Armstrong revered at charity event
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
Lance Armstrong admitted he had endured a “difficult” two weeks, but shook off the cloud of doping on Friday as he urged supporters of his Livestrong charity to continue the fight against cancer.
“It’s been an interesting couple of weeks. It’s been a difficult couple of weeks for me and my family, my friends and this foundation,” Armstrong said as he welcomed some 1500 people to the gala celebration of Livestrong’s 15th anniversary.
Armstrong founded Livestrong after his own battle with testicular cancer, but this week stepped down as its chairman after the US Anti-Doping Agency released a devastating report that placed the Texan at the heart of what it said was the biggest doping program in sports history.
Corporate sponsors including sportswear giant Nike have cut ties with Armstrong, but have said they will continue to support Livestrong.
“The mission absolutely must go on,” Armstrong said.
Even so, it remains to be seen if the foundation will weather the scandal, with some saying Armstrong – who remains on the board – should break with the organisation completely.
Access was tightly controlled for the event, but Livestrong posted a video of Armstrong addressing the crowd as the organisation announced the event raised $US2.5 million ($A2.42 million).
“We will not be deterred… The mission absolutely must go on.
“I just have one last request,” Armstrong concluded, “let’s have a helluva good time tonight.”
Sean Penn, among the actors lending a bit of Hollywood glamour to the occasion, said he came to support both embattled Armstrong and the foundation.
“I’m here for both,” the Oscar-winning actor said as he headed into the Austin Convention Center in Texas via the “Yellow Carpet” – a nod to the yellow rubber Livestrong bracelets worn to promote cancer awareness.
“Lance has developed an organisation that has become an inspiration to me and to others – and I think it will remain.”
Asked if Armstrong is still an inspiration, Penn said: “I think to anyone who looks at this with a clear eye will see it as hypocritical to think otherwise.”
It’s a different take on Armstrong now that USADA’s bombshell report has made him an outcast in cycling.
In support of the life ban it meted out to Armstrong in August, USADA published a damning dossier in which more than two dozen witnesses described his role in a doping scheme that helped him win seven Tour de France titles.
The International Cycling Union (UCI) said on Friday that it would respond to USADA’s report on Monday in Geneva.
The body has to decide whether to endorse or reject USADA’s ban and the removal of his Tour titles.
One longtime cycling sponsor decided not to wait for the UCI.
Rabobank, which has sponsored a professional cycling team for the last 17 years, claimed the sport had been irrevocably damaged by a succession of doping cases, and the report on Armstrong was the last straw.
Meanwhile, a report in Italy’s Gazzetta dello Sport newspaper on Thursday claimed that a host of top riders and even whole teams were linked to the sports doctor who oversaw Armstrong’s doping programme, stoking fears of fresh controversy.
Livestrong, however, said donations continued flow in.
© AFP 2013The Crowd Says (4) | Page 1 of Comments
Have Your Say
- Explore:
- Cycling, Lance Armstrong
October 21st 2012 @ 5:37pm
nick said | October 21st 2012 @ 5:37pm | Report comment
Wow, whats it gonna take for these people to see through this guy.
Charity based upon a delusion is still just that, a fabrication. The money is real but surely they’re able to say that they’ll give for the cancer patients not because of this charlatan.
October 22nd 2012 @ 2:46pm
aussie sports lover said | October 22nd 2012 @ 2:46pm | Report comment
charity to cancer patient is still a tangible gift that makes a difference regardless of how it was started. I suspect most of the people supporting him are aware that LA was most likely a doper and but let’s face it, without LA, there would have been no foundation and it would have been able to raise so much money. I suspect the majority of his critics have never raised anywhere near LA for any charity or contributed significant time/money/effort to help another person. Criticise his doping is fair enough, but people targetting the foundation he helped set up should take a good look at themselves and ask what have they done for cancer sufferers
October 23rd 2012 @ 6:16am
Bob Anderson said | October 23rd 2012 @ 6:16am | Report comment
People still defending Armstrong because of his “charity work” would do well to consider how much positive publicity Amstrong garnered for himself over the years by this very “charity work.” If he had really wanted to help cancer charities he could have been more low key about it, rather than constantly grandstanding and using it to gain even more publicity and positive media coverage for himself. How many more millions in endorsements did he make because of the good publicity created by this “charity work”? It was self-serving just like everything else he’s ever done.
October 23rd 2012 @ 7:26am
aussie sports lover said | October 23rd 2012 @ 7:26am | Report comment
Sure, it was self-serving but the foundation still brought in millions of dollars (reportedly half a billion) for cancer sufferers. What he did was still charity – he actively sought out sponsors for the foundation ,he visited cancer sufferers etc. He did resign from the Foundation as its leader once he realises his position there will harm its prospects in the long term. It’s trendy at the moment to dismiss his “charity work” but his actions in the past did benefit many cancer sufferers. So yes people like me defend his “charity work” because let’s be frank, it is his point of redemption as his career and reputation are destroyed. Will you be happier if the Foundation collapses as well? Can you raise half a billion dollars? I work in healthcare and I can tell you that money for cancer sufferers (well patients in general) are hard to come by. I think people should put their money where their mouth is, donate their time or money rather than re-defining what “charity work” is.