Lance Armstrong | News | Sports

Lance Armstrong No Longer Fighting Doping Charges

Lance_armstrong

Though he still calls the US Anti-Doping Agency's investigation into his career an "unconstitutional witch hunt," cyclist Lance Armstrong said he will no longer challenge charges that he took performance-enhancing drugs to become the world's most famous biker.

From the New York Times:

[Armstrong] continued to deny ever doping, calling the antidoping agency’s case against him “an unconstitutional witch hunt” and saying the process it followed to deal with his matter was “one-sided and unfair.”

“There comes a point in every man’s life when he has to say, ‘Enough is enough,’ ” Armstrong said in a statement. “For me, that time is now.”

Armstrong, who turns 41 next month, said he would not contest the charges because it had taken too much of a toll on his family and his work for his cancer foundation, saying he was “finished with this nonsense.”

Armstrong’s decision, according to the World Anti-Doping Code, means he will be stripped of his seven Tour titles, the bronze medal he won at the 2000 Olympics and all other titles, awards and money he won from August 1998 forward.

Nor can he compete professionally, coach new bikers or have anything to do with Olympics, other than to attend as a spectator.

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. If you think Armstrong wasn't doping you are beyond naive or don't know enough about this case. (this article isn't a bad place to start: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/david-walsh-on-armstrong-and-usadas-charges) He stopped fighting the charges because they had announced they had blood samples from 2009/10 that showed he was doping, and had ten of his former teammates that were prepared to testify against him.
    Doping was rife in cycling - he wasn't alone - but he is guilty of the charges and everyone in cycling knows it. That doesn't negate all the other good things he may be, or may have achieved in his life, but when it comes to this, he is guilty as charged.

    Posted by: aron | Aug 24, 2012 2:00:27 PM


  2. You have been diagnosed with cancer. Undergone surgery, radiation and chemotherapy and lost half your body weight. Then you are fired from your job while still in the hospital. You are angry and want to make a comeback in the sport that just pissed all over you. Steroids will help rebuild you body mass in half the time. Nobody is watching. What would you do?

    Posted by: zekeaz | Aug 24, 2012 2:11:27 PM


  3. Matt- yes, the USADA is MOSTLY (though not entirely) funded by the Federal government. But funding is not the determining criterion.

    Because the USADA makes its decisions and policies independently of the government that gives it funding, it is not a "government" organization when considering the application of the Bill of Rights to its operations.

    It's really the same situation as the cancer research department at your local university that receives grants from the Dept. of Health and Human Services, or the museum that gets funding from the National Endowment for the Humanities or, for that matter, like Ethiopia, when the State Dept. gives them millions in famine relief aid. The mere fact that the US gave money doesn't make the recipient a branch of government subject to constitutional restrictions.

    Posted by: Buster | Aug 24, 2012 2:17:04 PM


  4. The whole thing is ridiculous. If you award a medal, and then later we learn the competitor doped, that is AS MUCH the fault of the contest itself as the competitor. ALL medals should be revoked, not just his.

    Even more ridiculous is the idea that we can rewrite history. Lance won those races. Perhaps he was helped by drugs. But think if it another way. WHOEVER won those races had an unfair genetic advantage over most of the rest of the world. I don't find it interesting that the advantage is genetic vs drugged.

    If you can play, you can play.

    How about

    If you win, you win.

    Posted by: Randy | Aug 24, 2012 4:37:34 PM


  5. If there is one thing that I've learned while following Olympic-level and other international-level sports over the years, it's that whenever an American athlete runs the table, one should be concerned. Remember Marion Jones' ill-fated Olympic "drive for five" in 2000? She was the first American Olympic athlete in some years to publicly mount a campaign as ambitious as that. Now it seems that every two years, an American comes along with hopes of running the table in his or her sport. I'm not saying that every American who has a publicized campaign to win as many as 8 Olympic gold medals in one sitting (or win consecutive Tours de France) is automatically a drug whore, but you can't rule it out either. After the fall of Marion and Lance, you can't help but wonder.

    Posted by: Alex Sarmiento | Aug 24, 2012 7:30:11 PM


  6. I'm still wondering when Michael Phelps will be exposed, if he has any thing to hide that is.

    Posted by: Gabe R L | Aug 25, 2012 2:29:03 PM


  7. « 1 2

Post a comment







Trending


« «Why Sports Matter To LGBT Rights Movements« «