USADA - Armstrong

Page 400 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Mar 4, 2010
1,020
0
0
the big ring said:
It's on his shoulder.

I don't understand the constant "guess what's he's going to do" stuff. Wait 10 hours and you'll know for sure! :D
a few people will pop with anticipation before then
 

LauraLyn

BANNED
Jul 13, 2012
594
0
0
will10 said:
Saying what exactly?
Dear Mr. Armstrong,

We kindly request that you neatly fold all your TdF yellow jerseys (yes, including the 7 framed on your living room wall) and store them carefully in a box with all your trophies going back to 1999. A small Ford hatchback will be by early Friday to pick them up and take them to the nearest dump.

You will likely have a few people visiting you in the coming days and we suggest you stock up on check books.

A copy of this letter is being sent to Mr. McQuaid and Mr. Messick as well as the mayor of Austin. It has been carefully written not to be leak-proof.

The Clinic will be holding a small reception of friends and admirers in Judge Sparks chambers Saturday evening. Everyone had a great laugh and those who know you best are looking forward to congratulating you.

Sincerely,

Guess who
 

LauraLyn

BANNED
Jul 13, 2012
594
0
0
eyemgh said:
He will get a lifetime sporting ban and his previous victories will be expunged. From there, he can appeal to CAS.

What's interesting is if and when the details of the USADA case will be revealed if he chooses not to contend, but then moves straight to CAS for appeal.

No matter what, he's basically screwed. All who love LA love Georgie too. When it's revealed that he talked, very few will be blind enough to believe that Lance was clean.

M
Nopes. Just a letter. No CAS.

All the fun will be over.
 
Dec 13, 2010
189
0
8,830
eyemgh said:
He will get a lifetime sporting ban and his previous victories will be expunged. From there, he can appeal to CAS.

What's interesting is if and when the details of the USADA case will be revealed if he chooses not to contend, but then moves straight to CAS for appeal.

No matter what, he's basically screwed. All who love LA love Georgie too. When it's revealed that he talked, very few will be blind enough to believe that Lance was clean.

M
They have been saying that in order to appeal to CAS, he will first have to respond to USADA. If he doesn't respond, then can he appeal? From what I understand I don't think he can, but I could be wrong.
 
Oct 25, 2010
3,049
2
0
Tubeless said:
If Lance chose not to arbitrate, that would give a default judgement against him - and nothing for him to appeal. Much of the evidence would be released by USDA. That would consititute a formal judgement by an official body, label him as a doper with convincing evidence and take immediate effect. That doesn't make any sense.

It also seems the option to appeal Judge Sparks' decision won't do him any good either - unlikely to succeed and he'd need an immediate order of stay from the appeals court to stop the arbitration from proceeding ahead.

So from the three bad options, logically the least bad is to proceeed with the arbitration in a closed hearing format, and try to extend / delay everything - hoping for something to happen later that will save his butte.

As we're all speculating, and soon we should know - what's your guess what he'll do?
His only current route of appeal is the recent decision by Sparks. If he lets the USADA deadline come and go, he'll have nothing to appeal with them, as he refused to engage.

My guess is that he's counting on a real skrew-job from the UCI and their mafia circles. IE, even if the USADA bans him, the UCI, TDF, etc refuse to recognize the decision.
 
Feb 24, 2010
43
0
0
goober said:
What time was that - when I said Federal Investigation will be closed the week of Thanksgiving? Well my timing was off BUT it was supposed to be closed THAT WEEK. Took a little longer... I cannot control the people involved.
Dude--give it up, please. You don't have any inside sources. At various points you seemed to pretend you were close to Armstrong, at others that you knew what was really happening inside the DA's office. You're now making vague insinuations that anybody could conjure up from reading what RaceRadio and other posters better informed than you have said. When you do say something specific, you're flat out wrong. Your main gaffe in the past was not to say the investigation would be "closed the week of Thanksgiving," but to say that the investigation found no corroboration for Landis's claims. Here: http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=251139#post251139

Colm.Murphy
All I can comfortably say is that my sources have yet to direct me in the wrong direction.
I suppose we will have to wait until the story breaks. I won't be saying "I told you so", that is not my style.
As to your inside scoop, in what way is it contradictory to what I understand to be coming?

Goober
I will accept the "I told you so" indirectly if a story comes out with significant corraboration or anything that significant other than investigations actually outside of the Landis targeted riders and directors. No biggie to me, I just asked a friend of a friend of a friend of a distant friends uncle (a slight exaggeration but the uncle is in the correct position to comment so I call it credible). The friend of a friend, or maybe the other friend, could be a fanboy (which I have been called even though I could give a crap either way) of Lance.
And you certainly can "give a crap" about Armstrong. Why else would nearly all of your posts on the forums be in the Clinic, defending Armstrong or mocking people who criticize him? I don't think you're an intern--not prolific enough--and I don't know whether you're a fanboy. But please cut the BS and the obvious trolling.

goober said:
Yeah lol - guess that is it... Want to know what is going to happen? I am trolling for you guys to crave the information...
BTW--have you ever 'fessed up to colm murphy that you were wrong?
 
Aug 3, 2009
3,217
1
0
LauraLyn said:
Dear Mr. Armstrong,

We kindly request that you neatly fold all your TdF yellow jerseys (yes, including the 7 framed on your living room wall) and store them carefully in a box with all your trophies going back to 1999. A small Ford hatchback will be by early Friday to pick them up and take them to the nearest dump.

You will likely have a few people visiting you in the coming days and we suggest you stock up on check books.

A copy of this letter is being sent to Mr. McQuaid and Mr. Messick as well as the mayor of Austin. It has been carefully written not to be leak-proof.

The Clinic will be holding a small reception of friends and admirers in Judge Sparks chambers Saturday evening. Everyone had a great laugh and those who know you best are looking forward to congratulating you.

Sincerely,

Guess who
I'd probably temper that enthusiasm just a bit.
 
I wonder what he will say after removing his 7 TdF victiories. I bet he will never admit that he has doped and his tactic from this point will be will be "It's a conspiracy". Forever.
 

LauraLyn

BANNED
Jul 13, 2012
594
0
0
TomekA said:
I wonder what he will say after removing his 7 TdF victiories. I bet he will never admit that he has doped and his tactic from this point will be will be "It's a conspiracy". Forever.
And this time he'll be right. "Conspiracy" was the charge.

Funny thing is, it is not just people with yellow bracelets who believe in conspiracy theories.
 
Mar 4, 2010
1,020
0
0
I'm no lawyer but my take is if he chooses not to go to arbitration and files with sparks again, sparks will turn around and say sorry buddy, you had your chance at due process but decided not to participate.

he could then try going to cas who may say the same thing. i thought cas is there basically as an appeals court (there to settle sporting disputes). if he doesn't agree to arbitration then there is no dispute.

can an athlete go to CAS directly if sanctioned without evidence being heard?
 
Had to laugh at this from the CyclingNews article on Armstrong doping history:

"The media have given a forum to this man. They give him credibility and the possibility for him to speak. This man makes money out of the whole affair at the same time. If he says something, his name becomes even more important...Willy Voet is completely full of ****."

"Jan and I - both of us, cannot be cynical like him. But he should watch out, because as soon as he accuses people publicly and directly, he has to be brought before court. So long as he doesn't say: Lance Armstrong was doped in 1999 or Jan Ullrich was doped in 1997, you can't make anything of it. But as soon as he calls me by name, I would start proceedings against him."

Armstrong commented on the latest doping furore: "It worries me, the sport, the public and the people who love this sport. It was looking like people were starting to believe in the sport again - confidence in the riders and the teams. And then this happens with the Giro!"

"I believe there was more made of the whole thing than was actually there. They searched rooms and found things, but did not say what. If they found vitamin C, they would have said that they found something. That is unprofessional, undemocratic and unfair."

"But there were also riders who had some stuff found on them. We don't need to name names, because we know them all. For these people, there are no apologies. It is pure stupidity, they are total idiots and they should be excluded from the sport! Some say for two years, others for life. I don't know what would be fair."

"The sport of cycling already paid a high price for 1998. Everyone of us has a responsibility to keep the sport alive."
 

LauraLyn

BANNED
Jul 13, 2012
594
0
0
ÅSBJÖRN BENKT said:
Would the UCI recognize USADA's decision? Would he be the 7 times champ in the rest of the world but not in America?
If he doesn't go for arbitration, it means UCI and USA Cycling have thrown him under the bus (along with all his other friends already there).

So that leaves option 2, the vendetta: a confession.
 
Jul 6, 2010
2,340
0
0
thehog said:
Had to laugh at this from the CyclingNews article on Armstrong doping history:

"The media have given a forum to this man. They give him credibility and the possibility for him to speak. This man makes money out of the whole affair at the same time. If he says something, his name becomes even more important...Willy Voet is completely full of ****."

"Jan and I - both of us, cannot be cynical like him. But he should watch out, because as soon as he accuses people publicly and directly, he has to be brought before court. So long as he doesn't say: Lance Armstrong was doped in 1999 or Jan Ullrich was doped in 1997, you can't make anything of it. But as soon as he calls me by name, I would start proceedings against him."

Armstrong commented on the latest doping furore: "It worries me, the sport, the public and the people who love this sport. It was looking like people were starting to believe in the sport again - confidence in the riders and the teams. And then this happens with the Giro!"

"I believe there was more made of the whole thing than was actually there. They searched rooms and found things, but did not say what. If they found vitamin C, they would have said that they found something. That is unprofessional, undemocratic and unfair."

"But there were also riders who had some stuff found on them. We don't need to name names, because we know them all. For these people, there are no apologies. It is pure stupidity, they are total idiots and they should be excluded from the sport! Some say for two years, others for life. I don't know what would be fair."

"The sport of cycling already paid a high price for 1998. Everyone of us has a responsibility to keep the sport alive."
Great paraphrasing!

I actually thought the first paragraph was in reference to LA, and then Willy's name dropped.

This guy could very well be the largest successful liar in history (up until now, anyway).

Ask not for whom the bell tolls. It tolls for the ****** Bag.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
thehog said:
Had to laugh at this from the CyclingNews article on Armstrong doping history:

"The media have given a forum to this man. They give him credibility and the possibility for him to speak. This man makes money out of the whole affair at the same time. If he says something, his name becomes even more important...Willy Voet is completely full of ****."

"Jan and I - both of us, cannot be cynical like him. But he should watch out, because as soon as he accuses people publicly and directly, he has to be brought before court. So long as he doesn't say: Lance Armstrong was doped in 1999 or Jan Ullrich was doped in 1997, you can't make anything of it. But as soon as he calls me by name, I would start proceedings against him."

Armstrong commented on the latest doping furore: "It worries me, the sport, the public and the people who love this sport. It was looking like people were starting to believe in the sport again - confidence in the riders and the teams. And then this happens with the Giro!"

"I believe there was more made of the whole thing than was actually there. They searched rooms and found things, but did not say what. If they found vitamin C, they would have said that they found something. That is unprofessional, undemocratic and unfair."

"But there were also riders who had some stuff found on them. We don't need to name names, because we know them all. For these people, there are no apologies. It is pure stupidity, they are total idiots and they should be excluded from the sport! Some say for two years, others for life. I don't know what would be fair."

"The sport of cycling already paid a high price for 1998. Everyone of us has a responsibility to keep the sport alive."
Almost sounds like Wiggins :rolleyes:

Bet Armstrong was not pleased to see that stuff and the Betsy interview.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Tubeless said:
If Lance chose not to arbitrate, that would give a default judgement against him - and nothing for him to appeal. Much of the evidence would be released by USDA. That would consititute a formal judgement by an official body, label him as a doper with convincing evidence and take immediate effect. That doesn't make any sense.

It also seems the option to appeal Judge Sparks' decision won't do him any good either - unlikely to succeed and he'd need an immediate order of stay from the appeals court to stop the arbitration from proceeding ahead.

So from the three bad options, logically the least bad is to proceeed with the arbitration in a closed hearing format, and try to extend / delay everything - hoping for something to happen later that will save his butte.

As we're all speculating, and soon we should know - what's your guess what he'll do?
Thats how I see it too.

He may try a late appeal in the Fed Courts, but that is likely to fail - and be nothing more than grandstanding.

One other point to add if he does not elect to go to arbitration is that a lot of the information could come out when Bruyneel, Marti (and probably some of the witnesses) cases are heard.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
masking_agent The Clinic 2
fmk_RoI The Clinic 23

ASK THE COMMUNITY