Armstrong charged and banned

[rich p]

This thread would be useless without yello!
(no offence rich p, mind)

Yeah but he's off having a cold shower dreaming of Betsy!

 

[yello]

Can you predict the future for me?

Nope. No idea what he'll do.

I can suggest what I think to be a logical best step - elect for arbitration and raise questions about USADA's scope to sanction - but in doing that, he accepts USADA's jurisdiction and I'm not sure he'll ever do that. He wants to play out the 'kangaroo court' line. He wants to take this to where he can control it better, i.e. the courts, but there's no route there yet. He can't do that until his exhausted the arbitration processes available to him (USADA then CAS)... and by that stage he's probably sunk anyway.

He could, and it'd not surprise me if he id, simply ignore today's deadline and try and weather it out. Simply dismiss USADA and cycling as jealous witch-hunters, and hope his public stay faithful. He will be sanctioned and receive a lifetime ban (we know USADA will do that because we've seen it already) That means no triathlon, and that will hurt. He may then try and fight that latter aspect in the courts - but not get anywhere because he can't claim foul over something he ignored.

Imho, he simply has to elect for arbitration (no doubt closed) to stand any chance.

SCA are watching and waiting. No doubt so are The Sunday Times.... and a few others.

 

[86TDFWinner]

I hope some more bitter losers or ego-crazed sporting administrators with a vendetta come out with some new trumped up nonsense pretty soon. Otherwise we're all going to vanish up each other's fundaments.

LOL, why are they "bitter"? please explain.....

 

[rich p]

LOL, why are they "bitter"? please explain.....

Are you American? Chuffy is using heavy irony.

 

[86TDFWinner]

Nope. No idea what he'll do.

I can suggest what I think to be a logical best step - elect for arbitration and raise questions about USADA's scope to sanction - but in doing that, he accepts USADA's jurisdiction and I'm not sure he'll ever do that. He wants to play out the 'kangaroo court' line. He wants to take this to where he can control it better, i.e. the courts, but there's no route there yet. He can't do that until his exhausted the arbitration processes available to him (USADA then CAS)... and by that stage he's probably sunk anyway.

He could, and it'd not surprise me if he id, simply ignore today's deadline and try and weather it out. Simply dismiss USADA and cycling as jealous witch-hunters, and hope his public stay faithful. He will be sanctioned and receive a lifetime ban (we know USADA will do that because we've seen it already) That means no triathlon, and that will hurt. He may then try and fight that latter aspect in the courts - but not get anywhere because he can't claim foul over something he ignored.

Imho, he simply has to elect for arbitration (no doubt closed) to stand any chance.

SCA are watching and waiting. No doubt so are The Sunday Times.... and a few others.

They'll also IMO, strip him of atleast a few, if not ALL of his titles.....thats probably the most important thing to him.

Like i said earlier, once that happens, he automatically becomes irrelevant, and Lemond becomes the ONLY american to win the TDF.

 

[86TDFWinner]

Are you American? Chuffy is using heavy irony.

I am, but I dont "get" why anyone would be "bitter" about it? Armstrong did this to himself, so he needs to accept any scorn/criticism he receives for this matter. How again is someone "bitter" about it?

 

[rich p]

I'll let him explain - I'm due at the Chili Pickle for a meal and they do the best Indain food, ever, anywhere in the world. Cyalaters.

 

[yello]

They'll also IMO, strip him of atleast a few, if not ALL of his titles.....thats probably the most important thing to him.

I deliberately didn't mention that because I genuinely don't have an opinion how that'll pan out. I'm simply not sure. And, in truth, not concerned.

And on another subject (and it is another subject ), I know you're a big fan of Lemond etc but is there really a need to mention him quite so often? No one here has ever doubted his being clean - no one here with any degree of credibility at least.

 

[marinyork]

I deliberately didn't mention that because I genuinely don't have an opinion how that'll pan out. I'm simply not sure. And, in truth, not concerned.

Hard to say, too many combinations depending on what they go with.

 

[yello]

I'm due at the Chili Pickle for a meal and they do the best Indain food, ever, anywhere in the world.

You're illustrating irony aren't you?

 

[Smokin Joe]

I don't think this has been linked before, but it makes an interesting read -

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/ashenden-says-mcquaid-must-now-help-usadas-investigation

 

[Chuffy]

I've no idea. I'll ask him what happened later. At the moment he's a bit, um, chilled out shall we say.

May I refer you to Section 8 of the WADA Banned List.

Anyways, here's an interesting read to pass the time for midnight Texas time. Betsy Andreu answers 5 questions....
http://www.bicycling.com/news/pro-cycling/5-questions-betsy-andreu
God I fancy that women.

Blimey, most unlike you Yello! Mind you, she does have a bit of a fanclub doesn't she? Fine lady.

 

[Chuffy]

I am, but I dont "get" why anyone would be "bitter" about it? Armstrong did this to himself, so he needs to accept any scorn/criticism he receives for this matter. How again is someone "bitter" about it?

Standard issue in the Armstrong Fan Club kit (along with the secret decoder ring that tells you when the testers are coming round) is a set of key phrases and stock responses. One of the commonest is to portray anyone critical of LA as being 'bitter' or 'jealous'. Also gets used to describe vehement anti-dopers like Kimmage and Walsh. In the case of Kimmage it's probably correct, but that doesn't make him wrong.

And please, enough of the Lemond stuff already. We get it. Use the Ignore list if you have to, it would be better for all of us.

 

[yello]

Cheers SJ, I meant to link it earlier but got caught up responding to other stuff.

The article does unintentionally give rise to a false impression. At the time of the Swiss lab test (2001), UCI weren't signed up to WADA so any test result would not have gone to them - only UCI. So somewhat easier for them to orchestrate a cover up. Note also this....

Saugy told USADA that Armstrong’s samples were indicative of EPO use. In May 2011 Saugy admitted to attending a meeting with former US Postal sports director Johan Bruyneel and Lance Armstrong to discuss details of the early EPO test method.

So USADA only had notice (officially) of a possible cover up comparatively recently.

 

[yello]

May I refer you to Section 8 of the WADA Banned List..

S'okay, he has a TUE.... well, he does now.