Lance Armstrong: The needle and the damage done
Lance Armstrong's legacy may be to rip world cycling apart as he continues to ignore doping allegations made by former US Postal teammates and staff (Image: AFP)
Related coverage
There’s been a lot of commentary and opinionating lately about Lance Armstrong, the plucky pedal-pusher. He’s been called a liar, a cheat, a criminal, a shameless drug-guzzling charlatan, and in all senses a gold-plated knob-end.
But let’s step back from the anger and abuse for a second and really consider the facts.
Has Armstrong really done something so wrong? Yes he has.
But when you drill right down, are his “crimes” really so great?
Well, yes they are. But really, wouldn’t any one of us do the same if given the chance? No, we wouldn’t.
But some of us might, right?
Doesn’t that make us complicit in his misdeeds? No, it doesn’t – that’d be stupid. But the point is, let he who is without track marks cast the first stone. Which means, I guess, most of us. So we’re pretty entitled to slag him off as much as we like. But does that mean we should? Yes, it does.
However, it does have to be said that when it comes to doping in cycling, Armstrong is hardly Robinson Crusoe, unless Robinson Crusoe were a book about a man who washes up on a desert island inhabited by about fifty thousand other men exactly like him.
The fact is that cycling, by all appearances, is a dirty, dirty sport, and one can’t help feeling that if anyone is winning races without the fruits of cutting-edge medical science coursing through their veins, it can only be because either they are some sort of hideous genetic mutation, or because everyone else in the race took a wrong turn into the woods and was eaten by a mountain lion.
And given it’s so prevalent, given that everyone seems to be doing it, and has been for years, and given that every time the good guys come up with another test to detect doping, the bad guys come up with a new way to dope, why do they bother at all?
After all, if everyone is using drugs, the playing field is more or less level.
As level as it would be if nobody was using drugs.
The only un-level playing field is one on which some are on drugs and some aren’t, and seeing as it’d be a lot easier to get those few clean cyclists onto drugs than to get all the dirty ones off them, it seems a no-brainer: open up the sluices and syringes for all.
That way everyone is starting from the same point.
Of course not everybody will have access to the same level of doping expertise, but that will just become another colourful part of the sport, a point of competition, like car design and pit crews in motor-racing.
And the races won’t change. They’ll still be elite athletes pushing themselves to the limit in a fight for glory. There’ll still be the drama of the race, the courage of the riders, the tension of the finish.
They’ll just be that little bit better at it.
Of course you can say “it’s not natural”, but if you’ve looked at an Olympic cyclists thighs lately, you’ll know that “natural” got off the bus quite a few stops ago. Running 100 metres in under 10 seconds isn’t natural.
An AFL footballer’s skinfolds aren’t natural. Shane Watson’s hair isn’t natural. Let’s not get too hung up on what’s natural and what’s not in the world of sport, particularly because the whole idea of professional sport isn’t especially natural itself.
So, why don’t we do it? Open slather, do as you will, and let the best man/laboratory win?
It’s very simple: it doesn’t feel right.
The essence of sport is how it makes us feel. A love of sport is not a logical thing. It’s all about emotion, joy and pain, euphoria and devastation.
I hate night grand finals. There’s no real logical reason not to hold the grand final at night, but it doesn’t feel right. Somewhere inside me, I am certain that playing a grand final in the evening is wrong. It doesn’t feel right to have Meatloaf singing at one, either.
Much of what bugs us about the modernity of sport is that it doesn’t feel like the sport we remember. It’s not that we have proper arguments against it, it just doesn’t sit well with us.
But we can get used to a lot and still keep our love of the game. Night grand finals, dancers at cricket matches, video umpires, players switching clubs as casually as they switch toothbrushes. We fight our unease, and we accept the new reality, and we move on, defeating the feeling that something’s been lost.
But making drugs an acceptable part of competition?
Making the team pharmacist a pivotal player in the organisation’s success? Putting together a training regime of an hour on the weights, an hour in the pool, and then five minutes re-injecting your own blood into your veins?
No, I don’t think we can have that. It might level the playing field, but it would destroy any feeling we had that we were watching a sport.
And we’d still rather watch a sport where we know a lot of guys are cheating, than watch a sport where we don’t think it’s a sport anymore.
It just can’t be done.
Sorry Lance. I thought maybe we could mark you down as a pioneer of a brave new world, but on reflection, you’re going to have to stay a cheat.
Go away now.
Ben Pobjie is a writer and comedian writing weekly on The Age, New Matilda and The Roar, whose promising rugby career was tragically cut short the day he stopped playing rugby and had a pizza instead. The most he has ever cried was the day Balmain lost the 1989 grand final. Today he enjoys the frolics of Wallabies, Swans, baggy greens, and Storms. Ben is also the author of the books Surveying the Wreckage, Superchef, and his latest, The Book of Bloke, available from Momentum Books.
- Explore:
- Cycling, Lance Armstrong

October 18th 2012 @ 8:48am
Mals said | October 18th 2012 @ 8:48am | Report comment
LOL! You do make some good points in your ramblings
In those 10 years when Armstrong was at his peak how many of his competitiors were riding completely drug free? We’ll never know… Armstrong would have retained more dignity if he had come out years earlier and admitted to his drug taking. He is now hiding behind his Cancer Foundation but even that can’t protect him now.
October 18th 2012 @ 9:12am
Dane25 said | October 18th 2012 @ 9:12am | Report comment
Pure platinum!
I was nearly on the bandwagon for ‘open slather’ there for a moment, but then you swung me back around with the analogy of Shane Watson’s hair. Bravo.
October 18th 2012 @ 9:18am
The Electronic Swagman said | October 18th 2012 @ 9:18am | Report comment
I have, of late, been seriously bored by the endless anti-Deans bashing. You know where they all say Timani shouldn’t be allowed to even wear a jock strap let alone put it on in front of the other players. Then he wins the Man of the Match and they all go silent and castigate Deans for another perceived atrocity.
But Ben’s article puts it all in pertspective. Its not WHAT you say, its how good it feels saying it, the joy I being heard, the sense that your opinion about a 120 kilo Shrek has relevance.
I grew up in Surry Hills and could hear the sound of Souths scoring at the Sydney Cricket Ground. Ah! the feeling of the crowd.The feeling of sport. And never let the truth get in the way of a good story.
Lance Armstrong is a terrible story. Ben nails it. It feels all wrong because our heroes become less that human the more they become like Frankenstein. That means we become less than human as well.
October 18th 2012 @ 9:22am
Pot Stirrer said | October 18th 2012 @ 9:22am | Report comment
If an athlete is not drug free then the whole concept of what theyre achieving is pointless. Its about what a human can achieve and if they are using performance enhancers whats to say we all couldnt be champions if wed have gone down the same path in what ever sport u choose. If its not natural then it doesnt mean anything. I think this casts a shadow over all sports. Really if someone like
Armstrong and all his cohorts could cheat so severley and get rich becuase of it, it just makes you wonder when any athlete wins are they clean?
October 18th 2012 @ 12:43pm
kid said | October 18th 2012 @ 12:43pm | Report comment
“If an athlete is not drug free then the whole concept of what theyre achieving is pointless” Totally agree. Its a rule of the sport not to use any banned substance. If a F1 team uses the wrong fuel they are disqualified, if a race walker doesn’t lock their knees they are disqualified, if a sprinter breaks the start they are disqualified, If a grand tour cyclist doesn’t complete a stage they are disqualified.
October 18th 2012 @ 10:00am
jameswm said | October 18th 2012 @ 10:00am | Report comment
A couple of points.
Firstly, you cannot allow drugs. If you allow them at elite level, then they take them at lower levels, and then kids and their parents get on them. So you have 12yos getting blood transfusions and taking EPO before their nippers swim or state cross country.
Drugs are poor for your health (FloJo died at 38 remember), and the simple reason for not allowing them is “KIDS”. It’s not a case of how it makes you feel. It’s a question of what is safe.
Also in terms of being cynical – the testing has just about caught right up with the cheating now, so most sports are indeed clean. The inspiring moments of the track at the Olympics was watching people like Bolt, Rudisha, Mo Farah and Allyson Felix, and I’d wager that they’re all clean.
October 18th 2012 @ 12:04pm
nachos supreme said | October 18th 2012 @ 12:04pm | Report comment
On the topic of drugs in sport. Are injections like cortisone or painkillers not performance enhancing? I’ll wager they are. difficult to perform when you are unable to walk due to whatever injury you’ve just sustained.
it concerns me that somebody who is in enough pain not to play on without pharmaceutical treatment is “fixed up” and suddenly up and about risking further and possible long term, permanent damage
October 18th 2012 @ 1:23pm
Kev said | October 18th 2012 @ 1:23pm | Report comment
I think the difference is that cortisone and painkillers allow athletes to perform at the level that they would have had they not been injured but it doesn’t allow them to take short cuts with their fitness like EPO or steroids do.
October 18th 2012 @ 1:42pm
nachos supreme said | October 18th 2012 @ 1:42pm | Report comment
That’s a fair call Kev. For the sake of discussion I’d put it to you that EPO and Steroids are not so much giving the elite athlete the ability to take short cuts but more of an enabler to push their bodies past what is possible for a non doper…
October 18th 2012 @ 6:55pm
Damien said | October 18th 2012 @ 6:55pm | Report comment
Although I agree with your intention your logic seems flawed.
If the reason we don’t allow drugs at elite level to save the kids from using them as well because they are meant to be bad for your health then why are adults allowed to drink alcohol ?
Alcohol related injuries and deaths are light years ahead of anything that PED’s have accomplished.
Also your inference that Flo Jo dies from using PED’s are wrong. Flo Jo’s death was caused by suffocation during a severe epileptic seizure. Flo Jo had a congenital brain abnormality that made her subject to seizures.
Ironically Flo Jo supporters claimed that this cleared her from PED rumors because the Coroner’s Office noted that she did not die of drugs or banned substances..
October 19th 2012 @ 3:13am
amazonfan said | October 19th 2012 @ 3:13am | Report comment
It’s not just about safety, doping also violates the integrity of the sport. Even if doping was 100% safe, I would be just as disgusted by all the cheating as I am now.
In fact, personally, my first thoughts go out, not to the children, but to the clean athletes who were cheated of their dreams.
October 19th 2012 @ 6:45am
Damien said | October 19th 2012 @ 6:45am | Report comment
The ‘integrity of the sport’ is probably the best supporting argument, which I tend to agree with.
While I do not support PED’s what so ever in sport right now (coz its in the rules) I feel that there needs to be a more robust debate on why they are against the rules..
October 21st 2012 @ 10:29pm
nick said | October 21st 2012 @ 10:29pm | Report comment
Its about safety lower down the food chain actually.
One of his former teammates was on the radio here in NZ last week saying that the biggest issue was that other riders, younger ones, trying to keep up with the top guys like Lance who were doping with a team of high priced doctors watching over them were dying as a result of botched injections and the like.
He rattled off several riders, some even recently who had died because they didn’t have the wherewithal to do it themselves safely. I don’t know the sport well so i didn’t recognize nor remember their names but there were a number of them. They couldn’t afford the medical care and supervision that Lance and his cohorts could. Some were college guys and some were full blow pros.
Thats terrifying really. People dying just trying to give them selves a chance to compete! Not to win really but just stay in touch with the pack.
October 24th 2012 @ 2:49am
amazonfan said | October 24th 2012 @ 2:49am | Report comment
Safety is certainly an issue, and I agree that it’s terrible that people were putting their lives at risk in order to compete. However the reason I personally hate doping (and I imagine a lot of other people as well) has nothing to do with safety.
There is no doubt that it can be difficult to determine which substances should be allowed, and there is also no doubt that athletes can gain advantages through non-doping means such as funding. However IMO the discussion should not revolve around safety. If we condemn the use of drugs, we should do so regardless of whether they are safe or not. Otherwise we might as well fund chemists.
As such if Armstrong is to be condemned (and I believe he absolutely should be) then IMO it should mainly be because he stole his victories, not simply because he put peoples lives at risk. Although that is disgusting.
October 19th 2012 @ 8:07am
dasilva said | October 19th 2012 @ 8:07am | Report comment
If a miracle drug that exist that improves fitness and has zero side effects.
You know whati s going to happen. That drug will probably be non-prescription and people would probably take that drug (which would be now caleld a supplement because that would be more socially acceptable marketing) and there wouldn’t be much of a stigma behind that drug.
if that drug was so successful and affordable you probable start seeing foods being fortify with food. MAybe even government enforced foritfication
Point is drugs thatadvance the human race really shouldn’t be shunned upon. If organisation are going to banned something there has to be more concrete reason than just performance enhancing.
If something is performance enhancing and has no draw backs you have to wonder why the population aren’t taking it or doing it more often
October 18th 2012 @ 10:51am
Kate Smart said | October 18th 2012 @ 10:51am | Report comment
Ben, this is such a great article and is the perfect antidote to Jason Mazanov’s piece in The Conversation today. We cannot allow drug cheats for so many reasons and you know what, our collective anger, anguish and even disgust in this sordid affair is what reminds of why we need to oppose drug cheats.
October 18th 2012 @ 11:15am
matt said | October 18th 2012 @ 11:15am | Report comment
So given all the others were cheating does that mean Lance stays S the best ever? Or did he indeed get access to a doping regime that was far superior to his opponents?
one thing, he lied under oath in order to cheat an insurance company of millions of dollars (4corners), that is a significant line to cross and worthy of jail. Lock him up!
October 18th 2012 @ 2:33pm
bugwan said | October 18th 2012 @ 2:33pm | Report comment
Ben, the only issue I raise with your piece is the claim that there is somehow a level playing field if everyone is on drugs. It’s a furphy.
Firstly, not everyone is on drugs (Cadel Evans has been vindicated by his rivals), so the level playing field doesn’t actually exist.
Secondly, not all drugs are created equal. Their availability, cost, administration to athletes, the complexity of the doping system involved and the quality of medical staff at teams is relative to the budget of that team. Big budgets buy almost undetectable drugs and cutting edge performance enhancements with highly qualified medical personnel. Crappy budgets buy crappy, higher risk enhancers and maybe a vet…
October 18th 2012 @ 4:25pm
AB said | October 18th 2012 @ 4:25pm | Report comment
He did man up and relinquish his position at Livestrong. That decision would of taken a lot of ball.
October 18th 2012 @ 10:57pm
jc said | October 18th 2012 @ 10:57pm | Report comment
Realistically he didn’t have any choice. If he had stayed as chairman, then Nike and others would have pulled their sponsorship of Livestrong and that would have taken away his only saving grace. It is no coincidence that Nike put out its announcement only a couple of minutes after he announced his resignation as chairman – this was a precondition to continuing to support Livestrong.
October 19th 2012 @ 9:23am
lemo said | October 19th 2012 @ 9:23am | Report comment
good one AB – a real ball tearer
October 21st 2012 @ 10:30pm
nick said | October 21st 2012 @ 10:30pm | Report comment
hahahaha. Well done
October 18th 2012 @ 4:40pm
Skippy said | October 18th 2012 @ 4:40pm | Report comment
There never was a” level playing field ” , since we are all individuals with different build and mindset . Some sports require ALL equipment to be exactly the same Specs , but even then , if the competitor has a chance , they seek to improve the performance with various tweaks . Blogsters start with a clean sheet but spin out different articles , just as F1 teams get results from the same specs , so too would the Road Racer that ALL rode the “le Tour ” on a Factory spec , selected by ballot from the 200+ built for the event !
At this time the Road Racers are apparently trying to clean up their Sport . There are reports the Racers themselves are putting togethera submission to the ” UCI ” of NEW Rules & Regs that they will require to be adopted so as to move on from this Generation of ” Lost Dreams & Opportunities ! To hear of the ” Capo of “UCI” receiving US$1/2M direct , says there are serious problems in UCI , apart from the fact that several ” Sanctions ” in the past 15years were not enforced !
Even IF Racers were escorted 24 hrs a day , there will still be ways of circumventing the surveillance !
ONLY by starting over at DAY 1 with Draconian Penalties FOR ALL the Team , could we expect the level of Doping to decline BUT it will never disappear !