Retrobike Forum Index

It is currently Sun Dec 04, 2016 7:44 pm

* Login   * Register * Search  * FAQ



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 99 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 10  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 1:48 pm 
Old School Hero
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2011 11:54 am
Posts: 177
Location: Lancashire
I think that we have to look at Lance's TDF wins in the context of the day, lets face it, if he wasn't testing positive and was cheating that would probably mean 90% of the peleton were doing the same, so who would you give the titles to?

Being slightly flippant but in the light of hounding down a man who has achieved so much...

So when are they going to take the great Eddy's titles off him, he had been charged as a drugs cheat but contested it also?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 1:57 pm 
Old School Grand Master
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 5:13 pm
Posts: 8176
Location: Tredavoe, Cornwall
You lot make me laugh.


Funny stuff..... keep it up.

al. :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 2:08 pm 
Old School Grand Master

Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 1:55 pm
Posts: 8202
Location: New Forest, UK
While I don't like Armstrong particularly, I have to say that USADA seems unjust to disqualify someone without clear and tangible evidence. Lots of stories are not evidence.

What the sport needs now it a South African style 'truth and reconciliation commission'. If you admit what you were up to, your results stand; and anything not admitted will be open to disqualification. While in some ways that's a win for the cheats, it saves a domino-like reclassification of the results until whoever was 27th in the TdF gets credited as winning...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 3:56 pm 
retrobike rider
retrobike rider

Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 11:58 pm
Posts: 2362
Location: Bournemouth
From what I've read, he failed 2 tests, both covered up. The first in the early 90s by the US, the 2nd in late 90's early 00's which was covered up by the lab. USADA had 10 people ready to testify against him.

This is in addition to the suspicion everyone has had since his 1st tour win. Now I know they were all at it in the 90's and why should we make such an example of 1 man, but he's such an arrogant twunt I can understand it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 4:19 pm 
retrobike rider
retrobike rider
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 11:13 am
Posts: 1311
Location: I don't know, the satnav's bust!
hamster wrote:
While I don't like Armstrong particularly, I have to say that USADA seems unjust to disqualify someone without clear and tangible evidence. Lots of stories are not evidence.

...


I've always admired Armstrong and no idea whether he took drugs or not, but I would have thought that verbal evidence from many sources, that is consistent and credible, does constitute clear and tangible evidence.

Courts of law have convicted people of murder on such evidence, and they normally require much stronger evidence of guilt than tribunals or agencies.

The proviso is that the witnesses have to be consistent and credible and that is something the USADA has to be sure of.

Any stance we take, whether for or against expunging his TDF wins, is likely to be based on our own personal preconceptions.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 4:24 pm 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 8:30 pm
Posts: 580
Location: PT-LX
The thing with this team of witness ready to testify whatever name suggested, is that they are forcing cooperation, you give this ill give you that.
I don't think this method is valid if you're searching for the truth, its a dangerous path specially where there's no evidence.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 4:39 pm 
retrobike rider
retrobike rider
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 11:13 am
Posts: 1311
Location: I don't know, the satnav's bust!
I agree that it is dangerous and that is why it has to be judged carefully, but it is clearly still evidence that must be taken into consideration. Any benefits given to the witnesses must also be taken into consideration when judging the reliability of their evidence.

Courts of law all over the world rely very strongly on witness testimony so why cannot the USADA?

If people are clever enough to hide all physical evidence of guilt does that mean they cannot be convicted even if several people saw them commit the crime?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 5:06 pm 
Special Retro Guru
Special Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2008 11:34 am
Posts: 5663
Location: Don't mess with monkeys, man
gerryattrick wrote:
I agree that it is dangerous and that is why it has to be judged carefully, but it is clearly still evidence that must be taken into consideration. Any benefits given to the witnesses must also be taken into consideration when judging the reliability of their evidence.

Courts of law all over the world rely very strongly on witness testimony so why cannot the USADA?

If people are clever enough to hide all physical evidence of guilt does that mean they cannot be convicted even if several people saw them commit the crime?

I don't know the answer as to whether he was clean, or not - what I would say, though, is that if the rules and regulations of the cycling organisation he was competing in, require positive tests (be they urine, blood, or both) then without that damning him, I fail to see that he's got a case to answer in terms of the sporting events he competed in, and any titles he won, if there's no biological testing that withstands independent scrutiny, that can definitely be proved to be his, and not interfered with.

As somebody largely ambivalent, with maybe a passing admiration in terms of him beating cancer, then returning to cycling and winning, I've not been following it too much or too closely. But from where I'm sat, it does seem something of a witch-hunt, and my understanding of the people testifying, does seem somewhat compromised in terms of their impartiality and credibility.

Courts of law, criminal and civil cases dealing with testimony are one thing - but this is rather more specialist than that - if all you have is hearsay - whether from more than one person, or not, for at least some of them, they're damaged goods.

The other thing, too, is that some are inclined to support this because they dislike him - which, again, seems rather biased, really.

I get the no smoke without fire thing - and I also get that he seems to be a target of some of his own making. All the same, I can't help but feel there's something disproportionate about it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 5:22 pm 
MacRetro rider
MacRetro rider
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 22, 2010 7:25 pm
Posts: 4977
Location: Edinburgh
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIl5RxhLZ5U


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 5:39 pm 
retrobike rider / Gold Trader
retrobike rider / Gold Trader

Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 10:30 pm
Posts: 1255
Location: Desk
Lance Armstrong handed lifetime ban from sport by USADA. All competition results after 1st Aug 1998 are to be removed.

USADA statement here:

http://www.usada.org/media/sanction-armstrong8242012


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 99 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 10  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

About Us

Follow Retrobike

Other cool stuff

All content © 2005-2015 Retrobike unless otherwise stated.
Cookies Policy.
bikedeals - the best bike deals in one place
FatCOGS - Fat Chance Owner's Group

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group