other factors .watched the BBC about German football rules..once the 1400 a month was gone all hell broke loose. One guy said a career can be made from a multi goal month w good TV coverage. If Horner becomes the the new Roll.we can expect many years of ignoring the elephant that has been in the room all along.

Have you eaten too many yellow bracelets or something?

All the others have had their shame. Armstrong is the last nd most deserving of the shame for how he has treated people.

Looks like they saved the best doper for last.

 

[LauraLyn]

He'll be back in Federal court even if he doesn't decide to appeal the jurisdiction issue. The reason he'll go back to federal court is that he hasn't been injured yet by any process on the part of USADA, so he has nothing to ask of them until USADA adjudicates and punishes him.

Precisely, almost. It has not to do with adjudication by USADA but arbitration. No arbitration, no appeal possible. It is simple.

 

[BotanyBay]

Precisely, almost. It has not to do with adjudication by USADA but arbitration. No arbitration, no appeal possible. It is simple.

Right. He has nothing to fight yet, as USADA has not injured him yet. Once they do, then he can go back to federal court and make all kinds of new claims.

 

[QuickStepper]

I am not sure on this, but I would think that him not contesting the arbitration is similar to receiving a default judgment in civil court. There is nothing to appeal because what it essentially means is that you ceded to the charges made, similar to a criminal case would be pleading guilty. You can't appeal something like that. "I'm guilty...now I want to appeal my admission of guilt!" Makes no sense. I haven't read the statutes recently, so I cannot say for sure the supplemental rules don't provide for it, but I see nothing to appeal if he chooses not to contest the arbitration.

I think you are absolutely correct that Armstrong cannot allow the underlying arbitration with USADA to go by way of default and then attempt to appeal. You are also correct that the CAS Arbitration Appeal Rules provide that the athlete must, as a precondition to filing an appeal, exhaust his administrative remedies in the context of the sports-related body arbitration.


CAS Rule 47 provides:

***********************
R47

Appeal

An appeal against the decision of a federation, association or sports-related body may be filed with the CAS insofar as the statutes or regulations of the said body so provide or as the parties have concluded a specific arbitration agreement and insofar as the Appellant has exhausted the legal remedies available to him prior to the appeal, in accordance with the statutes or regulations of the said sports-related body.

An appeal may be filed with the CAS against an award rendered by the CAS acting as a first instance tribunal if such appeal has been expressly provided by the rules applicable to the procedure of first instance.

*********************************

 

[fatandfast]

Jurisdiction was decided by Judge Sparks in Austin.

It is clear that without USADA arbitration there is no possible recourse to the US courts.

I will have to take your word for it. I do not see were Armstrong would not have a case against one of the many groups that fosters an ultra hostile workplace. The case law for the NFL is just starting to build. They are losing 99% of the cases,but yet able to keep the doors open on a business that causes head injuries and some really bizarre later life outcomes. Seau and his legacy are not gone in the workplace. It doesn't look like work to people who did it as a hobby or in school but it is a job w rules,both local,national and some world wide standards.

The stance that these athletes can walk away at any time is wrong. The number of brands that Armstrong represents and the pressure to continue will find there way to the surface.

Forgive me ,but I do not think USADA is an absolute in the many areas of this case. you don't know how bad I hope you are wrong. At least wish me luck

 

[DirtyWorks]

...but the IOC is the key to all good.

Noooo. Not at all. The IOC isn't anti-doping. They are anti doping positives. They have a consistent history of enabling doping. Re-read the SI article on Armstrong. They touch on some interactions between USOC and Caitlin(?) USOC clearly suppresses doping. The bio-passport program is another example. It just prevents athletes from killing themselves with blood thickeners.

The IOC isn't going to let some athlete in some minor sport affect their branding. Armstrong doesn't have enough money or power for that bribe.

 

[the big ring]

Noooo. Not at all. The IOC isn't anti-doping. They are anti doping positives. They have a consistent history of enabling doping. Re-read the SI article on Armstrong. They touch on some interactions between USOC and Caitlin(?) USOC clearly suppresses doping.

The IOC isn't going to let some athlete in some minor sport affect their branding. Armstrong doesn't have enough money or power for that bribe.

They don't even mind doping positives, as long as they are dealt with quietly.

Just like JV, IOC are anti-doping scandal.

 

[LauraLyn]

I will have to take your word for it. I do not see were Armstrong would not have a case against one of the many groups that fosters an ultra hostile workplace. The case law for the NFL is just starting to build. They are losing 99% of the cases,but yet able to keep the doors open on a business that causes head injuries and some really bizarre later life outcomes. Seau and his legacy are not gone in the workplace. It doesn't look like work to people who did it as a hobby or in school but it is a job w rules,both local,national and some world wide standards.

The stance that these athletes can walk away at any time is wrong. The number of brands that Armstrong represents and the pressure to continue will find there way to the surface.

Forgive me ,but I do not think USADA is an absolute in the many areas of this case. you don't know how bad I hope you are wrong. At least wish me luck

Thank you. I have stated it clearly.

To say too much, the principle set of legal concerns revolves around those of free associations, not around labor laws.

Agree your bold. It is even larger than you express it. This is where the blindside can come from.

Wishing you the best of luck.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Right. He has nothing to fight yet, as USADA has not injured him yet. Once they do, then he can go back to federal court and make all kinds of new claims.

This may be a question more for LauraLyn, can Wonderboy just sit back in silence and then cry to the courts once the penalty is handed down without a court challenging that?

 

[JRTinMA]

Not trying to pick a fight, or even be overly argumentative, but wasn't SCA settled through arbitration, with a major, effectively punitive, award against SCA and to Lance?

Further, that the subject of doping or not, was found to be irrelevant since it was not explicitly contained within the bonus contract?

If we asked SCA who won, pretty sure they would say Lance.

Alternately, if we asked them if they won or lost, pretty sure SCA would say that they lost.

Dave.

I think we are in agreement, not sure on how the final settlement was adjudicated in SCA. I came into trek in a similar way around the same time as LeMond came in, I did not own a company lol but was part of one trek bought. I know Lance had influence on trek management for sure but trouble started almost day 1. LeMond was supposed to be more like a Gary Fisher and less like Greg Lemond. My impression is nobody told Greg but I guess this is for another thread.

 

[LauraLyn]

They don't even mind doping positives, as long as they are dealt with quietly.

Just like JV, IOC are anti-doping scandal.

USOC and IOC can only throw a wretch in the works for USADA, much as ICU and USA Cycling have done. But they will not knowing they have more to lose than to gain.

 

[PosterBill]

Does armstrong have until 11:59 to decide on his deadline?

 

[Race Radio]

Hey, Betsy took time away to answer some questions

http://www.bicycling.com/news/pro-cycling/5-questions-betsy-andreu