Update:WADA has 10 yr. statue of limitations so Rupp and Salazar will get off scot-free if it's proven Rupp doped in HS

Good point. What separates Hellebuyck and Armstrong is that they lied "under oath". They both participated in arbitration proceedings (in 2004 and 2005 respectively), which by agreement, carries the weight and obligations, as if it were in a court. They committed perjury in an Arbitration proceeding. This is why the statute of limitations was tolled for them.In Salazar/Rupp's case, this doesn't seem likely that something similar could happen that would have "stopped the clock" (assuming, for the sake of argument that the evidence shows that a violation of the rules actually occurred in 2002). Responding to reporters by e-mail to allegations is not the same as committing perjury, or lying to investigators, in a court-like examination.

The clock tolls for thee wrote:

When concealment of hiding wrongdoing in the past the tolling start does not apply. Eddy Hellebuyck and Lance Armstrong learned the hard way that statute of limitations goes out the door if you cheat and lie about the cheating. ...

Wrong Coach wrote:

TrackCoach wrote:

As I've stated in several post, short of a criminal investigation or an NOP coach or athlete coming forward and providing evidence that AlSal in anyway participated in providing an athlete with a banned substance, there is no winnable case....

Eddy Hallenbeck's and Lance Armstrong's prove you are wrong.

other athletes who rode with lance did come forward. actually, PLENTY of people came out against lance who had worked with him and directly said "he and I both took EPO together." No one has said any such thing about rupp and NOP.

And, even when they did come forward, even THAT wasn't enough to get lance. He got caught only because he went back in 2009 to compete again and the biological passport got him.