The Thread about Nothing....



swampy1970

Well-Known Member
Feb 3, 2008
10,075
381
83
Originally Posted by 531Aussie .

Hee hee. Apparently ESPN have been using this stock "Armstrong" photo today

mcewen-20.jpg

He looks like he has strong arms.
 

matagi

Well-Known Member
Mar 12, 2006
8,260
328
83
Personally, I'm with Monsieur Hinault on this one - it should have been dealt with way back.
 

swampy1970

Well-Known Member
Feb 3, 2008
10,075
381
83
Originally Posted by matagi .

Personally, I'm with Monsieur Hinault on this one - it should have been dealt with way back.
The issue is, specifically with Lance, what stuff?

In general though, if an athelete really is ultimately responsible for anything they consume (food, drinks, legitimate medicines, super fast go juice taking on the sly etc..., then a ban should quickly follow the doping infraction. Make testing the A and B sample manditory with the B sample being tested at a different lab. Get the chap/chapette involved up infront of the relevant panel within a week. If folks can travel the world to race they can make one last plane ride for an disciplinery hearing or fark it, skype the damn thing. If countless billions of dollars worth of business can be done via phone and video conferencing then some saps doping infraction can be done the same way.

The ongoing [COLOR= rgb(0, 102, 204)]Lance Armstrong doping case[/COLOR] experienced further delays on Friday when U.S District Court Judge Sam Sparks gave both parties; Armstrong and USADA, a further seven days to deliver additional information. Among the possible outcomes expected from Sparks in a week’s time include dismissing the [COLOR= rgb(0, 102, 204)]Armstrong’s lawsuit against USADA[/COLOR] or an injunction against USADA that will cease the case against the seven-time Tour winner.

Sparks’ concerns and subsequently delayed ruling on [COLOR= rgb(0, 102, 204)]jurisdiction[/COLOR] were primarily based around the specifics provided by USADA, or rather apparent lack of which did not provide Armstrong with enough information to mount an edequate defence.

"I couldn't find anything but conclusions (in the charges)," Sparks said. "Not one name, not one event, not one date,” said Sparks.
So no names, dates or events...

Really?

Maybe I should sell t-shirts with "Got evidence?" on the front and "USADA Witch Hunt" on the back. Have it in black with yellow sleeves.... ;)
 

531Aussie

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2004
12,633
297
83
I'm too scared to ask the cool kids (and I'm a bit too lazy to look too hard): does USADA really have the power to strip him of his titles, or the power to heavily influence the UCI to do so? If not, then why are the mainstream news services saying he's gunna lose them. Can someone spell it out for me in dumb man's terms? :) Will it happen? It doesn't really bother me too much either way; i'm just glad he's been exposed as a doper.
 

Jono L

Well-Known Member
Apr 28, 2005
4,434
124
48
From the Race Radio


Ok, here is an overview.

Armstrong did not to contest a hearing, that doesn’t mean there won’t be a report about his case.

http://www.usada.org/files/pdfs/usada-protocol.pdf

“USADA shall publicly report the disposition of anti-doping matters no later than five business days after … (2) such hearing has been waived.”

Additionally “After an anti-doping rule violation has been established, USADA may comment upon any aspect of the case.”

They need to give this report, with instructions, to the UCI. The UCI then has a "Choice" to follow the instructions of USADA or to take it to CAS. I doubt they would take it to CAS as they would lose quickly. CAS does have a process in place to review and rule on cases rapidly, this would surely qualify.

I expect the UCI to strip Armstrong of all results from Aug 1998 till today. Armstrong has threaten to sue USADA if he is stripped....but who does he sue? It is actually the UCI that would do the stripping so perhaps he files a lawsuit against Travis?

So USADA can release all the evidence they like, the question is how and when. For now Bruyneel, Marti, and Celya all are facing arbitration, this may effect when USADA releases the evidence. They may also just dump it all into the public at the same time they give it to them.

I understand that Armstrong was on the phone with Bruyneel yesterday trying to get him to drop the arbitration. Johan has a lot more to lose as he will be unemployable if he is sanctioned. He does not have the cash that Wonderboy has.
Another interesting element will be how the public reacts in 4 months

Tyler's book is coming out at just the right time. Coyle is an excellent writer and it will be a compelling story. It will get significant coverage in both the mainstream and cycling media

Over the next few weeks much of USADA's case will be know and it will not be pretty. There will be very clear evidence of a cover up by the UCI. Not just of the 2001 ToS but also the 1999 Cortisone positive. It should also expose the actions by the UCI to try to insure the truth did not get out to USADA or the Feds. I also expect USAC to not be spared. The question is outlet for this info. It could be outside of any detailed report it gives to the media or UCI.

Multiple entities will launch lawsuits as soon as he is stripped. SCA is the most obvious but I expect sponsors to as well.

By the time any arbitration comes around for Bruyneel, Marti, and Celya the public will be well aware of what USADA is....even these goofy baseball writers who have been babbling about Lance all day.

And then there are the Federal cases.....save the best for last
 

bbp

Well-Known Member
Jul 29, 2006
5,028
776
83
Apprentice North Sentinelese.
Hmm a little bingle with the fartographer after an exhaustive explanation of how it all worked, and why its important, and somehow it got personal, world view, personal anxiety, stuff. So I escaped to the pub only to find that hawthorn won. Cnuts. A good chat with a Vic swans fan about the Murray though. The evening is not lost yet.
 

stevebaby

New Member
Jun 22, 2004
3,515
4
0
http://i.minus.com/iXuhZlo2ubfl0.jpg

1961,,RAAF School in Penang.

My sister is the one in the bottom right hand corner...checking out the other girls and ignoring the camera.
She died 5 weeks ago. I miss the mad thing heaps.

Couldn't find any of my old school photos online, something for which I am very grateful, even though I modestly admit to being an awesome kid.
 

bbp

Well-Known Member
Jul 29, 2006
5,028
776
83
Apprentice North Sentinelese.
Originally Posted by stevebaby .

http://i.minus.com/iXuhZlo2ubfl0.jpg

1961,,RAAF School in Penang.

My sister is the one in the bottom right hand corner...checking out the other girls and ignoring the camera.
She died 5 weeks ago. I miss the mad thing heaps.

Couldn't find any of my old school photos online, something for which I am very grateful, even though I modestly admit to being an awesome kid.
i love you
 

bbp

Well-Known Member
Jul 29, 2006
5,028
776
83
Apprentice North Sentinelese.
London Boulevard is worth a watch. A Ray Winstone tour be force. With a Yardbirds soundtrack. What's not to love?
Keira Knightly too, who was not as appalling as usual, and Col'n Farrell for Tagsy too. At least he died in the end.
Oh, sorry.
 

swampy1970

Well-Known Member
Feb 3, 2008
10,075
381
83
Nice write up Jono but if the US District judge that looked at the "evidence" from USADA said there were no names, no specific events, no dates and wouldn't stand muster in even a basic court room, which is scarier: the prospect for any athlete that a fair trial isn't a necessarily a requirement or a chap (Lance in this case) losing a few wins? The first one should scare the bejesus out of folks that race given that neither failed tests or hard evidence are seemingly required to ban someone. The latter just needs to end one way or the other. If there's hard evidence - names, dates, records of funds used to procure "stuff and equipment" etc then he should be nailed to a cross and made an example of. Anything other than hard evidence then the whole thing resembles the Spanish Inquisition and opens the way for any head of an organization to go on a witch hunt to further their own careers at the tax payers expense. I think the only semi good thing here is that such a decision isn't left to one body. Does the fact that Lance has refused arbitration with the USADA also waived any rights for him to go to arbitration if the UCI upholds the request to ban him? So much **** has been slung around - this is one of the few times that I think that all the details should be aired in public. Those who are complicit in this shouldn't be allowed to remain anonymous and should be charged accordingly.
 

matagi

Well-Known Member
Mar 12, 2006
8,260
328
83
Whilst we are discussing Armstrongs ... did anyone gave Neil Armstrong in the DP?
 

531Aussie

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2004
12,633
297
83
Originally Posted by stevebaby .

iXuhZlo2ubfl0.jpg


1961,,RAAF School in Penang.

My sister is the one in the bottom right hand corner...checking out the other girls and ignoring the camera.
She died 5 weeks ago. I miss the mad thing heaps.

Couldn't find any of my old school photos online, something for which I am very grateful, even though I modestly admit to being an awesome kid.
Shame. Way too young, obviously.
 

Jono L

Well-Known Member
Apr 28, 2005
4,434
124
48
Originally Posted by swampy1970 .

Nice write up Jono but if the US District judge that looked at the "evidence" from USADA said there were no names, no specific events, no dates and wouldn't stand muster in even a basic court room, which is scarier: the prospect for any athlete that a fair trial isn't a necessarily a requirement or a chap (Lance in this case) losing a few wins? The first one should scare the bejesus out of folks that race given that neither failed tests or hard evidence are seemingly required to ban someone. The latter just needs to end one way or the other. If there's hard evidence - names, dates, records of funds used to procure "stuff and equipment" etc then he should be nailed to a cross and made an example of. Anything other than hard evidence then the whole thing resembles the Spanish Inquisition and opens the way for any head of an organization to go on a witch hunt to further their own careers at the tax payers expense.
I think the only semi good thing here is that such a decision isn't left to one body.
Does the fact that Lance has refused arbitration with the USADA also waived any rights for him to go to arbitration if the UCI upholds the request to ban him?
So much **** has been slung around - this is one of the few times that I think that all the details should be aired in public. Those who are complicit in this shouldn't be allowed to remain anonymous and should be charged accordingly.
As far as I understand most of the evidence will come out. And everyone will get to see that there was plenty of hard evidence and the whole 'witch hunt' theory is just another well played Livestrong PR strategy.
 

VadarStrikesBack

Well-Known Member
Sep 16, 2009
2,023
164
63
Quality rant by lama over on his blog. Love a bit of 'retarded technology' bashing.

Also top 10 in the state open over the weekend - very good ride in a very handy field in A grade.
 

gplama

Well-Known Member
May 16, 2004
7,817
378
83
Melbourne. Sometimes.
Originally Posted by VadarStrikesBack .

Quality rant by lama over on his blog. Love a bit of 'retarded technology' bashing.

Also top 10 in the state open over the weekend - very good ride in a very handy field in A grade.
I do it for the ladies.

Spent the day skiing behind mine... while she showboarded. Buller was pretty ****. Icy. Softened up at the end of the day for some fun.