BREAKING Report: Lance Abandoning Fight vs Doping Charges, TDF Titles Gone

THIS JUST IN:

Some of Usain's old training partners (perhaps jealous of his dominance?) have stepped forward, swearing they have eyewitness testimony in which they can prove Bolt is doping to the max.

Well, we better take his WR's, World champ, and olympic titles away then. Pass them to the next guy.

Same idea.

Tor, you just don't get it, yes he is guilty but all USADA can do is to keep him from competing whether in cycling or in triathalons. They must now turn their evidence over to the UCI which is the governing body of cycling. They will in turn reveiw the evidence and recommend the punishment or if the titles should be stripped from Armstrong. Even USA cycling in a not very surprising move sided with Armstrong that the case should have final jurisdiction with the UCI. USADA can only make recommendations to the various governing bodies.

Not the same idea dude, it becomes a problem if there are dodgy samples, and Usain refuses to answer questions, but, wants to stop the process

check this out bro wrote:

THIS JUST IN:

Some of Usain's old training partners (perhaps jealous of his dominance?) have stepped forward, swearing they have eyewitness testimony in which they can prove Bolt is doping to the max.

Well, we better take his WR's, World champ, and olympic titles away then. Pass them to the next guy.

Same idea.

Mr. Deeds wrote:

In answer to your question, USADA doesn't have the jurisdiction to strip Armstrong of his titles. They must now present their evidence to the UCI which could then also look to CAS for a ruling. Much of the supposed physcial evidence USADA has would have occurred on foreign soil which USADA has no jurisdiction outside of the United States.

I think people are naive to believe Armstrong would just give up. He knows the ultimate decision to strip him of the titles will fall to the UCI.

If he was really concerned about the evidence being released, you wouldn't see Bruynell choosing to go to arbitration as all the evidence will come out then.

You didn't really answer the question, you gave your pro-Armstrong perspective. You might be right, but I was actually hoping for an objective perspective from someone with an unbiased brain. Obviously USADA has lawyers and experts on cycling and doping governance, and they believe they have the authority to strip. I suppose UCI has high powered folks who will say the opposite, and maybe ASO has some high powered brains with their own perspective, so maybe a decision by CAS is inevitable.

Uncivil Engineer wrote: Now please don't waste any more of our time...

Our time? Your comments are the classic response for someone who lost an argument.

When you speak, speak for yourself, and do not speak for anyone else. Maybe that makes sense, it should, but in your case unlikely.

Mr.Spock wrote:

Innocent until PROVEN guilty. Not until it really, really looks like you're guilty, or until everybody thinks you're guilty. At least these people MUST show their evidence before stripping him of the titles. Otherwise, he's right - it is a witch-hunt.

Not if the accused says, "Okay, I'm not going to defend myself anymore, have it your way" and withdraws his defense (in this case, a lawsuit against the accuser). Why is this so hard for people to grasp?

USADA may indeed consist of hyperaggressive dickwhackers whose chief motivation for pursuing Armstrong is not cleaning up the sport, but shaming Armstrong and ruining his life. Doesn't matter, because his actions are those of a guilty man and he KNEW what would happen if he rolled over. Knew it fully. Think about it -- if you tell me 2 + 2 = 5 for sufficiently large values of 2 and I tell you that your mom's a fat ugly whore and punch you in the face and rape your sister and say "actually it's 4," I'm still right; my attitude and actions have no bearing on the outcome.

In a real court of law you cannot be tried for the same thing twice. That is called double jeopardy.

The USADA case is not a real legal case. There is no lawsuit. They have no authority.

Didn't answer the question?? Obviously you scored a 14 on the reading comprehension part of the ACT. No, I believe Armstrong is guilty, however the only people who can strip Armstrong of the titles is the UCI. All evidence must be presented to them and then they will rule. If USADA doesn't like the ruling the case will move to the CAS for a final ruling. I wouldn't be surprised to see him keep a few titles and be stripped of at least 2.

I think this is far from over and you will see a big PR push from Armstrong in attempt to win public sympathy. As I said earlier, people either love him or hate him. This case won't change many peoples minds.

None of this really matters unless the performance enhancing drug laws are changed.

1. Either let the athletes take whatever they want, or

2. Have a list of banned substances and if an athlete tests positive then they are banned for life from all professional sports.

End of story.

Anything other than this is total BS, and there will continue to be drug cheats. They are just dancing around the problem if they continue on the current path which is a total joke.

I am not a Lance fan, however it is totally ridiculous to strip him of his TDF titles. What are they going to do give them to another drug cheat like Jan Ulrich?

Dumb Engineers wrote:

Our time? Your comments are the classic response for someone who lost an argument.

When you speak, speak for yourself, and do not speak for anyone else. Maybe that makes sense, it should, but in your case unlikely.

How telling that the only part of my last post you quoted was the off-topic part. Your dodging the substantive material preceding my admonition about time-wasting is conspicuous, the hallmark of the furtive back-pedaler.

You were wrong from the beginning. Again, anyone who reads the first sentence of the Globe article I linked to and reviews what I wrote in accompaniment to that link can see at a glance how hapless and moronic you have been from the start.

So much raw stupid saturating this thread.

Cam Levins wrote:

Americans are idiots.

I bet there will be a lot of baffled amusement from the European cycling scene, wondering why America would willingly sacrifice it's own champion.

You're under arrest bitch

You will find what kind of a man he is when you face cancer yourself.

Tor wrote:

Here are some others for you to try (might need to copy and paste):

http://msn.foxsports.com/cycling/story/lance-armstrong-quits-doping-fight-against-usada-goes-from-hero-to-zero-082412http://www.usatoday.com/sports/columnist/brennan/story/2012-08-23/lance-armstrong-usada/57258738/1

I think you also underestimate the ability of the American people to change their mind about a hero (or ex-hero). Give it time, Mr. Deeds, and Mr. Armstrong is going to be nothing more than a punch line. Today is simply the beginning of the end for the Armstrong myth.

Getting totally ridiculous now with assumptions of some future UCI/USADA negotiating particular titles - stripping 3, keeping 1, tying 1.... how about an asterisk next to every year?

Whats the purpose of the USADA and World Doping Agency if they are without enforcement power? Should we do away with all anti-doping efforts?

Tor, Azia and all others who feel this case is over, here is one of the latest articles on a leading cycling site.

(Photo: Bettini)

American anti-doping chiefs may be confident of their power to strip Lance Armstrong of his seven Tour de France titles, but they could find themselves trapped in a legal minefield over jurisdiction.

Armstrong was officially branded a drugs cheat Friday by the US Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) and was also banned from cycling for life by the agency, which said his decision not to pursue arbitration in an effort to clear himself of doping charges leveled in June triggered the action.

But legal experts say the USADA are at risk of over-reaching themselves. "Not only does the USADA only have jurisdiction for its own territory but the role of an anti-doping agency is to determine if an athlete has doped or not," said Denis Oswald, the director of the Centre for International Sports Studies. "The sanctions are the preserve in principle of the international federations.

"The Tour de France is an international competition, placed under the authority of the UCI (the International Cycling Union). "And the eventual sanctions that can emanate in the event of a doping case must be taken by those concerned - the UCI and the management of the Tour de France", added Oswald, who is also a leading figure at the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). But for the USADA, to leave the international federations to rule on the Armstrong case is like having "the fox guarding the hen-house". The UCI, in return, has reproached the American authorities for "having no respect for the rules and principles of regulatory procedure", demanding that the affair be the responsibility of an independent body.

On Friday, the UCI said it would wait for the USADA to reveal its findings before commenting on the matter. One source close to the UCI said the federation felt like it had been caught in the "crossfire". "Their (the UCI) interest is to shed light on the matter, but their duty to their athletes is to ensure that the rules are respected," added Oswald.

Another sticking point is the duration of suspension. The world anti-doping code states that an athlete can be banned for life from all competitions only in the case of repeat offences; if not, the maximum suspension is four years.

Pockets Full Of Stones wrote:

You will find what kind of a man he is when you face cancer yourself.

Oh, silly me, I forgot the unwritten rule stating that if you overcome a major life setback through whatever combination of grit and luck, you then have carte blanche to break rules that apply to everyone else in your field.

Thanks Deeds, that's good info. Looks like it's gonna be a mess, cause USADA is sure they have authority to impose penalties, and so is WADA according to President John Fahey. So...

USADA says "yes we do"

WADA says "yes they do"

UCI says "not so sure"

CAS says "not so sure"

ASO says nothing

What a mess...

check this out bro wrote:

THIS JUST IN:

Some of Usain's old training partners (perhaps jealous of his dominance?) have stepped forward, swearing they have eyewitness testimony in which they can prove Bolt is doping to the max.

Well, we better take his WR's, World champ, and olympic titles away then. Pass them to the next guy.

Same idea.

One big hole in your argument is that they have positive tests starting in 2009.

More info on WADA's president's comments (John Fahey) concerning USADA and Armstrong:

MELBOURNE (Reuters) - World Anti-Doping Agency chief John Fahey says American cyclist Lance Armstrong's decision not to fight doping charges can only lead to the conclusion that he is a 'drug cheat' and he should be stripped of his seven Tour de France titles.

He had the right to rip up those charges but he elected not to, therefore the only interpretation in these circumstances is that there was substance in those charges," Fahey told Reuters in a telephone interview from his Australian residence on Friday.

"I'm not going to attempt to understand why he's done that ... I can only take it as it stands - that it leads only to the conclusion that he is a drug cheat.

"My understanding is that when the evidence is based upon a career that included seven Tour de France wins then all of that becomes obliterated."

Australian Fahey dismissed Armstrong's criticism of USADA and said he had found the doping authority to be a "very professional organization" that had followed the rules in the cyclist's case.

"They have acted on rules which are compliant with the WADA code," Fahey said. "Now Mr. Armstrong has said: 'Enough, I'm not going any further' and he's endeavored to shoot the messenger.

"I think that's disappointing ... He's never gone before a tribunal. There's never been a hearing related to this behavior, so what is he tired of?"

Fahey said the issue was now for USADA to make a formal decision with sanctions attached, and said the weight of evidence against Armstrong, and his refusal to respond to the charges, made the allegations "factual".

"I think you've got to look at the facts and the evidence that has only been collected in the last couple of years.

"There are 10 riders and several other witnesses with evidence (against him).

"There can be no other interpretation. To refuse the charges can only leave the interpretation that he is a cheat."

Dumb Engineers wrote:

There is no lawsuit.

"Armstrong sued USADA in Austin, where he lives, in an attempt to block the case and was supported by the UCI. A judge threw out the case Monday, siding with USADA despite questioning the agency's pursuit of Armstrong in his retirement."

I was wrong in stating that Armstrong dropped the suit -- it was thrown out. But he did sue USADA. He did everything he could until his best option was to bail out before he got shredded publicly by the weight of the evidence against him, including biological evidence:

"USADA announced in June it had evidence Armstrong used banned substances and methods -- and encouraged their use by teammates. The agency also said it had blood tests from 2009 and 2010 that were "fully consistent" with blood doping."