Life-time bans add to Armstrong pressure
Related coverage
The pressure has mounted on America’s seven-time Tour de France champion Lance Armstrong as three former close associates were banned for life from sport by the US Anti-Doping Agency.
Former US Postal doctor Luis Garcia del Moral, Armstrong’s personal trainer and consultant to the team Michele Ferrari and coach “Pepe” Marti were handed life-time bans for their roles in what USADA termed “systematic doping within the team”.
“Permanently banning these individuals from sport is a powerful statement that protects the current and next generation of athletes from their influence, and preserves the integrity of future competition,” read a statement by USADA chief executive officer Travis Tygart on Tuesday.
This trio are part of the group of six, including Armstrong, who were accused by USADA in June of being part of a doping conspiracy during his years as Tour de France champion (1996-2001), the move coming four months after a two-year US government probe into Armstrong ended with no criminal charges.
Another doctor Pedro Celaya, who is presently team doctor to the RadioShack team, and sporting director Johan Bruyneel are also accused of being involved.
The RadioShack team presently lead the team category in the Tour de France, though Bruyneel opted not to come to the race after the accusations were made.
Armstrong has never tested positive, and says he has taken more than 500 drug tests in his career.
USADA claims to have nearly a dozen former Armstrong associates willing to testify against him and also to have blood samples from more recent events that indicate doping by Armstrong.
USADA has not made public the names of those witnesses, saying it wants to protect them from possible intimidation.
Armstrong has countered that witnesses, such as admitted dope cheat Floyd Landis, aren’t credible, while others may have grudges against him.
The New York Times reported last week that former Armstrong teammates George Hincapie, Levi Leipheimer, Christian Vande Velde and David Zabriskie are among those set to testify against Armstrong. All four are in this year’s Tour de France field.
Armstrong also argues that any such investigation should be pursued by the International Cycling Union rather than USADA.
© AFP 2013Sport, all day long. Does this sound too good to be true? We're searching for a Group Sales Manager to lead our team in Sydney. If you're a sales star who doesn't mind a hit, kick, throw, or cycle, we want to hear from you. Apply now.
The Crowd Says (1) | Page 1 of Comments
Have Your Say
- Explore:
- Cycling, Lance Armstrong
July 11th 2012 @ 6:13pm
sittingbison said | July 11th 2012 @ 6:13pm | Report comment
OK I’ll do it again, because yet another article is extremely lazy journalism.
Lance HAS tested positive, to corticosteroids in 1999 comeback Tour. He produced a RETROSPECTIVE Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE) for supposedly cream he applied to a saddle sore. Said TUE was signed by none other Dr. Luis Garcia del Moral, who today was found guilty not only of a doping conspiracy, but of helping USPS team members to carry out performance enhancing doping including blood transfusions as well as saline infusions to prevent the doping from being detected by blood value checks. Del Moral was also accused of administering EPO, testosterone, corticosteroids and human growth hormone. Del Moral was famously videotaped disposing of the USPS team’s medical waste at the 2000 Tour de France, which journalists searched, finding packages of Actovegin, an extract of calf’s blood.
Of course we won’t mention the 2001 positive for EPO cover up, or the 2005 retrospective EPO test determining he tested positive to six tests from 1999 with a further 2 highly suspicious. Or the 2009 and 2010 blood parameters that show his hematocrit levels increasing during the Tour.
The NYT was quoting a Dutch rag “Telegraaf” (for whom Bruyneel writes a column) that has since been found to have “leaked” drivel regarding the “witnesses” (said leak to have come from Lances camp, not USADA). The names of the witnesses are not known, and have not been released to Lance. It is speculation on his part they include Landis and Hamilton. It is speculation it includes the others named in the “leak”.
As to Lances claim in front of Judge Sparks that was tossed out in less than a day, three issues the $500ph brigade tries to introduce were (1) jurisdiction of USADA to conduct doping investigations, (2) USADA is a state actor aka government body therefore bound by rules of jurisprudence, AND (3) They say the entire case is built on Floyd going to UCI with his allegations against Lance, therefore UCI, not USADA, has to determine whether to act on those allegations.
1) Lance raced every year under a new USA Professional Cycling license, agreeing to know and abide by the applicable rules and regulations of USA Cycling and the UCI, including the anti-doping rules and procedures as set forth by USADA, the UCI or WADA and agreeing to submit to any drug test organized under the rules by the UCI, USA Cycling, USADA, or the official anti-doping authority of a foreign country where competing. He also submitted to the jurisdiction of the USADA when he gave samples.
2) It has been clearly determined by the Courts through numerous attempts by prior (ultimately convicted) dopers that USADA is NOT a state actor. Therefore criminal jurisprudence procedures do not apply, and Lance must abide by the USADA rules that ironically his personal manager, Bill Stapleton, helped draft when he was a board member of the U.S. Olympic Committee and served as the chairman of the athletes’ advisory council, and that every IOC athlete in USA has agreed to.
3) Floyd did NOT complain to UCI – in fact he accused them of being corrupt and protected Lance numerous times. Floyds email was sent to Steve Johnson, USA Cycling and not the UCI. The UCI only ended up with it after the leak.
Why oh why cant we have some proper investigative journalism instead of lazy hacks regurgitating rubbish and discredited twaddle? What about doing a story, instead of repeating PR releases?