Pyro Tim wrote:
USADA only have jurisdiction against US riders and teams....
That is not correct. They have sanctioned Dr Ferrari who never had a USAC licence as a rider or a Team owner, or Doctor. Similar that CONI (Italian authority) found evidence and created sanctions in the Valverde case, which was pretty much dropped by RFEC after Operacion Puerto.
To recap - If an Anti-Drugs Authority has evidence that a rider in a sport has broken the rules, they can act on it and propose a suspension on behalf of WADA. In such sporting cases, the Athlete can protest against the ADA that brings the charges, if they don't like it or argue successfully, they can appeal to CAS.
In this particular case, USADA claimed evidence against Armstrong that he decided not to contest. Once that was the case, a decision was reached and sanctions were created. Thus, after not contesting the USADA information, he had no recourse to the UCI or the CAS. Hence where we are today. The UCI have upheld at least part of the decision (All tour titles) but will have a meeting in regard to other results, and if there will be changes in 'the winners'.
The UCI has also stated that they feel WADA should contest the charges due to the fact they feel that the SOL is still valid, and this is the case with WADA rules. USADA argue that the SOL is not valid, as they have proven cases that extend beyond the SOL due to fraud.
It is now to WADA to determine if their rules are appropriate, and cover the extended SOL, which they apparently have previously upheld in the USADA v Hellebuyck case.
There is a pissload of points still to be argued by the relevant authorities, but this is where we are at present - the Italian case surrounding Dr. Ferrari appears to contain even more names, so we aren't out of the rough just yet.