Who's to blame for the lance years fiasco?

[Basecase]

Think I've captured most options but if I missed anyone, let me know and I will see if I can add. Thanks

 

[ebandit]

no one innocent

recalling the quote.........no-one is innocent...there are just different levels

of responsibilty without doubt lance is most to blame....then his financial

enablers...team personnel....uci

sponsors could have done more.......but hey! it's a capitalist society and

profit rules

i can't allocate as much responsibilty to media.........ok they fueled the myth

but like fans they are just responding to a situation not of their making

bit much to blame fans even though it could be said that pro cyclists just

entertain

wada could have done more but were denied opportunity by uci etc

 

[bianchigirl]

Disagree that lance was not of the medias making - he was ENTIRELY a media creation - they might have been played but they didn't have to accept access for not asking tough questions, they didn't have to propagate the myth without fact checking. Trouble is, many weren't sports journos at all but straight from the news desk looking for the human interest story - if they'd only done some digging they'd have found a far better story under their nose.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Good job it is a multiple choice poll. It isn't all of the above because I don't see where WADA etc failed, nor do I see society as to blame.

 

[cineteq]

Teams, other riders, culture?

 

[Froome19]

To be honest I do not see how Lance was to blame. The whole peloton would have been doping regardless of whether Lance came onto the scene or not. If anything Lance attracted attention to the issue in subsequent years.

 

[sniper]

on a microlevel, the numerous fans and journos with whool pulled over their eyes played a significant role. We owe it to these people that USPS wasn't the first and won't be the last big PED-scandal.

... nor do I see society as to blame.

in my humble view, much of the macrofactors involved are of a social/sociohistorical nature.
the disproportionate amount of money involved in topsport, in turn a result of the power of capitalism, media, etc.

 

[BroDeal]

Who is to blame for all these stupid polls that have infested The Clinic?

 

[Basecase]

This is probably the best and most relevant no?

Or can we have a poll of best polls?

To clarify, when I say "testing regime", that would mean anyone that is commissioned by UCI etc to develop and carry out testing. They would be working under the instruction of such bodies.

 

[frenchfry]

Who is to blame for all these stupid polls that have infested The Clinic?

Before I read your post, I was thinking who is this Basescase and why is he/she clogging the forums with endless new threads/polls that are often useless or redundant.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

on a microlevel, the numerous fans and journos with whool pulled over their eyes played a significant role. We owe it to these people that USPS wasn't the first and won't be the last big PED-scandal.


in my humble view, much of the macrofactors involved are of a social/sociohistorical nature.
the disproportionate amount of money involved in topsport, in turn a result of the power of capitalism, media, etc.

Is that not environment/culture/values rather than society? I agree with your point.

I understood society in this context to be the role of the world outside cycling and sport in general.

 

[D-Queued]

Good poll. Thanks for making it multiple choice.

Dave.

 

[FitSsikS]

Who is to blame for all these stupid polls that have infested The Clinic?

They are like.....dare I say it?....A type of cancer.

Btw, coincidentally cancer is also to blame for the Lance fiasco.

 

[Basecase]

Good poll. Thanks for making it multiple choice.

Dave.

Thanks Dave - I'm not mad as a brush all the time!

 

[pmcg76]

They are like.....dare I say it?....A type of cancer.

Btw, coincidentally cancer is also to blame for the Lance fiasco.

Sadly your last comment is very true.

Take out the cancer angle and ask the following questions.

Would the UCI have still accepted the back-dated TUE in 99? Probably as they didn't want another scandal.

Would the mainstream media have become interested? No and as a result he would not have become so popular, nor had as many endorsements, nor had his earning power to just be able to sue people or had the protection of the authorities. I think it was the fact he became mainstream news that elevated him to his position of power.

Would he have been hailed as such a hero by the cycling journos or would more difficult questions have been asked to explain his huge improvement?
I think undoubtedly he would have got a tougher time from the media on the subject of doping, after all it was the first year post Festina.

As a result of all the above, would he have won 7 Tours? I say no way

Would he have ever been near the Oprah show? Not a chance in hell.

So it would seem that the media had a big part to play but it is easy to see why they(particularly mainstream media) wanted to run with the feel good story.

The question is was the use of the cancer shield a pre-meditated strategy in the decision to try and win the Tour by the Armstrong camp? If so clearly Lance and his cohorts need to take a lot of the blame.

 

[Carols]

I voted for all except for Fans/Society/WADA

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

I don't see how the fans can get away without blame.

They were the ones who refused to question their heroes and still do. We only have to look at the Wiggins, Dertie, Frodo fanboys out there who take any questioning of their heroes as a personal offense.

Fans were the ones who were active in disseminating and spreading the attacks on the likes of O'Reilly, Andreau etc, fans were the ones who allowed the media, authorities etc to get away with not asking questions.

The fact that fans refuse to take responsibility is the one of main reasons why although Armstrong is gone, the likes of Riis, Dertie, Brailsford etc are allowed to remain and pollute cycling.

 

[pmcg76]

I don't see how the fans can get away without blame.

They were the ones who refused to question their heroes and still do. We only have to look at the Wiggins, Dertie, Frodo fanboys out there who take any questioning of their heroes as a personal offense.

Fans were the ones who were active in disseminating and spreading the attacks on the likes of O'Reilly, Andreau etc, fans were the ones who allowed the media, authorities etc to get away with not asking questions.

The fact that fans refuse to take responsibility is the main reason why although Armstrong is gone, the likes of Riis, Dertie, Brailsford etc are allowed to remain and pollute cycling.

Yeah but most of the fans doing the attacking were the Armstong fans who as shown many times were not the same as real cycling fans. What % of fans are really knowledgeable about the goings on in the sport. I would say a small minority.

Also Amstrong brought in a lot of new fans who knew nothing about the sport, how are they expected to know about the whole doping issue. That is where he built his backing.

There is also a fine line between questioning and slandering which some people don't see to grasp on here.

 

[hrotha]

Would the UCI have still accepted the back-dated TUE in 99?

No "probably" about it. The UCI accepted another 3 backdated TUE's for the same thing (from Hamburger, Beltrán and Castelblanco).

 

[pmcg76]

No "probably" about it. The UCI accepted another 3 backdated TUE's for the same thing (from Hamburger, Beltrán and Castelblanco).

Wait. I thought those were the three guys who had returned samples with EPO like Lance in the AFLD re-tests. Did they also test positive for cortisone.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

No "probably" about it. The UCI accepted another 3 backdated TUE's for the same thing (from Hamburger, Beltrán and Castelblanco).

Nope - these guys were not on corticoids, so they had nothing backdated.
They were the others who posted positives for EPO when they were retested in 2005.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

were the other EPO positives ever named?

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

To be honest I do not see how Lance was to blame. The whole peloton would have been doping regardless of whether Lance came onto the scene or not. If anything Lance attracted attention to the issue in subsequent years.

what a load of bull. many riders have confirmed in recent years that the 1998 tour changed a lot and that the 99 tour outside of armstrong was very clean. it was armstrong who restarted the fraud and made it far worse. even ullrich was riding without juice in 2000 and 2001. zulle without epo almost beat lance in 99 if it wasn't for passage du bois.

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

No "probably" about it. The UCI accepted another 3 backdated TUE's for the same thing (from Hamburger, Beltrán and Castelblanco).

what? no they didn't. those names came about in re-tests of epo in 1999 tour many years later

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

were the other EPO positives ever named?

yes, those 4 where the only ones who had epo in them. 1999 tour was very clean. even lance's teammates didn't use any epo at all except hamilton and livingston in a few mountainstages. but when lance was save in yellow they stopped as well and so did lance