USADA - Armstrong

[thehog]

VN: Were you satisfied with evidence that you had amassed, and were you confident in your case?

TT: Absolutely. We never would have brought a case if we were not extremely confident in the level of evidence. And the truth – at the end of the day, our job is to search for truth and justice, to expose the full truth and ensure, to the best of our ability, perfect justice.

VN: Are you surprised by what happened, that this didn’t go to arbitration?

TT: No, I think it was our expectation from the beginning. He knows all the evidence as well and he knows the truth, and so the smarter move on his part is to attempt to hide behind baseless accusations of process. It is pretty telling because the federal court was crystal clear on Monday that our process meets constitutional due process, and that is the appropriate forum for the evidence to be presented and all the arguments to be made.

VN: It was said before that the likely sanctions would be a lifetime ban and the loss of seven Tour titles – will that be the case?

TT: Yes…the charges were not contested, so what automatically goes into place will be a lifetime ban from any participation from any sport which recognises the WADA Code and disqualification from all results, including ant Tour de France victories, any other victories and placings beginning August 1st 1998 to the present.

VN: Armstrong’s lawyers have said in a letter to USADA that USADA can’t impose these sanctions, and have threatened legal action if they go through. Do you have any concerns about that?

TT: No, they have already taken legal action and the federal judge told them we do have authority and our process is the process where those complaints can be made. It is kind of funny that they walking away from a process, but are threatening to attempt to go back to somewhere else to fight. It is a little ironic but, no…it means nothing.

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/1...ts-from-August-1st-1998-will-be-stripped.aspx

 

[webvan]

Armstrong definitely does not want Bruyneel to go to arbitration or anywhere where he will be further exposed. Then his lame defiance and all the good I've done will be crushed forever.

Maybe he doesn't want it, but how can Bruyneel not go there? If he doesn't he's out of a job immediately, granted it's only a question of time, but he's going to be needing all the cash he can get from now on.

 

[Stueyy]

What precedent does this set with regard to other national doping agencies taking more control and bypassing the likes of the IOC and UCI?

Will the UCI and IOC come under greater scrutiny?

Will USADA still pursue the alleged doping cover-up by the UCI?

 

[veganrob]

Maybe he doesn't want it, but how can Bruyneel not go there? If he doesn't he's out of a job immediately, granted it's only a question of time, but he's going to be needing all the cash he can get from now on.

Well, the crooks will just have to try and figure it out. That should be fun, eh.

 

[neineinei]

Glenn Magnusson (US Postal 1999), Swedish national team coach:
"He has never tested positive. He has never been convicted of anything. There have been a witch-hunt against him from Usada. It has been going on for many years. I understand that he is tired. This might have been continued until he is an old man."

Ulf Näslund, anti-doping manager, Swedish Cycling Federation:
"It is difficult to keep such a high level without being detected. He has been tested so many times during his career, and still have no found any positive test. I tested him already in the early 90's."

http://www.svd.se/sport/det-har-varit-en-haxjakt-mot-armstrong_7446606.svd

Steffen Kjærgaard (US Postal 2000-03) director of sport for the Norwegian Cycling Federation: "I still dont belive Armstrong was doped"

 

[rhubroma]

I suppose when the other riders get sanctioned, we'll know who the USADA witnesses were. Armstrong's reaction was not surprising, though, and, as I've said before, is completely consistent with his way of acting: when you can't attack the claims, attack the person or, in this case, entity making them. It's pathetic and the fact that he couldn't defame USADA as he did the others, means he had no way out of this but to just give up. Lastly the fact that he only puts "value" in the UCI's decision, together with the fact that the UCI refused to work with USADA, is proof that he had them in his pocket when he raced and that the UCI is guilty of a conflict of interests, corruption and sporting fraud. So it appears that it was better at all costs to make sure the evidence doesn't get made public, even at the cost of loosing the 7 titles, to leave doubt in the minds of some, the stupid and ignorant, to try and keep the myth alive for a few I guess. If anything, you have to be in awe of his cynicism. It's true, though, nobody sould be given the winner's prize of the Tour those years.

 

[therealtimshady]

Give 2002 to beloki

 

[will10]

Give 2002 to beloki

The second strongest that year was Heras, let's give it to him.
Wait...

 

[Benotti69]

Glenn Magnusson (US Postal 1999), Swedish national team coach:
"He has never tested positive. He has never been convicted of anything. There have been a witch-hunt against him from Usada. It has been going on for many years. I understand that he is tired. This might have been continued until he is an old man."

Ulf Näslund, anti-doping manager, Swedish Cycling Federation:
"It is difficult to keep such a high level without being detected. He has been tested so many times during his career, and still have no found any positive test. I tested him already in the early 90's."

http://www.svd.se/sport/det-har-varit-en-haxjakt-mot-armstrong_7446606.svd

Steffen Kjærgaard (US Postal 2000-03) director of sport for the Norwegian Cycling Federation: "I still dont belive Armstrong was doped"

Shaking in their boots no doubt.

 

[Benotti69]

David Walsh, a journalist, again calling it correct.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/david-walsh-on-armstrong-and-usadas-charges

“When you think of all the nonsense we had to listen to about Armstrong being faster than Pantani in '98. Armstrong goes and rides a faster Tour a year later and you have all these idiot journalists saying, well the roads and the bikes are better, it’s logical. It was all completely illogical and if they were being honest they would have known this.”

“You still see it today. There are still some journalists going out from England to cover the Tour who half believe that Armstrong is innocent, who have been defending him. Complete buffoons.”

The history of the Tour de France, over the last 20 years, since EPO and blood boosting drugs were big, the history of the Tour de France has been bunkum. It’s hasn’t been a story of triumph and great achievement, it’s been a story of corruption and innocent people who rode the race clean being screwed. They were the people we always needed to stand up for. The spiritual leader of that peloton was Christophe Bassons and we all remember what happened to him in 1999.”

Leave the winners blank.

 

[therealtimshady]

The second strongest that year was Heras, let's give it to him.
Wait...

Beloki was def 2nd best oh wait now 1st best, actually I always felt sorry for beloki having his career ruined by the 2003 crash

 

[neineinei]

UCI press release

 

[sulgpallur]

so new winners are:
1999 - Zülle
2000 - Ullrich
2001 - Ullrich
2002 - Beloki
2003 - Ullrich
2004 - Klöden
2005 - Basso

 

[neineinei]

Interview with Tygart in Velonation

"VN: There was reportedly a lot of evidence in the case, there was witness testimony and presumably more…do you expect any of those details to emerge?

TT: Yes, absolutely…at the right time. Obviously there are other cases that are alleged to be involved in the conspiracy. Their cases are still proceeding, so it will be in due course.

VN: So there is no impediment to USADA releasing the evidence?

TT: No, no. "

 

[the big ring]

UCI press release

Very coy. It's completely factual, so why does it feel like a veiled threat.

Definitely not supporting the decision / process / USADA.

 

[Benotti69]

Pat still in hiding

The UCI notes Lance Armstrong’s decision not to proceed to arbitration in the case that USADA has brought against him.


The UCI recognises that USADA is reported as saying that it will strip Mr. Armstrong of all results from 1998 onwards in addition to imposing a lifetime ban from participating in any sport which recognises the World Anti-Doping Code.


Article 8.3 of the WADC states that where no hearing occurs the Anti-Doping Organisation with results management responsibility shall submit to the parties concerned (Mr Armstrong, WADA and UCI) a reasoned decision explaining the action taken.


As USADA has claimed jurisdiction in the case the UCI expects that it will issue a reasoned decision in accordance with Article 8.3 of the Code.


Until such time as USADA delivers this decision the UCI has no further comment to make

Still playing a waiting game.

McQuaid should get out before it gets worse.

 

[therealtimshady]

so new winners are:
1999 - Zülle
2000 - Ullrich
2001 - Ullrich
2002 - Beloki
2003 - Ullrich
2004 - Klöden
2004 - Basso

Well rsnt need world tour points maybe kloden can claim some retrospective ones

 

[cineteq]

so new winners are:
1999 - Zülle
2000 - Ullrich
2001 - Ullrich
2002 - Beloki
2003 - Ullrich
2004 - Klöden
2004 - Basso

It doesn't mean anything, the peloton doped. Titles should be *Not Awarded*.

 

[sniper]

David Walsh, a journalist, again calling it correct.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/david-walsh-on-armstrong-and-usadas-charges

Leave the winners blank.

Baffling anecdote:

even sections of the press corps turned their backs on him.

Walsh: “In 2004 I was meant to travel in a car that had an American writer, a British writer and an Australian writer and I had travelled with them many times. I first travelled with the English journalist back in 1984, if memory serves me. They didn’t want me in the car because Armstrong’s team had made it known to them that they wouldn’t get a lot of cooperation if I was in the car. And rather than stand by journalism they chose to do what was expedient but that’s what people did. Pretty much every English speaking journalist on the Tour in those early Armstrong years was in one way or another trying to defend Armstrong.”

 

[Benotti69]

so new winners are:
1999 - Zülle
2000 - Ullrich
2001 - Ullrich
2002 - Beloki
2003 - Ullrich
2004 - Klöden
2005 - Basso

There are no new winners and i dont think people should be looking for winners.

I doubt 1 of those riders will stand up and say they were cheated out of a win in the greatest cycling event in History. We all know they doped to a man.

Now is the time to look to clean out the rest of the doping, not looking back to handing over wins to other dopers.

 

[DominicDecoco]

so new winners are:
1999 - Zülle
2000 - Ullrich
2001 - Ullrich
2002 - Beloki
2003 - Ullrich
2004 - Klöden
2005 - Basso

Bjarne is closing in on Hog! And that's even with admitting af doping past..

 

[lemoogle]

Francois Pervis (french track cyclist) on twitter:

What a farce this Armstrong affair. The runner-ups declared winners are better?

http://twitter.com/FrancoisPervis/status/238900327166906368


Jimmy Engoulvent ( Saur-Sojasun ) :

The realisation is that doping tests are inneffective

http://twitter.com/JimmyEngoulvent/status/238898880979288064

 

[therealtimshady]

There are no new winners and i dont think people should be looking for winners.

I doubt 1 of those riders will stand up and say they were cheated out of a win in the greatest cycling event in History. We all know they doped to a man.

Now is the time to look to clean out the rest of the doping, not looking back to handing over wins to other dopers.

Beloki and kloden maybe - remembering that both were cleared of allegations against them if we clutch at straws

 

[Stueyy]

What are we going to say now Pat?

 

[BroDeal]

Article 8.3 of the WADC states that where no hearing occurs the Anti-Doping Organisation with results management responsibility shall submit to the parties concerned (Mr Armstrong, WADA and UCI) a reasoned decision explaining the action taken.

I like the chance of that being leaked. It would seem that there would have to be evidence to support the SOL being ignored.