Lance Armstrong accepts drugs charges

Post Reply New Topic

http://www.news.com.au/sport/more-sport ... 6457338370


Lance is not fighting the charges anymore. USADA will most likely take this as an admission of guilt.

The fact that L.A. is no long contesting the charges is NOT an admission of guilt. The burden of proof is on those who accuse L.A. of using drugs to enhance his performance. This has not been done beyond a shadow of reasonable doubt. I think Armstrong is the greatest bicyclist who ever cranked pedals.

ruveyn

^ Agreed ^

In my opinion, Mr. Armstrong's resolve has simply caved in under all of the pressure, and he has stopped fighting.

I also agree that Lance Armstrong isn't admitting guilt. It's sad that the USADA thinks they could just do this to someone after so many years of fighting against those charges, and being cleared multiple times. I wonder what proof the USADA think they have? Hopefully this will get settled eventually.

Plenty, they claim:
and http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/us ... ory_1.html

Time will tell...

Too much is being made of personal testimony and eyewitness accounts.

Where are the actual results of any blood screenings performed by a trained and licensed medical professional?

Plenty of finger-pointing, but little or no valid empirical evidence.

No ... I think that there were just too many liars for Mr. Armstrong to take on all at once.

A grat man has lost his honor, his legacy, and his dignity ... such is the power of bullying.

Which means the USADA will either look very, very silly when this is all eventually tested - or they'll be proved correct.

Well, you know my stance on unsubstantiated claims. I feel sorry for Mr. Armstrong. They wore him down without showing any valid empirical evidence; only with claims that they had witnesses who would testify against him.

It just goes to show that a lot of people put more of a stake in the opinions of a few disgruntled losers than in any mitigating facts.

Well the important point is that what the USADA claims will need to be presented, with evidence, to the world organisation governing this stuff so at the moment it is just their say-so.
I still think it's somewhat unlikely the USADA would make such a public show of their claims - unless they have a death-wish - or, they have the truth of the matter.

If L.A. pleads "Nolo Contendre" (or even "Guilty"), the judicial body may not need to examine any 'evidence'.

If the charges are valid, then I will be sorely disappointed with Lance Armstrong -- more so than I am now.
If the charges are invalid, then my current level of disappointment in L.A. will remain unabated.

I'm not so sure about that and I think the USADA is blowing a much smaller trumpet than it believes it has.
At the moment he's simply said "I've had enough of this" and dropped out - certainly not any admission of guilt, despite what they're crowing about - and it's this public crowing from the USADA I find most distasteful. Also, I really would have expected any actual proof to have been tested and found valid by now, if there was any: God knows they've been hammering away at this for years now.
They can't be allowed to get away with this sort of activity with no proof and I believe that's what the governing body will seek to establish. This is a huge case involving a major athlete and surely it can't pass untested. If he'd said "Ok, it's a fair cop: guilty as charged" then it would be a different thing altogether.

IMHO, Someone does not want an American to have more wins (consecutive or otherwise) than any European.

Find out who (or which country) stands to receive those wins, and I think you'll be on your way to finding out who is backing the prosecution of L.A.

Yes. This whole thing seems far too drawn out for what should surely have been a relatively simple and testable thing at each competition.

Apparently the UCI (governing body) and the International Olympic Committee will need to examine the evidence from the USADA before endorsing any of their sanctions, and the findings will be made public.

The people who accuse Lance Armstrong of doping himself have never really proved the charge.

In spite of the controversy I consider Lance the greatest cyclist who ever turned a sprocket.

ruveyn

Actually, the USADA charges are based not only on witness testimony, but on blood samples from 2009 and 2010. Their case is not without empirical evidence. His 1999 Tour de France samples have tested positive for EPO, yet he has consistently refused permission for the French anti-doping agency to have 1998 and 1999 samples retested.

It also bears noting that Armstrong's climbdown occurred three days after a judge dismissed his dispute of the USADA's jurisdiction. He has chosen the only method possible to keep the USADA's evidence from being produced and tested in an adversarial hearing that would not involve an express admission of guilt. Taken from that perspective it is very difficult to accept the claim that this is simply a case of being worn down by the machine. He fought the machine tooth and nail, and has only stopped at the last possible minute before the evidence would have been brought forward.

Cycling is among the dirtiest of sports, and was completely riddled with drug cheats--and likely still isn't free of them. At the time that Armstrong was accumulating his victories, he was defeating known and admitted drug cheats by vast margins. His claims to have been clean are simply not credible.

It is natural to romanticize the patient who recovers from cancer and goes on to conquer athletic challenge. And Armstrong has done a tremendous amount for cancer research fundraising. But neither of these things should blind us to the circumstances.

Okay, I'll buy that.

It's a puppy's mother that we'll never know the truth.