This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Lance Armstrong - Refusal to fight admission of guilt?
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
Interest
it's in their right to throw out those accusations and milk all of the money out of him legally.
How so?
Why am I bothering with this, really? Must be a bit too late >_<
Post by
164232
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
331902
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
331902
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Squishalot
They changed a fundamental law of the game for the benefit of one person, that is something that I have a huge problem with.
Not really - under the same fundamental law, half of the international bowlers would likewise have been banned. They changed the law because it wasn't feasible. Everyone's at 15 degrees of flex these days. If I'm not mistaken, I seem to recall that Brett Lee was sitting up at 13 degrees, which was illegal under the old laws as well.
Post by
FatalHeaven
The fact of the matter is that people, both his competitors and just regular ol' joes like yourself
think
he is guilty. With no proof and nothing but verbal accusations to stand with that, this should have been dropped long ago. Want to keep investigating him? Fine. He doesn't have to
help
you do that. As far as titles, I believe that Mr. Armstrong
- and every other title-holder in any sport -
should be stripped of nothing, until/unless said accusations can be proven.
People believe he is guilty or think he is hiding from something simply because they love controversy. It's pitiful.
Post by
331902
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
164232
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Squishalot
But the point remains the law was changed with one person in mind.
I disagree, I think the law was changed keeping the entire bowling community in mind, following tests done on one person. But we're diverting from the topic, I think.
He hasn't walked away from a legal case, and should one be brought to bear, he will not be able to, so some version of the truth will out. It seems likely to me that the next step will be to sue him for the return of his earnings.
It's funny though, because if you look at the service that his earnings bought, it was to market and provide brand recognition while he was a superstar cyclist. He's provided that. They've gotten their marketing returns on their investment. The only people who could feasibly mount an argument that their contractual requirements were not met are any of his current sponsors (if he has any at the moment).
Post by
164232
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
134377
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
331902
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
134377
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
331902
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
ChairmanKaga
I totally agree, but you have to stand up and say "I didn't do anything. Prove it, or shut up. Here's the tribunal, give them your evidence."
He's been standing up and saying that for 14 years. Either no one cares or this is a ridiculous vendetta.
Post by
164232
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
331902
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Squishalot
If you know someone is guilty, then you should be able to present the 'smoking gun' evidence and he won't be able to wriggle out of it. If all you've got is flimsy anecdotal evidence, then yes, I think you should be giving up.
Post by
Dundaz
I personally think he has had enough with constant fighting, testing and clearing his name. He recently posted article on his website about why he has chosen to give up fighting this acusations. There is a point where everyone will just give up if it doesn't go anywhere and this seems to be going round and round the circle. I honestly think it's now brought up every time before Tour De France just to advertise it and hype it up to get more viewers.
If you want to read what Lance has to say about this Google:
Lance Armstrongs Statement Of August 23 2012,
sorry I cannot post a link as I'm newly registered person.
Post by
ChairmanKaga
If you know someone is guilty, then you should be able to present the 'smoking gun' evidence and he won't be able to wriggle out of it.
QFT
So far all we've heard is "Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia". You'd think they'd be renting out the front page of the New York Times to parade out the evidence, given how much they've invested in it.
My guess is that the evidence is circumstantial and flimsy at best -- as in, it wouldn't stand up in a court of law. Which the USADA is no doubt thankful it doesn't have to prove their case in. Must be nice to be prosecutor, judge, jury, and executioner all in one.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.