What the hell just happened ?

[gree0232]

Gree, let’s cut through the crap. You keep saying, take it to CAS:







In response to this, I pointed out that USADA was quite willing to do this, but LA refused to:



To which you replied:



Do you see why I assumed you were referring to CAS as a kangaroo court? Anyone who saw your statement come immediately after mine would assume that. If you were not in fact referring to CAS, the only other possible interpretation of your statement is that you were dodging the issue, intentionally refusing to reply to it. So I will repeat:

USADA is willing to go to CAS. But only LA can request that the normal arbitration hearing be skipped, and the proceedings go directly to CAS.

If CAS is a fair venue, why do you suppose LA refuses to go there? And if you believe so strongly in CAS, why don’t you write to LA and urge him to reconsider his decision?

For the rest of your comments:



Did you read this link? The arbiters are chosen from a list produced by CAS, which you keep arguing is where this case should go.



Also:



So is the AAA part of the USADA conspiracy against LA?

And:



Can’t trust the USOC not to side with USADA, either?



Hello, USADA is the prosecutor, it is not supposed to be acting completely impartially. That is up to the arbiters, which, to repeat from your own link, are chosen from a list of CAS. Again, you have this crazy notion that USADA is both prosecution and judge. It is not.



I myself don’t recall smearing UCI, in any sense. But you are most definitely smearing USADA.



Well, concerns like that could be raised for each of the other five men charged by USADA, and there you are, sitting on your hands, not raising the slightest protest on their behalf. I would bet a very large sum of money that if the USADA charging letter had not included LA, but did include the other five, you would never have come on this forum and complained about how unfair the process was.



Oh, sure. Zabriskie, George, Levi, Vande, those guys didn’t want to go to the Olympics. They all decided, by coincidence, not to go at the last moment.



You want superfluous stupidity? Instead of responding directly to the charges against him, he tries to argue that the rules don’t apply to him. I ask you again, why won’t LA agree to go directly to CAS?



Hear, hear. This thread is performing a great public service.

Well, you keep thinking that LA, or any other athlete, has to do things the way you want them done.

LA does not have to do them the way you want them done. He does have lawyers and strategists working for him. Its safe to bet that they are earning their pay.

Simple because you, and the other Lance haters, do not like the choices made by lance, doesn't mean they were taken without deliberation, consideration, or desire for furture effect. Its called anticipation.

Now, the better question, as we are two weeks away from a defense of these allegations, and given the strung out nature of all discussion about likely outcomes in the near future, is whether or not the lance haters are prepared for what is clearly coming?

In short, did USADA strategize in the least? Have they anticipated ANY of the likely outcomes of this process? Or did they think LA would simply fall into this obvious trap? Have rested themselves on calling LA, who will of course refuse to come, to JB's arbitration hearing?

The problem is that there is a process, LA and company are within that process, and screaming that they are not following it the way you want it to ... has no bearing, for example, on whether, after we see what is in the 'evidence', whether or not LA makes good on that decision to return the matter to a court where a judge listed a series of concerns with the process.

LA has other cards to play, and only a fool and an idiot whose sole goal for teh past 16 years has been to harpoon the white whale of cycling, would ignore even the pretense of exploring those options because they would rather beat their chest in righteousness.

Cycling can use a LOT less hyperbole, and little bit more analysis on the business ends of things. Actually, it could use quite a bit more of the later and quite a bit less of the former.

Two weeks gents. Try a fewer insults and more anticipation, and see where that gets you.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Well, you keep thinking that LA, or any other athlete, has to do things the way you want them done.

LA does not have to do them the way you want them done. He does have lawyers and strategists working for him. Its safe to bet that they are earning their pay.

Simple because you, and the other Lance haters, do not like the choices made by lance, doesn't mean they were taken without deliberation, consideration, or desire for furture effect. Its called anticipation.

Now, the better question, as we are two weeks away from a defense of these allegations, and given the strung out nature of all discussion about likely outcomes in the near future, is whether or not the lance haters are prepared for what is clearly coming?

In short, did USADA strategize in the least? Have they anticipated ANY of the likely outcomes of this process? Or did they think LA would simply fall into this obvious trap? Have rested themselves on calling LA, who will of course refuse to come, to JB's arbitration hearing?

The problem is that there is a process, LA and company are within that process, and screaming that they are not following it the way you want it to ... has no bearing, for example, on whether, after we see what is in the 'evidence', whether or not LA makes good on that decision to return the matter to a court where a judge listed a series of concerns with the process.

LA has other cards to play, and only a fool and an idiot whose sole goal for teh past 16 years has been to harpoon the white whale of cycling, would ignore even the pretense of exploring those options because they would rather beat their chest in righteousness.

Cycling can use a LOT less hyperbole, and little bit more analysis on the business ends of things. Actually, it could use quite a bit more of the later and quite a bit less of the former.

Two weeks gents. Try a fewer insults and more anticipation, and see where that gets you.

Ah, Gree -
Really, hate to break it to you, but Armstrong decided he did not want to be part of the process (he tried Fed court and got shot down there).

He cannot appeal (or rebutt) what he did not take part in.
You may not have given up - but your Lance did.

 

[superleicht]

The problem is that there is a process, LA and company are within that process, and screaming that they are not following it the way you want it to ... has no bearing, for example, on whether, after we see what is in the 'evidence', whether or not LA makes good on that decision to return the matter to a court where a judge listed a series of concerns with the process.

Still don't get what you're driving at. Judge Sparks may have had doubts about the process under which USADA brought forward their charges, but he was pretty clear that he did not have jurisdiction. No subsequent action by the UCI, WADA or CAS is going to change that.

Superleicht

 

[Sarcastic Wet Trout]

Well, you keep thinking that LA, or any other athlete, has to do things the way you want them done.

LA does not have to do them the way you want them done. He does have lawyers and strategists working for him. Its safe to bet that they are earning their pay.

When Lance applied for his USA Cycling Pro license, he agreed to do things the UCI way. And since the UCI is a signatory of the WADA, he also agreed to do it the USADA way.

 

[dadane]

Still don't get what you're driving at. Judge Sparks may have had doubts about the process under which USADA brought forward their charges, but he was pretty clear that he did not have jurisdiction. No subsequent action by the UCI, WADA or CAS is going to change that.

+1. The way I interpretted Judge Sparks conclusion was simple. This can go back to Federal Court, if, and ONLY if, USADA conduct the case in a manner contrary to their rules (THIS IS NOT HAPPENING). The emphasis being on ensuring evidence would be supplied to LA in time to prepare a defence for an arbritration hearing (Er... THIS IS NOT HAPPENING EITHER).

Gree, I refer to my previous, and as yet unanswered question, at what point have USADA broken with the procedures laid down for them? One speficic, real (that means not imaginary), and CONCISE example will do.

 

[gree0232]

Still don't get what you're driving at. Judge Sparks may have had doubts about the process under which USADA brought forward their charges, but he was pretty clear that he did not have jurisdiction. No subsequent action by the UCI, WADA or CAS is going to change that.

Superleicht

He was pretty clear when he dismissed the suit without prejudice.

Now, as per the lance troll creed, I am going to have to report you to moderation team for being deliberately obtuse, and trolling. That is the going rate these day to the obstinate refusal to conceed a point.

 

[gree0232]

When Lance applied for his USA Cycling Pro license, he agreed to do things the UCI way. And since the UCI is a signatory of the WADA, he also agreed to do it the USADA way.

Right, which means that the USADA can take things like the statute of limitations and summarily blow it off? Charge foreigners who have never set foot on US soil? With hold evidence? Use questionable tactics to shield its witnesses from the ver same behavior is uses to smear lance and company? Nake spurious allegations of corruption in cyclings governing body, and then publically smear the rebuttal in an overt attempt to poison the well?

Now, the later point, is this about getting LA or about setting up a system of fair and credible justice?

 

[Zora_DB]

Wow, Gree, I'm new here and I've been lurking since I joined, but I had to delurk just to say... wow! You are not making any sense at all. Have you actually read up on this case? Do you have the first idea what you're talking about?

 

[dadane]

Charge foreigners who have never set foot on US soil?

What exactly would be the point of having an international agreement if it didn't apply internationally?

ver same behavior is uses to smear lance and company?

"Smear"? Oh yeah, "Smeared" in the sense that they haven't actually said anything, or even leaked anything yet (Apart from the official charging document)

Still, as you say, within two weeks the evidence will be presented and Lanceybaby will home, dry, cleared of all suspicion, and the world will be a happy place once more

 

[BroDeal]

Right, which means that the USADA can take things like the statute of limitations and summarily blow it off? Charge foreigners who have never set foot on US soil? With hold evidence? Use questionable tactics to shield its witnesses from the ver same behavior is uses to smear lance and company? Nake spurious allegations of corruption in cyclings governing body, and then publically smear the rebuttal in an overt attempt to poison the well?

Now, the later point, is this about getting LA or about setting up a system of fair and credible justice?

 

[MarkvW]

+1. The way I interpretted Judge Sparks conclusion was simple. This can go back to Federal Court, if, and ONLY if, USADA conduct the case in a manner contrary to their rules (THIS IS NOT HAPPENING). The emphasis being on ensuring evidence would be supplied to LA in time to prepare a defence for an arbritration hearing (Er... THIS IS NOT HAPPENING EITHER).

Gree, I refer to my previous, and as yet unanswered question, at what point have USADA broken with the procedures laid down for them? One speficic, real (that means not imaginary), and CONCISE example will do.

Judge Sparks seriously ragged on USADA, but he found the process as a whole to be "robust" and to provide sufficient due process. In other words, the process, as a whole, is good enough to catch and correct any errors USADA may have made.

Lance didn't reject just USADA,
Lance rejected due process!

 

[Kender]

Right, which means that the USADA can take things like the statute of limitations and summarily blow it off? Charge foreigners who have never set foot on US soil? With hold evidence? Use questionable tactics to shield its witnesses from the ver same behavior is uses to smear lance and company? Nake spurious allegations of corruption in cyclings governing body, and then publically smear the rebuttal in an overt attempt to poison the well?

Now, the later point, is this about getting LA or about setting up a system of fair and credible justice?

SOL dont apply where there is evidence of a conspiracy

You referring to Ferrari? I hope you're not trying to protect a known doping Doc

The evidence would have been presented if lance bothered to go to arbitration as is the correct process

You mean protect witnesses from intimidation tactics which is actually one of the charges?

the witnesses made the allogations not the USADA. They're a fact finding organisation. Pat leveled accusations at USADA before he had any facts and deserved to be cut down. he made a public statement, USADA responded in the same manner

This is about cleaning up the sport. LA was not the only person charged. The witnesses will also not escape sanctions. This point is often overlooked by LA supporters saying it's a witch hunt against him. it's not.

 

[doolols]

Two weeks gents.

Not quite. This week, apparently, according to those that generally know. I wish I was on that mailing list.

 

[MarkvW]

SOL dont apply where there is evidence of a conspiracy

You referring to Ferrari? I hope you're not trying to protect a known doping Doc

The evidence would have been presented if lance bothered to go to arbitration as is the correct process

You mean protect witnesses from intimidation tactics which is actually one of the charges?

the witnesses made the allogations not the USADA. They're a fact finding organisation. Pat leveled accusations at USADA before he had any facts and deserved to be cut down. he made a public statement, USADA responded in the same manner

This is about cleaning up the sport. LA was not the only person charged. The witnesses will also not escape sanctions. This point is often overlooked by LA supporters saying it's a witch hunt against him. it's not.

Your first point is highly debatable. Don't asssume it is the rule. It's the one good argument Lance had to toss out the "old" doping acts as a basis for sanction. It still remains an argument that McDruggen may make.

 

[Race Radio]

Right, which means that the USADA can take things like the statute of limitations and summarily blow it off? Charge foreigners who have never set foot on US soil? With hold evidence? Use questionable tactics to shield its witnesses from the ver same behavior is uses to smear lance and company? Nake spurious allegations of corruption in cyclings governing body, and then publically smear the rebuttal in an overt attempt to poison the well?

Now, the later point, is this about getting LA or about setting up a system of fair and credible justice?

Nice talking points, but could you point out where any of this has happened in the Armstrong case?

 

[dadane]

This is about cleaning up the sport. LA was not the only person charged. The witnesses will also not escape sanctions. This point is often overlooked by LA supporters saying it's a witch hunt against him. it's not.

Very true in every sense. However, if you really want something to change at the highest level then there has to be huge public awareness outside the sport, without it there will be yet another whitewash job. The LA part of the case is beginning to create this awareness. The bigger the drama and the scandal the bigger the interest when it really hits the public domain. The "witch-hunt" brigade are actually helping to promote this.

 

[MarkvW]

Very true in every sense. However, if you really want something to change at the highest level then there has to be huge public awareness outside the sport, without it there will be yet another whitewash job. The LA part of the case is beginning to create this awareness. The bigger the drama and the scandal the bigger the interest when it really hits the public domain. The "witch-hunt" brigade are actually helping to promote this.

Look at the FIFA example. Real change is extremely unlikely.

 

[gree0232]

Wow, Gree, I'm new here and I've been lurking since I joined, but I had to delurk just to say... wow! You are not making any sense at all. Have you actually read up on this case? Do you have the first idea what you're talking about?

You do understand the point that I am attempting to drive home do you not?

What case?

The evidence here has not been released ... at all. We have speculation and an agency that just blew its own timeline while calling the UCI corrupt. The 'evidence' against lance has been debated on this forum more times than skunks stink.

I'll give you an example.

In my profession, we routinely administer dope tests. A couple of points to make:

#1 - when a positive dope test comes in, a minor infraction (marijuna) takes less than a month to bring to an equivalent of a trail, sentencing, etc. For a major case, something illicit, it takes longer, but within a period measured in months at most, the perp in jailed and convicted. The appeals process then is aimed at reversing a conviction and rarely successful.

Is that what is happening in cycling these days?

Is the arbitration process cheap? Efficient? Independant of the various bodies politic that are involved in cycling?

Again, until we get CAS involved, with a literal prosecution and defense (not circus chair agencies each plying their own opinion), what we get is rumors, innuendo, and smears in the press.

In short, this process is not producing convictions, its producing acrimony and infighting.

#2 - In the LA case in particular, the process is nothing short of debauched. There isn't even the pretense of objetivity anymore. Take the Vrijman report, still cursed at by certain members of this board.

Yet the fact remains, have been responsible for the administration of an AD process ... if those concerns were raised in a cocaine positive, even with concaine smeared across the guys face, the results would have been thorwn out.

Rather than letting sleeping dogs lie, we continue to have various agencies and persons repeatedly accuse LA of 'testing positive'. The results management has been a joke. The refusal of certain parties to let it go is, as I have said, nothing less than CPT Ahab after his white whale. LA apparently bit off one too many legs or something ... but when the same rehashed and thoproughly investigated nonsense comes up again in a USADA ... declaration of guilt?

When you cannot raise even a hint of doubt about this process, even attempts to examine the process sans LA, without being branded a troll ... without having LA drug in and shoved down your throat ... we don't have results management. We have interagency infighting.

There are better way to do this.

 

[Hugh Januss]

Right, which means that the USADA can take things<plural> like the statute of limitations and summarily blow it<singular> off? Charge foreigners who have never set foot on US soil? With hold<should be one word> evidence? Use questionable tactics to shield its<it's> witnesses from the ver<I am sure you meant very> same behavior is uses<not sure what you mean here> to smear lance and company? Nake<should invest in typing lessons> spurious allegations of corruption in cyclings<or Jr. High School education> governing body, and then publically<I had to check, not even spell check knew what you were trying to say here, best guess was "public ally", but I came up with "publicly" which I think may be right?> smear the rebuttal in an overt attempt to poison the well?

Now, the later point, is this about getting LA or about setting up a system of fair and credible justice?

On the whole, JFC dude what are you smoking?

 

[gree0232]

Look at the FIFA example. Real change is extremely unlikely.

So tell me, what should cycling be doing?

We have the blod doping passport, random drug testing, a whereabouts programs of which violation of result in the same penalty as doping, police forces wire tapping people .... Contador just got nailed for a trace amount of clen in his system ...

Nevertheless, we have people right here on this forum going after Wiggo ... for the 'crime' of winning the Tour. Year before that, is was speculation about Evans. Does that speculation help us ride the sport of doping?

Honestly, what more should the sport do?

 

[gree0232]

On the whole, JFC dude what are you smoking?

Well, thanks for that riveting smear fest. If you want the job of my secretary, apply - lose the attitude first though.

 

[Hugh Januss]

So tell me, what should cycling be doing?

We have the blod doping passport, random drug testing, a whereabouts programs of which violation of result in the same penalty as doping, police forces wire tapping people .... Contador just got nailed for a trace amount of clen in his system ...

Nevertheless, we have people right here on this forum going after Wiggo ... for the 'crime' of winning the Tour. Year before that, is was speculation about Evans. Does that speculation help us ride the sport of doping?

Honestly, what more should the sport do?

Dude, slow down, take a breath then try to write legibly. Nobody will have any idea WTF you are on about even still, but won't you just feel better about yourself if it doesn't seem like you are operating with a third grade education?
If you can, ask yourself this question: Basso, Valverde, Ullrich, Armstrong, Miller, why have none of them ever tested positive, while 4 going on 5 have been caught in other ways? And why do you seem to think that only Armstrong is getting a raw deal here?

 

[Oldman]

Well, thanks for that riveting smear fest. If you want the job of my secretary, apply - lose the attitude first though.

If you actually have a real secretary; have her file your posts. She should know how to use Spellcheck, correct grammar and pursue some factchecking for you.
As for the smear...I've told you that people have actually testified willingly to as much and more that Tyler has written about. There are real people with real events that have been disclosed. USADA is not short on details and corroborative evidence but you will be rewarded with what you fear.

 

[piemonster]

Gree, the poster that just keeps on giving

I'm actually coming round to the idea of a witch hunt, a proper one with pitch forks and flaming torches

 

[ebandit]

sides?

gree i read in your posts that issues discussed here revolve around haters v lance

i have no reason to hate lance but i do hate what has been done to discredit our sport and welcome that guilty parties have been held to task

i'm sure that others replying to your posts feel similarly?

how come you see things so differently to others here...............but can't be wrong?

right now uci are going through the motions asking where this usada report is
.............they sure will be anxious about info contained in the report

just how much the uci is compromised and just how they can avoid this info escaping into the public domain

right now this is no longer about lance who has accepted his sanction but about the uci and their involvement