Lance Armstrong to be stripped of Tour de France titles and banned for life

[Dave Cooper please]

Dunno, it's a bit murky really. Most performance enhancing drugs aren't actually illegal, just performance enhancing! And I'm sure injecting yourself with your own blood isn't illegal either. So most cyclists may have doped but didn't break the law as such.
 Better legal minds than mine can determine whether those involved in the cover up (if there was one of course) are guilty of, say, perverting the cause of justice or something?
 

[paul_e]

Dunno, it's a bit murky really. Most performance enhancing drugs aren't actually illegal, just performance enhancing! And I'm sure injecting yourself with your own blood isn't illegal either. So most cyclists may have doped but didn't break the law as such.
 Better legal minds than mine can determine whether those involved in the cover up (if there was one of course) are guilty of, say, perverting the cause of justice or something?
 

That's kind of what I mean, I can't believe that there won't be some kind of legal ramification for someone at the end of all this (if the evidence is as clear as it is being made out to be by USADA).

[lovejoy]

Certainly sporting fraud is an offence in countries such as Italy.

[RunRickyRun]

But he's already satisfied the UCI and US Federal investigators that he doesn't have a case to answer.  Do you honestly believe that if the USADA case went to trial and the USADA lost, that they'd give it up and let him get on with his life?  Because he doesn't.  His view is that this is a witch-hunt and that even if he defended himself and won it still wouldn't be the end of it so what's the point.
Given what's happened so far you can understand why he feels that way.

The UCI accepted at least one substantial donation from Armstrong in the past so their non-action can be dismissed.

The Federal case looked at the illegal activities of defrauding of the government, drug trafficking, money laundering and conspiracy rather than any sporting rule breaking.

As USADA explained afterwards:

“Unlike the U.S. Attorney, Usada’s job is to protect clean sport rather than enforce specific criminal laws. Our investigation into doping in the sport of cycling is continuing and we look forward to obtaining the information developed during the federal investigation.”

[lovejoy]

I find it astounding that people can still question if Armstrong is innocent in face of all this. As for never being found guilty, Hilter was never found guilty of war crimes but I'm pretty sure he perpertrated them.

[RunRickyRun]

Armstrong has been found guilty though. He was charged of doping offences by the (WADA licensed) USADA. He refused to answer the charge and therefore has been found guilty.

The UCI is signed up to WADA (as all Olympic sports must be) and therefore USADA do have the jurisdiction to strip Armstrong of his titles (as WADA have already ruled).

I doubt the UCI will take the case to CAS (as has been muted by some) as that would put their participation at the Olympics in jeopardy. We will ultimately see a very slow reluctant acceptance of USADA's findings.

[Hopadop]

I've got little to add, but I've never known an innocent man just give up and accept an injustice. Not to say it cannot happen, and I accept Adam's point that he's battled for a long time, but still.

I've enjoyed reading the opposing views on a subject i knew nothing about but now feel well informed.

[AV1874]

I have, can't find bugger all.
Caffeine IS a banned substance but you would probably need to drink a dozen cases of the Red Bull to be over the limit, can't see that being particularly performance enhancing before a race!

You sure about caffeine?  This is part of the regulations:

*
The following substances included in the 2012 Monitoring Program (bupropion,
caffeine, nicotine, phenylephrine, phenylpropanolamine, pipradol, synephrine) are
not considered as Prohibited Substances.

So a pre-Alpe D'Huez double espresso should be fine and dandy. 

 

I can assure that caffeine is not a banned substance as even I need to be careful of any supplements I take due to potential testing, this is taken from AIS link http://www.ausport.gov.au/ais/nutrition/supplements/old_pages/supplement_fact_sheets/group_a_supplements/caffeine

• In 1 January 2004, caffeine was removed from the 2004 World Anti-Doping Agency Prohibited List, allowing athletes who compete in sports that are compliant with the WADA code to consume caffeine, within their usual diets or for specific purposes of performance, without fear of sanctions.

[Hopadop]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-09-10/former-lance-armstrong-teammate-describes-doping/4253740

Hmmm

[Dante Lavelli]

I wish there were a few more new sources than this Tyler Hamilton fella as he currently has a book to see so it not beyond my imagination to think he has ulterior motives.  ...although I have read he is selling all his cycling memorabilia and giving the proceeds to doping charities.  Not sure about any profits from the book.

[Dante Lavelli]

This from the BBC to confuse things further:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/19749763

It strikes me that politics seems to be the driver for a lot of the press statement rather than the search for truth.

[Ad@m]

This from the BBC to confuse things further:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/19749763

It strikes me that politics seems to be the driver for a lot of the press statement rather than the search for truth.

Indeed.

It does seem quite odd though for a governing body of a sport to strip someone of their entire career's titles before they have the evidence to support it.

[lovejoy]

They have additional evidence apparently and are adding this to the file. Don't trust what the UCI are saying either, part of the allegations are likely to implicate them in abetting Armstrong in covering up positive tests (he was too big too fail etc).

The bottom line remains that if innocent it was difficult to understand why Armstrong refused to contest the charges thereby admitting guilt.

[Ad@m]

It's not that difficult, as has been explained several times over on this thread.

[ExclDawg]

Caffeine IS a banned substance but you would probably need to drink a dozen cases of the Red Bull to be over the limit, can't see that being particularly performance enhancing before a race!

I don't mean to dig up an old post, but I wanted to revisit this one ...

Caffeine isn't on the banned list now ... but it was before 2004.  So my question is this:  If it's 2003, and a cyclist takes so much as a small drink of coffee before a race, would you consider that doping?  If he drinks 6 Red Bulls, is that doping?  If he takes a package of caffeine pills and comes in just under the legal limit, is THAT doping?

I ask, because I'm pretty sure that's what's going on with most of this Armstrong "doping", as well as what's still going on today.  Is it the fault of the biker for ingesting anything on the list, regardless of how small ... or the fault of the governing bodies who say, "you can have so much of this in your system, just not THIS much"?  If you can't fault one guy for taking a small amount of a "banned" substance, because it's well below allowable limits anyway ... how can you fault a guy for taking enough of it to go right up to the limit?  Technically, he's still playing by the rules that the governing bodies set up.