Lance tells IOC: Suspend or remove Pound

[davidbod]

I don't understand why so many people can't see this for what it is. In a system where you have a watchdog and those to be watched, with a set of rules that both sides have agreed to live by, why is it so complicated to understand that if one side breaks the rules and is allowed to get away with it, that the system then becomes broken and a bit of a joke. Were not talking about just cycling here, were talking about the entire basis for enforcing drug use in sport under the IOC system.

I would ask is this biased hatred and fight to bring one man down really worth breaking the whole system for. I would also suggest that if this whole scandal had errupted say at Tom Boonen's door step instead of LA's, most of those who currently support **** Pound and WADA would conviniently change their minds.

 

[wolfix]

Exactly......When this Spanish scandal breaks then we may see it happening to others. Maybe JU or Basso????? Has their names been brought up in connection to the Spanish situations yet?


This **** Pound thing goes way beyond cycling. After the way he broke all ethical standards and has not denied them I think he needs to be removed immeidiatly.

 

[limerickman]

Exactly......When this Spanish scandal breaks then we may see it happening to others. Maybe JU or Basso????? Has their names been brought up in connection to the Spanish situations yet?

Yet? You're making an assumption that Basso or JU are party to the Spanish enquiry.
But in the other breath you wail when your man is exposed.

That's a double standard, if I ever read one.

This **** Pound thing goes way beyond cycling. After the way he broke all ethical standards and has not denied them I think he needs to be removed immeidiatly.

If you read the lawyers report - it's a shambolic report/investigation - you would see that the conclusions arrived at in the report, couldn't be supported or derived based on the detail of the report.

I have very serious reservations about that report primarily because it's objective is to create a pissing contest between the UCI and WADA.
It's a UCI report - carried out by a UCI appointtee for godssake.

And when you read the reports content - you will see that investigators conclusions are made on the basis of investigations that were not detailed and which do not verify what may have actually happened.

 

[cyclingheroes]

This **** Pound thing goes way beyond cycling. After the way he broke all ethical standards and has not denied them I think he needs to be removed immeidiatly.

I have no problem when **** leaves but he should take Hein Verbrugghe with him.

 

[davidbod]

Yet? You're making an assumption that Basso or JU are party to the Spanish enquiry.
But in the other breath you wail when your man is exposed.

That's a double standard, if I ever read one.



If you read the lawyers report - it's a shambolic report/investigation - you would see that the conclusions arrived at in the report, couldn't be supported or derived based on the detail of the report.

I have very serious reservations about that report primarily because it's objective is to create a pissing contest between the UCI and WADA.
It's a UCI report - carried out by a UCI appointtee for godssake.

And when you read the reports content - you will see that investigators conclusions are made on the basis of investigations that were not detailed and which do not verify what may have actually happened.

You forget one very important point. That is that LA, the UCI and the independent report are not satisfied with the level of cooperation from the other parties involved, and have asked for further investigation. In fact the report goes as far to say that the other parties are deliberately witholding information and refusing to cooperate.

LA wants more spot light on the subject from a higher intervening authority, while **** Pound and WADA want the whole thing to go away without having to open themselves up to scrutiny. How do you reconcile that with your belief that LA is guilty and **** Pound and WADA are in the clear regarding their conduct and actions.

 

[cyclingheroes]

You forget one very important point. That is that LA, the UCI and the independent report are not satisfied with the level of cooperation from the other parties involved, and have asked for further investigation. In fact the report goes as far to say that the other parties are deliberately witholding information and refusing to cooperate.

LA wants more spot light on the subject from a higher intervening authority, while **** Pound and WADA want the whole thing to go away without having to open themselves up to scrutiny. How do you reconcile that with your belief that LA is guilty and **** Pound and WADA are in the clear regarding their conduct and actions.

And the UCI doesn't want to have an investigation of the probes.... But yes the letter of LA could be important. It might be that the IOC wants to investigate the probes of LA.... The report isn't independent, i posted the press release of the anouncement that Mr. Vrijman would do the investigation and what he had to investigate: the role of WADA. It was never about the probes. And yes WADA and Pound have to answer a couple of questions, just like LA, the UCI and many others.

 

[elephen]

here in the US, if a cop busted down your door because he thought you had some weed in your apartment w/o a search warrant, he would likely get fired for doing so and anything he found wouldn't stand up in any court.

not anymore... read the recent news... a justice allowed evidence from an illegal search and seizure to be included in a case and the guy got jail time if i remember correctly. The story goes back to the cop knocked on the door, waited 5 seconds and busted down the door, they found pot or whatever drug(s). The defense was arguing the cop did not wait the mandated 10 or 15 seconds for someone to answer and wanted the evidence thrown out but the judge said no.

 

[davidbod]

And the UCI doesn't want to have an investigation of the probes.... But yes the letter of LA could be important. It might be that the IOC wants to investigate the probes of LA.... The report isn't independent, i posted the press release of the anouncement that Mr. Vrijman would do the investigation and what he had to investigate: the role of WADA. It was never about the probes. And yes WADA and Pound have to answer a couple of questions, just like LA, the UCI and many others.

Agreed, many need to answer questions. My simple point is LA, the UCI and Vrijman's report are all calling for the higher authority to come in and ask the tough questions and get to the bottom of it, while the rest are being evasive and want the whole affair to go away without further scrutiny. How does one reconcile that with the notion that LA is guilty and **** Pound / WADA are in the clear. It simply doesn't fit.

 

[wolfix]

Yet? You're making an assumption that Basso or JU are party to the Spanish enquiry.

Mis-understood on this one. I was not implying that were guilty. I was questioning if their names have been attached to the investigation in any way. I know JU's name came up in the beginning as a rider who visited the lab. There were supposedly videos of JU visiting the lab. I was questioning as if this was true or it was bad reporting of a sensational story. I do know that JU was questioned about this at the Giro.

I should have been more detailed in my post..... If either riders name comes up in the investigation in anyway whatso ever, then the French press, Pound, and everyone will be all over it. They will be convicted in the court of public opinion. Even if innocent.

If it can happen to LA, it can happen to any other rider. And no matter how any one views the test/report it is documented and reported by the lab that **** Pound targeted LA for his questioning of Pound's tactics.
And no matter how the report is viewed, **** Pound has not denied his unethical tactics and possible lies. His blocking of facts during the investigation does not give confidence in his leadershp of a very important position in the sport world.
This report reveals a much larger problem then if LA doped in 1999. History will treat LA as it did Merckx. The doping issue will be forgotten and he will go on to his place in history. Merckx was not liked as a competitor and Hinault was not the most popular guy either. But we have forgotten all that.
LA's name will be forever attached to the TDF.

 

[limerickman]

Mis-understood on this one. I was not implying that were guilty. I was questioning if their names have been attached to the investigation in any way. I know JU's name came up in the beginning as a rider who visited the lab. There were supposedly videos of JU visiting the lab. I was questioning as if this was true or it was bad reporting of a sensational story. I do know that JU was questioned about this at the Giro.

I should have been more detailed in my post..... If either riders name comes up in the investigation in anyway whatso ever, then the French press, Pound, and everyone will be all over it. They will be convicted in the court of public opinion. Even if innocent.

If it can happen to LA, it can happen to any other rider. And no matter how any one views the test/report it is documented and reported by the lab that **** Pound targeted LA for his questioning of Pound's tactics.
And no matter how the report is viewed, **** Pound has not denied his unethical tactics and possible lies. His blocking of facts during the investigation does not give confidence in his leadershp of a very important position in the sport world.
This report reveals a much larger problem then if LA doped in 1999. History will treat LA as it did Merckx. The doping issue will be forgotten and he will go on to his place in history. Merckx was not liked as a competitor and Hinault was not the most popular guy either. But we have forgotten all that.
LA's name will be forever attached to the TDF.

Thanks for the clarification.

I have to be honest, I am not altogether happy with **** Pounds role in this saga either.
I think if any cyclist is cheating - they ought to be named without fear or favour.

I read the report and I have to say that the conclusions based on the detail in the report are not watertight conclusions.
But let's just park that for one moment.

The tests carried out have to be compliant in order to insure that the results can withstand all levels of scrutiny (both for the riders protection and WADA's protection).
If the the report is correct about the tests/samples/handling - and it's a big if - then there is a serious issue here.
At the very minimum, WADA should by it's own volition be looking at this report and providing a piece by piece rebuttal (if they can rebutt) to that report.


On the other side, I think the UCI need to be more proactive in the doping war.
I don't believe that they're doing half near enough.

The jury will still be out for a long time

 

[limerickman]

You forget one very important point. That is that LA, the UCI and the independent report are not satisfied with the level of cooperation from the other parties involved, and have asked for further investigation. In fact the report goes as far to say that the other parties are deliberately witholding information and refusing to cooperate.

LA wants more spot light on the subject from a higher intervening authority, while **** Pound and WADA want the whole thing to go away without having to open themselves up to scrutiny. How do you reconcile that with your belief that LA is guilty and **** Pound and WADA are in the clear regarding their conduct and actions.

That's more rubbish that you're posting above.

Try reading what the report says - will ya?

The UCI appointtee states throughout his report that LNDD did not provide documentation.
Which is your point.
But if you read the report - the author states why the LNDD cannot disclose documentation.
The report states that LNDD cannot disclose documentation to any third party, unless that third party is appointed by a French judge.
That's what the report states.

How do I know that Armstrong doped?
The collective evidence from LNDD, the statements of former USPS/DC riders, the statements of former USPS/DC employees, the failed cortiscoid test at the TDF, his implausible explanation for the improvement in his cycling performance post cancer, the discovery of performance enhancing products (actovegin) in the USPS team car, his alliance with Michele Ferrari.

 

[wolfix]

the discovery of performance enhancing products (actovegin) in the USPS team car, his alliance with Michele Ferrari.

At the time actovegin was a legal substance I think.

As far as association with certain doctors that is an area where cycling fans must tread easily. I think the Spanish scandal may reveal that we have several big names in cycling connected to the doctors in question.
It is only a assumption on my part, but I just have this feeling. Some major heads in cycling are going to roll when things are revealed.

 

[limerickman]

At the time actovegin was a legal substance I think.

As far as association with certain doctors that is an area where cycling fans must tread easily. I think the Spanish scandal may reveal that we have several big names in cycling connected to the doctors in question.
It is only a assumption on my part, but I just have this feeling. Some major heads in cycling are going to roll when things are revealed.

Actovegin was legal at the time.

But it was subsequently banned.

Anyway, both sides of this dicsussion ought to agree to disagree.
We're going round in circles.
Armstrong's retired.

No point in reheating an issue which will not change either sides views.

 

[Bike N Ski]

Since when does LA have the right to tell IOC anything? He can ask but other than the threat of legal action he has no right nor power to tell IOC to do anything. Now I dislike Pound as much as anybody, but what kind of arrogance allows someone to tell IOC to do anything. Geeze

I'm sure, like others, you feel LA should just keep his mouth shut so we can see who's reputation will be tarnished next by that scoundrel. After all Lance, Pound went after you, what makes you that arrogant to think you can go after him. Hopefully, for the sake of cycling, the powers that be will see this for what it is and take action pronto.

 

[wolfix]

Anyway, both sides of this dicsussion ought to agree to disagree.
We're going round in circles.
Armstrong's retired.

No point in reheating an issue which will not change either sides views.

But if we agreed, what would we do with all the extra time on our hands?

 

[patch70]

I would ask is this biased hatred and fight to bring one man down really worth breaking the whole system for. I would also suggest that if this whole scandal had errupted say at Tom Boonen's door step instead of LA's, most of those who currently support **** Pound and WADA would conviniently change their minds.

By the same argument, if it were Boonen being accused instead of Lance, I would suggest that the Lance-tifosi would not recognise the name **** Pound (or **** Slam or whatever) let alone be calling for his resignation.