FootballNews

Rampant Antagonism wrote:I didn't.

Rampant Antagonism wrote:It makes you ask questions.

God is an Englishman wrote:I'm actually surprised there's not people on here stating that the aussies are innocent.

adam wrote:

God is an Englishman wrote:I'm actually surprised there's not people on here stating that the aussies are innocent.

i think that attitude died when KG left 5AA...
they all cheat... and i don't think it is isolated to cycling...

Bomber wrote:

adam wrote:

God is an Englishman wrote:I'm actually surprised there's not people on here stating that the aussies are innocent.

i think that attitude died when KG left 5AA...
they all cheat... and i don't think it is isolated to cycling...

Heaven forbid if Cadel Evans was ever found out!

One day maybe we will have two separate events for many sports. One drug free, and the other where its open slather and without any testing. Question then would be, which of the two would hold more interest?

DAM wrote:early 80's to be exact!

DOC wrote:amnesty is good, i say people get 2 weeks to let it all out, then sign a document to say they are currently clean and will stay clean

sky is forcing team members to sign a document stating that they have never and will never participate in doping, and if they dont sign they will be gone, interesting to see that cavendish change teams

God is an Englishman wrote:

DOC wrote:amnesty is good, i say people get 2 weeks to let it all out, then sign a document to say they are currently clean and will stay clean

sky is forcing team members to sign a document stating that they have never and will never participate in doping, and if they dont sign they will be gone, interesting to see that cavendish change teams

Come on, if you know your cycling (which I don't pretend to) it's pretty obvious that Cavendish would move to a team where they would give him the back up in the sprints.

If he wants the recognition he had to leave Sky as they were always going to back Wiggins and the yellow jerseys.

God is an Englishman wrote:

DOC wrote:amnesty is good, i say people get 2 weeks to let it all out, then sign a document to say they are currently clean and will stay clean

sky is forcing team members to sign a document stating that they have never and will never participate in doping, and if they dont sign they will be gone, interesting to see that cavendish change teams

Come on, if you know your cycling (which I don't pretend to) it's pretty obvious that Cavendish would move to a team where they would give him the back up in the sprints.

If he wants the recognition he had to leave Sky as they were always going to back Wiggins and the yellow jerseys.

DAM wrote:

God is an Englishman wrote:

DOC wrote:amnesty is good, i say people get 2 weeks to let it all out, then sign a document to say they are currently clean and will stay clean

sky is forcing team members to sign a document stating that they have never and will never participate in doping, and if they dont sign they will be gone, interesting to see that cavendish change teams

Come on, if you know your cycling (which I don't pretend to) it's pretty obvious that Cavendish would move to a team where they would give him the back up in the sprints.

If he wants the recognition he had to leave Sky as they were always going to back Wiggins and the yellow jerseys.

two drug cheats in that post......

DAM wrote:drugs in cysling has been goin on for years...early 80's to be exact!

as for Lance and his drug taking, I read somewhere, (maybe P Jonker said it not sure), but with the amount of drugs that Lance was supposed to be taking, he should of been dead!

adam wrote:

DAM wrote:drugs in cysling has been goin on for years...early 80's to be exact!

as for Lance and his drug taking, I read somewhere, (maybe P Jonker said it not sure), but with the amount of drugs that Lance was supposed to be taking, he should of been dead!

Phil Liggett - "I had an email from an eminent scientist from the US yesterday. An SMS actually. It said if Lance Armstrong had taken the drugs outlined by USADA he’d have been dead ten years ago. He’s an eminent scientist and a very intelligent man. I don’t know his name, the SMS came from a secondary person.”

that's credible.

DAM wrote:

adam wrote:

DAM wrote:drugs in cysling has been goin on for years...early 80's to be exact!

as for Lance and his drug taking, I read somewhere, (maybe P Jonker said it not sure), but with the amount of drugs that Lance was supposed to be taking, he should of been dead!

Phil Liggett - "I had an email from an eminent scientist from the US yesterday. An SMS actually. It said if Lance Armstrong had taken the drugs outlined by USADA he’d have been dead ten years ago. He’s an eminent scientist and a very intelligent man. I don’t know his name, the SMS came from a secondary person.”

that's credible.

yet, the supposed testimony from convicted drug cheats is more credible???

THE voice of world cycling, Phil Liggett, says Lance Armstrong swore to his face he didn't dope but the veteran commentator now feels like 'a fool' for staunchly defending the fallen cyclist for so long.

Liggett, who has called 35 Tours de France, says he’s had sleepless nights this week following USADA’s damning report into the systematic drug taking of seven-time winner Armstrong and his teammates.

Liggett had previously been a strong supporter of Armstrong’s in numerous doping scandals, and even as early as this week, was still questioning the quality of evidence in USADA’s "witch hunt" pursuit of Armstrong.

But the withdrawal of Armstrong’s sponsors and his resignation as chairman of the Livestrong foundation has finally convinced Liggett of Armstrong’s guilt.

"I was inclined (to think) surely he doesn’t dope, but now I look a fool, to be quite frank," Liggett told The Daily Telegraph from London.

"Quite clearly he has had a program going, with all the other guys."

"I am like everybody else. I had no idea such an in-depth drug scheme was taking place.

"I spent many hours with Armstrong over the years, but only at functions, doing things for him like MC-ing his cancer events.

"I wouldn’t call Lance a friend because you can’t get that close to him. But I really thought he was clean, and in 2003, he actually told me to my face, in his own room. So obviously I am devastated."

Liggett was reluctant to fully demonise Armstrong given his massive passion to raise money and awareness of cancer.

Ultimately, however, it was knowing how much Livestrong meant to Armstrong that had this week removed Liggett’s doubts that the US cyclist had doped.

"Lance gave us great moments and also raised over half-a-billion dollars for Livestrong, which is the dearest thing to his heart," Liggett said.

"If there were any lingering doubts as far as I was concerned, when Nike and all his sponsors pulled out, but continued to donate to Livestrong, quite clearly a deal was struck.

"We’ll donate to Livestrong Lance, providing you leave the company as chairman’.

"That’s about the nearest I think we’re going to get to a confession from Lance. And if he does confess, that leaves him wide open to a myriad legal entanglements."
Liggett told a cycling website this week were it not for the fact he’d signed contracts to commentate through to 2016, the scandal was so depressing he would have walked away from cycling.

"Having been with the riders...there’s never been the slightest inclination these guys have been going back and preparing by taking EPO and human growth hormone."

A giant shadow is now cast over Tour de France winners but Liggett said he firmly believes
Cadel Evans is a clean rider: "I feel beyond a shadow of a doubt Cadel Evans won a clean Tour de France.

"That was a good race and a real race."

Liggett baulks at the talk of amnesty for drug cheats, and feels six-month sentences for people who testified against Armstrong are "derisory".

He feels like professional cycling is now in a new era of strict drug rules, and hopes young athletes coming through will never have been "tainted" by old drug regimes.

"I think we are still in process of cleaning out the back room, but going forward I
feel we are very much in a safer state," he said.

"Looking back (on the past 12 years), how do I feel? I suppose I feel like I have been taken for a ride. Quite literally."

Without confirmation, Lance Armstong should keep his innocence
By Shane Newell

Published: Sunday, October 21, 2012

In a United States court, a person is innocent until proven guilty.
This practice, also known as the presumption of innocence, is widely accepted in the nation.
When it comes to the court of public opinion though, a person is often guilty until proven innocent.
Lance Armstrong, seven-time Tour de France winner and hero to billions, is the victim of a relentless media and a U.S. Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) witch-hunt.
Earlier this month, the USADA released a nearly 1,000-page report accusing Armstrong of doping, forcing his teammates to dope and deceiving the entire sport of cycling.
For a 1,000-page report, one would assume that the evidence within would be overwhelmingly damning.
However, that is not the case.
If an agency is going to accuse Armstrong of doping, then there should be a great deal of evidence, like positive drug tests, photos of Armstrong doping or some physical proof.
USADA’s report is based entirely on other cyclists’ testimonies, with no physical proof whatsoever.
How can an agency strip Armstrong of his seven titles without a single positive drug test?
Some, but not nearly all, of Armstrong’s teammates testified that he led a sophisticated doping ring, ran when the doping police came to town and in turn, forced all of his team to dope.
Former teammates, like George Hincapie and Levi Leipheimer, have come out against Armstrong and in turn admitted to their own doping as well.
Another critical failing of the USADA report is a “suspicious” drug test result from Armstrong’s 2001 Tour of Switzerland.
The test results serve as one of USADA’s pieces of evidence, when in fact they show that Armstrong was in acceptable limits.
“There was no positive test on the Tour of Switzerland in 2001,” Martial Saugy, director of the laboratory that performed the tests, said, according to AFP News.
The suspicious sample was ruled out last week by a Tour of Switzerland official, further proving that Armstrong did not dope.
I admit, the witness testimony against Armstrong is convincing; however, in a sport of liars and cheaters, I can see those aforementioned cyclists taking Armstrong down with them.
The question of Armstrong’s guilt raises a large question about an issue plaguing society.
In a world of instant gratification and instant desire for knowledge, something has to give.
In this case, it was Armstrong.
Rather than read the report themselves, or actually look at more than one news source, many jumped the gun and assumed that Armstrong was guilty.
Did Armstrong dope?
I’ll never know. However, the evidence in support of him (lack of any positive drug tests) is enough for me to support him for life.
The International Cycling Union will announce today if Armstrong will be stripped of his titles.
Regardless of their decision, my support will continue for cycling’s greatest athlete and humanitarian.

Shane Newell is a sophomore journalism major and an assistant city editor for the Daily 49er.

adam wrote:gone gone gone gone gone gone gone

The fate of disgraced cyclist Lance Armstrong has been sealed, with world cycling's governing body deciding to back a life ban for doping and strip him of his record seven Tour de France titles.

The International Cycling Union (UCI) said late last night that it supported the US Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) decision to erase Armstrong's entire career after August 1998.

UCI president Pat McQuaid called the scandal "the biggest crisis" the sport had ever faced and said Armstrong deserved to be "forgotten in cycling".

"We will not appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport and we will recognise the sanction that USADA has imposed," McQuaid told a news conference in Geneva, saying he had been "sickened" by the revelations.

"The UCI will strip him of his seven Tour de France wins.

"Lance Armstrong has no place in cycling ... he deserves to be forgotten in cycling."

LANCE Armstrong's best finish on the Tour de France will now go down as 36th place after he was stripped of all results since 1998 following a ``landmark'' decision by world cycling chiefs on Monday.

DISGRACED cyclist Lance Armstrong's empire has unravelled as he is chased for millions of dollars in bonuses, his records are being wiped out and sponsors desert him.

Tour de France director Christian Prudhomme said he no longer considered Armstrong a seven-time winner of the world's most prestigious cycling race but the title for those years would remain "blank".

Speaking after cycling's governing body ratified the US Anti-Doping Agency's decision to strip Armstrong of wins since August 1998, Prudhomme welcomed the decision, reiterating his belief that there should be no new champions declared for the seven Tours that Armstrong had won.

Dallas insurance company SCA Promotions immediately demanded the return of millions of dollars in bonuses paid to Armstrong now that the his Tour de France victories have been expunged.

"Mr Armstrong is no longer the official winner of any Tour de France races and as a result it is inappropriate and improper for him to retain any bonus payments made by SCA," Jeffrey Dorough, general counsel for the firm, said.