GGDub
I guess I'm the first to see this, not even on Velonews yet.
http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/cycling/news/story?id=3029089
http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/cycling/news/story?id=3029089
Landis Decision
Pages :
[1]
2
The BikeForums Team
-adv-
This is an archived thread, you can find the full version of this thread, with images, links and more content here.
Ready to buy? Check out these two online bike stores:
- http://www.nashbar.com (you can find the latest bike nashbar coupons in this thread)
- http://www.performancebike.com (you can find the latest performance bike coupons in this thread)
Cya on the forums,
- The BikeForums Team
- http://www.bikeforums.net
Ready to buy? Check out these two online bike stores:
- http://www.nashbar.com (you can find the latest bike nashbar coupons in this thread)
- http://www.performancebike.com (you can find the latest performance bike coupons in this thread)
Cya on the forums,
- The BikeForums Team
- http://www.bikeforums.net
HWS
Just saw that on MSNBC...:eek:
roadCruiser76
I guess I'm the first to see this, not even on Velonews yet.
http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/cycling/news/story?id=3029089
I can't say it surprises me, although I think Landis made a good case. It would have created too much controversy and difficulty for the sport if they would have acquitted him. I'm sure that that played a part in the decision.
http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/cycling/news/story?id=3029089
I can't say it surprises me, although I think Landis made a good case. It would have created too much controversy and difficulty for the sport if they would have acquitted him. I'm sure that that played a part in the decision.
Helmet Head
cn.com has it now:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/sep07/sep21news
By the way, there is a great article about Tyler and his "Believers" in the Nov issue of Bicycling. Highly recommended.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/sep07/sep21news
By the way, there is a great article about Tyler and his "Believers" in the Nov issue of Bicycling. Highly recommended.
worker4youth
cn.com has it now:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/sep07/sep21news
By the way, there is a great article about Tyler and his "Believers" in the Nov issue of Bicycling. Highly recommended.
Why did I buy his book?
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/sep07/sep21news
By the way, there is a great article about Tyler and his "Believers" in the Nov issue of Bicycling. Highly recommended.
Why did I buy his book?
Gee3
Somehow, I think we all knew what the outcome was going to be, whether he was actually guilty or not.
I wonder if he'll appeal the decision or if he can afford to appeal.
Ultimately, no matter what our judgements may be only Landis knows for sure whether he did or didn't cheat.
But I am just having mixed feelings right now. I feel my faith in the sport, or more appropriately the governing bodies, is lost and that this witch hunt is just the beginning of a lot more turmoil that has already been stirred and to come in the sport.
I feel bad for Landis and American cycling.
I'm hoping teams like Team Slipstream can popularize Amercian cycling like Disco/Postal did but without the air of doubt.
I'm sure the French are toasting in the streets about now. How sad that would be to cheer one's downfall.
I just can't see that Oscar can be proud of this TdF "win".
I wonder if he'll appeal the decision or if he can afford to appeal.
Ultimately, no matter what our judgements may be only Landis knows for sure whether he did or didn't cheat.
But I am just having mixed feelings right now. I feel my faith in the sport, or more appropriately the governing bodies, is lost and that this witch hunt is just the beginning of a lot more turmoil that has already been stirred and to come in the sport.
I feel bad for Landis and American cycling.
I'm hoping teams like Team Slipstream can popularize Amercian cycling like Disco/Postal did but without the air of doubt.
I'm sure the French are toasting in the streets about now. How sad that would be to cheer one's downfall.
I just can't see that Oscar can be proud of this TdF "win".
skanking biker
This is a really good article. http://www.kare11.com/sports/sports_article.aspx?storyid=265236
Anyone know where one can obtain a copy of the decision?
And how long before the server crashes?
Anyone know where one can obtain a copy of the decision?
And how long before the server crashes?
skanking biker
The majority repeatedly wrote that any mistakes made at the lab were not enough to dismiss the positive test, but also sent a warning.
"If such practises continue, it may well be that in the future, an error like this could result in the dismissal" of a positive finding by the lab.
What, so we'll look the other way and excuse your rampant incompetency this time because we don't like Landis, but next time we'll hold you accountable?
"If such practises continue, it may well be that in the future, an error like this could result in the dismissal" of a positive finding by the lab.
What, so we'll look the other way and excuse your rampant incompetency this time because we don't like Landis, but next time we'll hold you accountable?
kpumpy
I'd have been shocked if he was acquitted. I think the only one who will ever know whether he's truly guilty or not is Landis himself. Sad day for cycling period.
wearyourtruth
Somehow, I think we all knew what the outcome was going to be, whether he was actually guilty or not.
I wonder if he'll appeal the decision or if he can afford to appeal.
Ultimately, no matter what our judgements may be only Landis knows for sure whether he did or didn't cheat.
But I am just having mixed feelings right now. I feel my faith in the sport, or more appropriately the governing bodies, is lost and that this witch hunt is just the beginning of a lot more turmoil that has already been stirred and to come in the sport.
I feel bad for Landis and American cycling.
I'm hoping teams like Team Slipstream can popularize Amercian cycling like Disco/Postal did but without the air of doubt.
I'm sure the French are toating in the streets about now. How sad that would be to cheer one's downfall.
+1 it's a sad time in the sport, even if it was brought upon itself
I wonder if he'll appeal the decision or if he can afford to appeal.
Ultimately, no matter what our judgements may be only Landis knows for sure whether he did or didn't cheat.
But I am just having mixed feelings right now. I feel my faith in the sport, or more appropriately the governing bodies, is lost and that this witch hunt is just the beginning of a lot more turmoil that has already been stirred and to come in the sport.
I feel bad for Landis and American cycling.
I'm hoping teams like Team Slipstream can popularize Amercian cycling like Disco/Postal did but without the air of doubt.
I'm sure the French are toating in the streets about now. How sad that would be to cheer one's downfall.
+1 it's a sad time in the sport, even if it was brought upon itself
timmhaan
Why did I buy his book?
because you're a sucker? :)
because you're a sucker? :)
alanbikehouston
Landis has a month to decide whether or not to appeal the "guilty" finding. But, odds are, his career is over. He will go into history as the only winner of the Tour de France to ever lose the yellow jersey based on an official finding that he cheated to win.
ryanhulce
"If such practises continue, it may well be that in the future, an error like this could result in the dismissal" of a positive finding by the lab."
Well that is a good basis for a lawsuit or some sort of legal action for Landis to take I think.
Well that is a good basis for a lawsuit or some sort of legal action for Landis to take I think.
skanking biker
Landis has a month to decide whether or not to appeal the "guilty" finding. But, odds are, his career is over. He will go into history as the only winner of the Tour de France to ever lose the yellow jersey based on an official finding that he cheated to win.
even if he does ultimately clear himself, he will be too old to compete by then
even if he does ultimately clear himself, he will be too old to compete by then
skanking biker
Well that is a good basis for a lawsuit or some sort of legal action for Landis to take I think.
Who is he going to sue and in what jurisdiction?
Are you saying that some court would allow Landis to sue a lab whose results were upheld in another legal proceeding?
Who is he going to sue and in what jurisdiction?
Are you saying that some court would allow Landis to sue a lab whose results were upheld in another legal proceeding?
ryanhulce
Who is he going to sue and in what jurisdiction?
Are you saying that some court would allow Landis to sue a lab whose results were upheld in another legal proceeding?
My guess and I'm no legal expert is that he may try to have his case heard in the Supreme Court. They are the only ones who could overturn the UCI's decision that I am aware of.
Are you saying that some court would allow Landis to sue a lab whose results were upheld in another legal proceeding?
My guess and I'm no legal expert is that he may try to have his case heard in the Supreme Court. They are the only ones who could overturn the UCI's decision that I am aware of.
bac
This year's Tour could not have helped Folyd's cause.
... Brad
... Brad
skanking biker
My guess and I'm no legal expert is that he may try to have his case heard in the Supreme Court. They are the only ones who could overturn the UCI's decision that I am aware of.
The hearing is not subject to US law, US courts have no jurisdiction over the matter.
The hearing is not subject to US law, US courts have no jurisdiction over the matter.
GGDub
My guess and I'm no legal expert is that he may try to have his case heard in the Supreme Court. They are the only ones who could overturn the UCI's decision that I am aware of.
I doubt the U.S. supreme court has any jurisdiction over the UCI, a french-based organization. They could rule whether he was unfairly dismissed and try to make the UCI pay compensation (if they have U.S. assets) but they could not force the UCI to allow him to ride. Its kinda like the U.S. supreme court making rulings regarding French Labour laws, they can do it all they want, but it won't make a lick of difference in France.
I doubt the U.S. supreme court has any jurisdiction over the UCI, a french-based organization. They could rule whether he was unfairly dismissed and try to make the UCI pay compensation (if they have U.S. assets) but they could not force the UCI to allow him to ride. Its kinda like the U.S. supreme court making rulings regarding French Labour laws, they can do it all they want, but it won't make a lick of difference in France.
Rincewind8
I doubt the U.S. supreme court has any jurisdiction over the UCI, a french-based organization. They could rule whether he was unfairly dismissed and try to make the UCI pay compensation (if they have U.S. assets) but they could not force the UCI to allow him to ride. Its kinda like the U.S. supreme court making rulings regarding French Labour laws, they can do it all they want, but it won't make a lick of difference in France.
I think you'd have to substitute France and french with Switzerland and swiss:
The International Cycling Union (UCI), a non-profit-making organization founded on 14 April 1900, is the association of the National Cycling Federations. Its headquarters are in Aigle, Switzerland.
I think you'd have to substitute France and french with Switzerland and swiss:
The International Cycling Union (UCI), a non-profit-making organization founded on 14 April 1900, is the association of the National Cycling Federations. Its headquarters are in Aigle, Switzerland.
USAZorro
The judges were about as biased, and predictable as your standard vote in Congress. In reality, the only things the hearing proved were that the lab made numerous mistakes, and that two of the "judges" couldn't care less about scientific facts. It's a sad day when politics impedes justice. :(
GGDub
I think you'd have to substitute France and french with Switzerland and swiss:
whoops, you are right. Incidently, why are almost all international sporting federations based in Switzerland?
whoops, you are right. Incidently, why are almost all international sporting federations based in Switzerland?
skanking biker
I doubt the U.S. supreme court has any jurisdiction over the UCI, a french-based organization. They could rule whether he was unfairly dismissed and try to make the UCI pay compensation (if they have U.S. assets) but they could not force the UCI to allow him to ride. Its kinda like the U.S. supreme court making rulings regarding French Labour laws, they can do it all they want, but it won't make a lick of difference in France.
US courts possess neither subject matter jurisdiction over this contraversy nor personal jurisdiction over any of the parties besides Landis.
US courts possess neither subject matter jurisdiction over this contraversy nor personal jurisdiction over any of the parties besides Landis.
Trevor98
Who is he going to sue and in what jurisdiction?
Are you saying that some court would allow Landis to sue a lab whose results were upheld in another legal proceeding?
As it has been thrown in my face so often- this USADA decision has nothing to do with laws. These are merely administrative hearings for a sport.
And yes, Landis can bring lawsuits against everyone involved. The courts can also throw them all out. As he is now Californian all bets are off on what CA courts will do.
The hearing is not subject to US law, US courts have no jurisdiction over the matter.
The hearing could very well be subject to US law. The hearing defenitely effects his employment and the US has labor laws (California has more stringent labor laws).
I doubt the U.S. supreme court has any jurisdiction over the UCI, a french-based organization. They could rule whether he was unfairly dismissed and try to make the UCI pay compensation (if they have U.S. assets) but they could not force the UCI to allow him to ride. Its kinda like the U.S. supreme court making rulings regarding French Labour laws, they can do it all they want, but it won't make a lick of difference in France.
The UCI didn't make the decision (nor is it French) USADA did. But that is moot. This will not be handled in the US criminal courts but rather in civil courts- a vastly different thing. The UCI does not control which riders are allowed to ride- national organizing bodies such as the USAC do that and they are very much subject to local rulings. You are obviously ignorant of the Hondo case in which Swiss courts overruled a ban and allowed him to race in spite of the ruling by the Swiss Cycling Federation. I don't know if this will happen but the mere fact that it occurred betrays that you're wrong.
As for your specific example of the US making rulings on French Labor laws, the US can enforce it's court rulings through various trade tools if enforcement is important enough (not this case). About 15 years ago the US had a problem with French laws regarding subsidies and threatened an embargo on all French goods to protect US national interests.
US courts possess neither subject matter jurisdiction over this contraversy nor personal jurisdiction over any of the parties besides Landis.
It's often amazing what courts determine as their jurisdiction. He is a employee that resides in California and his employment opportunities have been altered by an administrative decision. Some judge will determine that he has jurisdiction. On a broader scale, US law allows US courts to decide in absentia on foreign entities under certain circumstances. Needless to say this could get interesting.
Are you saying that some court would allow Landis to sue a lab whose results were upheld in another legal proceeding?
As it has been thrown in my face so often- this USADA decision has nothing to do with laws. These are merely administrative hearings for a sport.
And yes, Landis can bring lawsuits against everyone involved. The courts can also throw them all out. As he is now Californian all bets are off on what CA courts will do.
The hearing is not subject to US law, US courts have no jurisdiction over the matter.
The hearing could very well be subject to US law. The hearing defenitely effects his employment and the US has labor laws (California has more stringent labor laws).
I doubt the U.S. supreme court has any jurisdiction over the UCI, a french-based organization. They could rule whether he was unfairly dismissed and try to make the UCI pay compensation (if they have U.S. assets) but they could not force the UCI to allow him to ride. Its kinda like the U.S. supreme court making rulings regarding French Labour laws, they can do it all they want, but it won't make a lick of difference in France.
The UCI didn't make the decision (nor is it French) USADA did. But that is moot. This will not be handled in the US criminal courts but rather in civil courts- a vastly different thing. The UCI does not control which riders are allowed to ride- national organizing bodies such as the USAC do that and they are very much subject to local rulings. You are obviously ignorant of the Hondo case in which Swiss courts overruled a ban and allowed him to race in spite of the ruling by the Swiss Cycling Federation. I don't know if this will happen but the mere fact that it occurred betrays that you're wrong.
As for your specific example of the US making rulings on French Labor laws, the US can enforce it's court rulings through various trade tools if enforcement is important enough (not this case). About 15 years ago the US had a problem with French laws regarding subsidies and threatened an embargo on all French goods to protect US national interests.
US courts possess neither subject matter jurisdiction over this contraversy nor personal jurisdiction over any of the parties besides Landis.
It's often amazing what courts determine as their jurisdiction. He is a employee that resides in California and his employment opportunities have been altered by an administrative decision. Some judge will determine that he has jurisdiction. On a broader scale, US law allows US courts to decide in absentia on foreign entities under certain circumstances. Needless to say this could get interesting.
Trevor98
whoops, you are right. Incidently, why are almost all international sporting federations based in Switzerland?The IOC is there due to Switzerland's longstanding neutrality. That neutrality is based on the lack of invasion for the past couple of hundred years (attacking into the mountains is hard). So ultimately, these international sporting federations are based in Switzerland because it's in the mountains.
skanking biker
It's often amazing what courts determine as their jurisdiction. He is a employee that resides in California and his employment opportunities have been altered by an administrative decision.
Sorry but you guys are efiing nuts and know didly-squat about our legal system.
http://www.usatf.org/about/legal/antidoping/usadaprotocol.asp
The key word is "administrative agency." The agency is applying international law, the rules of the WADA, and contractual provisions to which all athletes agree in order to compete.
THis is no different than if you are in a contract dispute and your contract says you have to arbitrate with the AAA under the AAA rules and procedures.
Landis has no independent cause of action against anyone--he is contractually bound to fight this through the USADA. No court is going to allow Landis to sue the USADA because he doesn't like their decision.
He gets his appeal and then it is finished.
Sorry but you guys are efiing nuts and know didly-squat about our legal system.
http://www.usatf.org/about/legal/antidoping/usadaprotocol.asp
The key word is "administrative agency." The agency is applying international law, the rules of the WADA, and contractual provisions to which all athletes agree in order to compete.
THis is no different than if you are in a contract dispute and your contract says you have to arbitrate with the AAA under the AAA rules and procedures.
Landis has no independent cause of action against anyone--he is contractually bound to fight this through the USADA. No court is going to allow Landis to sue the USADA because he doesn't like their decision.
He gets his appeal and then it is finished.
skanking biker
As it has been thrown in my face so often- this USADA decision has nothing to do with laws. These are merely administrative hearings for a sport.
An administrative agency by definition is an arm of the government charged with implementing certain laws. The USADA has to apply WADA rules. Cycling is an international sport governed by rules agreed upon by the participants. Just where do you think the USADA gets its authority?
An administrative agency by definition is an arm of the government charged with implementing certain laws. The USADA has to apply WADA rules. Cycling is an international sport governed by rules agreed upon by the participants. Just where do you think the USADA gets its authority?
Keith99
Landis has a month to decide whether or not to appeal the "guilty" finding. But, odds are, his career is over. He will go into history as the only winner of the Tour de France to ever lose the yellow jersey based on an official finding that he cheated to win.
Let's see if you can defend your position. What about the 1904 TDF?
Let's see if you can defend your position. What about the 1904 TDF?
jaxgtr
Sad day, never seen a more screwed situation, but I expected it. They really need to fix the inconsistant WADA labs and how results attained. If nothing else, maybe all the sunshine will force their hand. Do you think they would have brought forward a updated WADA code if not for Landis asking for a public tribunal?
Kerlenbach
I've read the entire decision, and here are a couple of observations that seem to be missing from some other anaylses I've read.
First, the deicsion is based almost solely on the science of the tests. The chain of custody argument, the Greg Lemond excitement, the conspiracy claims, all had no impact. The panel went into tremedous detail discussing the T/E ratio analyisis, and found that the lab's failure to comply with the rules made the results unreliable. They also analysed the endogenous/exogenous testosterone tests and found several problems, but found that the problems did not make the results unreliable - in other words, "harmless error." The report is a very good lesson in drug testing techniques, and the problems in testing for testosterone doping.
The report makes it clear that all the testing errors would make the results insufficient to convict in a criminal case. So, did he dope? The answer is probably yes, but we won't know for sure.
First, the deicsion is based almost solely on the science of the tests. The chain of custody argument, the Greg Lemond excitement, the conspiracy claims, all had no impact. The panel went into tremedous detail discussing the T/E ratio analyisis, and found that the lab's failure to comply with the rules made the results unreliable. They also analysed the endogenous/exogenous testosterone tests and found several problems, but found that the problems did not make the results unreliable - in other words, "harmless error." The report is a very good lesson in drug testing techniques, and the problems in testing for testosterone doping.
The report makes it clear that all the testing errors would make the results insufficient to convict in a criminal case. So, did he dope? The answer is probably yes, but we won't know for sure.
erader
I can't say it surprises me, although I think Landis made a good case. It would have created too much controversy and difficulty for the sport if they would have acquitted him. I'm sure that that played a part in the decision.
an innocent guy wouldn't play hide the weenie with lemond or change his story so many times :eek:.
ed rader
an innocent guy wouldn't play hide the weenie with lemond or change his story so many times :eek:.
ed rader
erader
I doubt the U.S. supreme court has any jurisdiction over the UCI, a french-based organization. They could rule whether he was unfairly dismissed and try to make the UCI pay compensation (if they have U.S. assets) but they could not force the UCI to allow him to ride. Its kinda like the U.S. supreme court making rulings regarding French Labour laws, they can do it all they want, but it won't make a lick of difference in France.
true. france ain't florida or the u.s. :eek:.
ed rader
true. france ain't florida or the u.s. :eek:.
ed rader
pdxtex
What gets me are the folks that still think he is innocent. We already know half of the peleton is doing something shady (operation puerto, vinokurov, rassmussen and his questionable whereabouts, tyler hamilton!!) so how is floyd landis any different. i don't think he is the sports moral beacon or a scapegoat. the sad fact is, to remain competitive in procycling, you either need to be a super athlete or use a synthetic advantage to keep up with everybody else who is doing it. instead of spot testing throughout the season, the UCI needs to test every rider before admitting them into the tdf and countinue to test them throughout the race. either that or make the consequences of cheating so bad that you would be crazy to do so......
USAZorro
... instead of spot testing throughout the season, the UCI needs to test every rider before admitting them into the tdf and countinue to test them throughout the race. either that or make the consequences of cheating so bad that you would be crazy to do so......
The TDF is not one of UCI's races. The out of competition testing is important, since some illegal regimens will improve rider performance in ways that in performance testing has no hope of detecting. I agree that the small sampling approach to testing is folly in a sport that claims to be cleaning itself up.
btw - I'm one of those people who's not convinced of Floyd's guilt. Unlike Tyler's whacko defense, Floyd's case cast very serious doubts on the testing that was performed. The only reason he was penalized was because of the kangaroo court arrangement that WADA and its affiliates have been given permission to engage in. If my employment were threatened under the same circumstances in a real court, There's no question that I would win the case.
The TDF is not one of UCI's races. The out of competition testing is important, since some illegal regimens will improve rider performance in ways that in performance testing has no hope of detecting. I agree that the small sampling approach to testing is folly in a sport that claims to be cleaning itself up.
btw - I'm one of those people who's not convinced of Floyd's guilt. Unlike Tyler's whacko defense, Floyd's case cast very serious doubts on the testing that was performed. The only reason he was penalized was because of the kangaroo court arrangement that WADA and its affiliates have been given permission to engage in. If my employment were threatened under the same circumstances in a real court, There's no question that I would win the case.
cibai
Sorry but you guys are efiing nuts and know didly-squat about our legal system.
http://www.usatf.org/about/legal/antidoping/usadaprotocol.asp
The key word is "administrative agency." The agency is applying international law, the rules of the WADA, and contractual provisions to which all athletes agree in order to compete.
THis is no different than if you are in a contract dispute and your contract says you have to arbitrate with the AAA under the AAA rules and procedures.
Landis has no independent cause of action against anyone--he is contractually bound to fight this through the USADA. No court is going to allow Landis to sue the USADA because he doesn't like their decision.
He gets his appeal and then it is finished.
I don't think this is entirely true, he can fight the legality of the contract, and who had the power is making it. For example it does not matter if I sign a contract that states that an international company can discriminate against me on the basis of race, that contract will not hold up in a U.S. court of law. If landis can show that he is forced to sign a contract in order to keep his job that subjects him to unfair standards of determining if he may keep his job, he has a case contract or not.
http://www.usatf.org/about/legal/antidoping/usadaprotocol.asp
The key word is "administrative agency." The agency is applying international law, the rules of the WADA, and contractual provisions to which all athletes agree in order to compete.
THis is no different than if you are in a contract dispute and your contract says you have to arbitrate with the AAA under the AAA rules and procedures.
Landis has no independent cause of action against anyone--he is contractually bound to fight this through the USADA. No court is going to allow Landis to sue the USADA because he doesn't like their decision.
He gets his appeal and then it is finished.
I don't think this is entirely true, he can fight the legality of the contract, and who had the power is making it. For example it does not matter if I sign a contract that states that an international company can discriminate against me on the basis of race, that contract will not hold up in a U.S. court of law. If landis can show that he is forced to sign a contract in order to keep his job that subjects him to unfair standards of determining if he may keep his job, he has a case contract or not.
skanking biker
I don't think this is entirely true, he can fight the legality of the contract, and who had the power is making it. For example it does not matter if I sign a contract that states that an international company can discriminate against me on the basis of race, that contract will not hold up in a U.S. court of law. If landis can show that he is forced to sign a contract in order to keep his job that subjects him to unfair standards of determining if he may keep his job, he has a case contract or not.
Next time you go on a cruise or buy a plane ticket, look at the fine print on the cotract and you will see that by purchasing the ticket, you've agreed either to a) arbitrate any dispute or b) agreed to be subject to the laws of timbukctoo
Even assuming you are correct, and that Landis can somehow "challenge the legality of the contract" all a court can do is to rescind the contract. You can't walk into court and say "hey, I was forced to sign this illegal contract so I don't have follow any of the rules I said I would. Oh, and by the way, I'd like to keep my contractual salary and the prize for the race I won working for the company whose contract you just threw out the window."
Next time you go on a cruise or buy a plane ticket, look at the fine print on the cotract and you will see that by purchasing the ticket, you've agreed either to a) arbitrate any dispute or b) agreed to be subject to the laws of timbukctoo
Even assuming you are correct, and that Landis can somehow "challenge the legality of the contract" all a court can do is to rescind the contract. You can't walk into court and say "hey, I was forced to sign this illegal contract so I don't have follow any of the rules I said I would. Oh, and by the way, I'd like to keep my contractual salary and the prize for the race I won working for the company whose contract you just threw out the window."
Straws
Regardless of if he actually doped or not I think it's pretty disgraceful the way the organizers are basically celebrating his loss of the case.
Race director Christian Prudhomme said, “It took that long to confirm what we already knew . . . that he cheated.”
That right there gives a great look at the sentiment held towards american competitors. The organizers of the TDF should not themselves be biased. That's terrible.
Race director Christian Prudhomme said, “It took that long to confirm what we already knew . . . that he cheated.”
That right there gives a great look at the sentiment held towards american competitors. The organizers of the TDF should not themselves be biased. That's terrible.
timmhaan
That right there gives a great look at the sentiment held towards american competitors. The organizers of the TDF should not themselves be biased. That's terrible.
what does this have to do with american or not? any competitor would have been treated like this if they challenged them the way landis did. right or wrong, landis basically dragged their name through the mud and made a public spectable of it at every chance he got.
and besides, he was found guilty by US arbitrators. do they have a bias against americans? ;)
what does this have to do with american or not? any competitor would have been treated like this if they challenged them the way landis did. right or wrong, landis basically dragged their name through the mud and made a public spectable of it at every chance he got.
and besides, he was found guilty by US arbitrators. do they have a bias against americans? ;)
Straws
what does this have to do with american or not? any competitor would have been treated like this if they challenged them the way landis did. right or wrong, landis basically dragged their name through the mud and made a public spectable of it at every chance he got.
and besides, he was found guilty by US arbitrators. do they have a bias against americans? ;)
He was found guilty by two canadian arbitrators, actually. I dont think there was bias there.
My point was that the head of the TDF spoke in a vindictive manner. He should at the very least appear to remain unbiased about the situation. Instead he spoke as if he had personal knowledge the entire time that Landis had cheated. All he did was show that regardless of test results or arbitration jury's Landis was guilty in the eyes of the TDF the whole time. Landis may have been unprofessional about this but that doesnt necessitate the head of the TDF to act the same way.
and besides, he was found guilty by US arbitrators. do they have a bias against americans? ;)
He was found guilty by two canadian arbitrators, actually. I dont think there was bias there.
My point was that the head of the TDF spoke in a vindictive manner. He should at the very least appear to remain unbiased about the situation. Instead he spoke as if he had personal knowledge the entire time that Landis had cheated. All he did was show that regardless of test results or arbitration jury's Landis was guilty in the eyes of the TDF the whole time. Landis may have been unprofessional about this but that doesnt necessitate the head of the TDF to act the same way.
TomM
Regardless of if he actually doped or not I think it's pretty disgraceful the way the organizers are basically celebrating his loss of the case.
Race director Christian Prudhomme said, “It took that long to confirm what we already knew . . . that he cheated.”
That right there gives a great look at the sentiment held towards american competitors. The organizers of the TDF should not themselves be biased. That's terrible.
How is that celebrating?
Race director Christian Prudhomme said, “It took that long to confirm what we already knew . . . that he cheated.”
That right there gives a great look at the sentiment held towards american competitors. The organizers of the TDF should not themselves be biased. That's terrible.
How is that celebrating?
julian
I don't see how anyone can believe that he didn't cheat. Based on what, a french lab? Give me a break. It is painfully obvious that you have to be doing something illegal to compete at the top levels in bicycle racing. The only problem with testing is that it is not good enough. In my mind there are too many "False negatives"
Landis changed his story so much it was laughable. I really like the one where he said he got drunk after the day he bonked. Then the next day he has the ride of his life. But let's blame the French for his failures. I suppose they are also against the Danes, and all the other country's where the cheaters come from.
Then the people who pile on Greg Lemond who has been speaking the truth for years. Sure he may be a big mouth but he has been proven to be a lot more credible than the peloton of late.
To me the nail in the coffin was when Landis and his henchmen threatened Lemond. Little did they know that he would have the balls to come clean about his molestation.
Do you folks also believe that Contador was clean, Levi?, Rasmussen, Vino etc. etc.??? And how many of you folks believe OJ was innocent, even though he was acquitted in a US court by a jury of his peers?
Landis changed his story so much it was laughable. I really like the one where he said he got drunk after the day he bonked. Then the next day he has the ride of his life. But let's blame the French for his failures. I suppose they are also against the Danes, and all the other country's where the cheaters come from.
Then the people who pile on Greg Lemond who has been speaking the truth for years. Sure he may be a big mouth but he has been proven to be a lot more credible than the peloton of late.
To me the nail in the coffin was when Landis and his henchmen threatened Lemond. Little did they know that he would have the balls to come clean about his molestation.
Do you folks also believe that Contador was clean, Levi?, Rasmussen, Vino etc. etc.??? And how many of you folks believe OJ was innocent, even though he was acquitted in a US court by a jury of his peers?
Straws
I don't see how anyone can believe that he didn't cheat. Based on what, a french lab? Give me a break. It is painfully obvious that you have to be doing something illegal to compete at the top levels in bicycle racing. The only problem with testing is that it is not good enough. In my mind there are too many "False negatives"
Landis changed his story so much it was laughable. I really like the one where he said he got drunk after the day he bonked. Then the next day he has the ride of his life. But let's blame the French for his failures. I suppose they are also against the Danes, and all the other country's where the cheaters come from.
Then the people who pile on Greg Lemond who has been speaking the truth for years. Sure he may be a big mouth but he has been proven to be a lot more credible than the peloton of late.
To me the nail in the coffin was when Landis and his henchmen threatened Lemond. Little did they know that he would have the balls to come clean about his molestation.
Do you folks also believe that Contador was clean, Levi?, Rasmussen, Vino etc. etc.??? And how many of you folks believe OJ was innocent, even though he was acquitted in a US court by a jury of his peers?
Well no **** if you're competing at the upper levels you are doing some things which are against good competition ethics. Regardless of that, regardless of how stupid Landis had been about the situation, the lead organizer of the TDF should remain professional and rely on the tests, however inaccurate they may be, and the arbitrators to make the final decision. It's not for Landis' sake, it's not for the spectators sake, it's not for the sports sake, it's for the sake of the integrity of the TDF. So that next time someone gets caught doping and it happens to be a frenchman or some other nationality he can remain as unbiased as possible in appearance. Now that he's gone on record with his personal opinion of the matter, when that next doping allegation does occur if he assumes the innocence of the athlete there's going to be, or should be, a pretty big uproar about bias.
Do you get my point? He needs to maintain professional candor, not immature finger pointing.
And if he does indeed believe the tests to be of poor quality and the arbitration process to be easily navigable by a cheater then he, as the head of the largest cycling competition in the world, needs to pull some weight and get the USADA and international organizations of the same type to really clamp down.
Landis changed his story so much it was laughable. I really like the one where he said he got drunk after the day he bonked. Then the next day he has the ride of his life. But let's blame the French for his failures. I suppose they are also against the Danes, and all the other country's where the cheaters come from.
Then the people who pile on Greg Lemond who has been speaking the truth for years. Sure he may be a big mouth but he has been proven to be a lot more credible than the peloton of late.
To me the nail in the coffin was when Landis and his henchmen threatened Lemond. Little did they know that he would have the balls to come clean about his molestation.
Do you folks also believe that Contador was clean, Levi?, Rasmussen, Vino etc. etc.??? And how many of you folks believe OJ was innocent, even though he was acquitted in a US court by a jury of his peers?
Well no **** if you're competing at the upper levels you are doing some things which are against good competition ethics. Regardless of that, regardless of how stupid Landis had been about the situation, the lead organizer of the TDF should remain professional and rely on the tests, however inaccurate they may be, and the arbitrators to make the final decision. It's not for Landis' sake, it's not for the spectators sake, it's not for the sports sake, it's for the sake of the integrity of the TDF. So that next time someone gets caught doping and it happens to be a frenchman or some other nationality he can remain as unbiased as possible in appearance. Now that he's gone on record with his personal opinion of the matter, when that next doping allegation does occur if he assumes the innocence of the athlete there's going to be, or should be, a pretty big uproar about bias.
Do you get my point? He needs to maintain professional candor, not immature finger pointing.
And if he does indeed believe the tests to be of poor quality and the arbitration process to be easily navigable by a cheater then he, as the head of the largest cycling competition in the world, needs to pull some weight and get the USADA and international organizations of the same type to really clamp down.
julian
It seems like you are willing to give the riders a lot more slack than the sanctioning organizations. I am not happy about the leaks but name me a case where leaks don't occur in the world of 24 7 news and internet coverage?
Do you really think someone spiked his koolaid?
Do you really think someone spiked his koolaid?
Straws
oh my god. that is not what I'm saying at all. I really feel like you didnt even read my post. I'm not even going to elaborate because the first sentence of my post explains that I do believe he was doping, and that others are as well.
MY POINT, again, for the third time, is that the director of the TDF needs to maintain professional candor and an unbiased position when regarding doping allegations of any athlete. When he comes out on the side of one, or against another, he is opening up himself and the entire organization to criticism of bias. When that happens, given it's an international sporting event, doubt is cast on much of the organization and things such as legitimacy begin to be questioned.
So, to wrap that up. The director of the TDF needs to maintain an appearance of neutrality while the arbitrators and the USADA do what it is that they do. If in fact he does believe the USADA and other such organization are not doing their job he should encourage the ICO to establish a more reputable anti-doping agency.
MY POINT, again, for the third time, is that the director of the TDF needs to maintain professional candor and an unbiased position when regarding doping allegations of any athlete. When he comes out on the side of one, or against another, he is opening up himself and the entire organization to criticism of bias. When that happens, given it's an international sporting event, doubt is cast on much of the organization and things such as legitimacy begin to be questioned.
So, to wrap that up. The director of the TDF needs to maintain an appearance of neutrality while the arbitrators and the USADA do what it is that they do. If in fact he does believe the USADA and other such organization are not doing their job he should encourage the ICO to establish a more reputable anti-doping agency.
Coach Ice
As a keen follower of cycling, and being from neither France nor America...
I feel bad for Landis and American cycling.
I'm sure the French are toasting in the streets about now. How sad that would be to cheer one's downfall.
Don't feel bad for American cycling, it's these sort of decisions that will help get drugs out of the sport, and Landis has contributed big time!:D
And I don't see why the French would be toasting? What do they get out of it?
The biggest problem with the Landis case, was the length of time it has taken to hear it. It wasn't a murder for goodness sake!
I feel bad for Landis and American cycling.
I'm sure the French are toasting in the streets about now. How sad that would be to cheer one's downfall.
Don't feel bad for American cycling, it's these sort of decisions that will help get drugs out of the sport, and Landis has contributed big time!:D
And I don't see why the French would be toasting? What do they get out of it?
The biggest problem with the Landis case, was the length of time it has taken to hear it. It wasn't a murder for goodness sake!
julian
oh my god. that is not what I'm saying at all. I really feel like you didnt even read my post. I'm not even going to elaborate because the first sentence of my post explains that I do believe he was doping, and that others are as well.
MY POINT, again, for the third time, is that the director of the TDF needs to maintain professional candor and an unbiased position when regarding doping allegations of any athlete. When he comes out on the side of one, or against another, he is opening up himself and the entire organization to criticism of bias. When that happens, given it's an international sporting event, doubt is cast on much of the organization and things such as legitimacy begin to be questioned.
So, to wrap that up. The director of the TDF needs to maintain an appearance of neutrality while the arbitrators and the USADA do what it is that they do. If in fact he does believe the USADA and other such organization are not doing their job he should encourage the ICO to establish a more reputable anti-doping agency.
OK then point out to me the exact quotes that you find so offensive? If I was a director of a race and I had participants keep popping postiive on drug tests I would not be very happy about it. I would think well over 90 percent of the A postitives are backed up by B positives.
Also point out where the French are "cheering in the streets"? The may be thankful that a cheater finally got his just desserts but has there been evidence of widespread celebrations and cheering in the streets?
It is the illegal dopers ruining these race not the directors.
You seem to be concentrating more on the behavior of the directors than that of the atheletes.
MY POINT, again, for the third time, is that the director of the TDF needs to maintain professional candor and an unbiased position when regarding doping allegations of any athlete. When he comes out on the side of one, or against another, he is opening up himself and the entire organization to criticism of bias. When that happens, given it's an international sporting event, doubt is cast on much of the organization and things such as legitimacy begin to be questioned.
So, to wrap that up. The director of the TDF needs to maintain an appearance of neutrality while the arbitrators and the USADA do what it is that they do. If in fact he does believe the USADA and other such organization are not doing their job he should encourage the ICO to establish a more reputable anti-doping agency.
OK then point out to me the exact quotes that you find so offensive? If I was a director of a race and I had participants keep popping postiive on drug tests I would not be very happy about it. I would think well over 90 percent of the A postitives are backed up by B positives.
Also point out where the French are "cheering in the streets"? The may be thankful that a cheater finally got his just desserts but has there been evidence of widespread celebrations and cheering in the streets?
It is the illegal dopers ruining these race not the directors.
You seem to be concentrating more on the behavior of the directors than that of the atheletes.
a77impala
There is still reasonable doubt on his guilt. Two of three voted to find him guilty, one voted not to, so there is still a 33% chance he is innocent according to statistics.
Why isn't a unanimous vote required? It looks like a hung jury to me.
Why isn't a unanimous vote required? It looks like a hung jury to me.
erader
There is still reasonable doubt on his guilt. Two of three voted to find him guilty, one voted not to, so there is still a 33% chance he is innocent according to statistics.
Why isn't a unanimous vote required? It looks like a hung jury to me.
landis was not tried in a court of law. it was an adminstrative decision. i think the hide the weenie incident alone (lemond) was enough cause to strip landis of the MJ, not to mention the number of times he changed his story.
ed rader
Why isn't a unanimous vote required? It looks like a hung jury to me.
landis was not tried in a court of law. it was an adminstrative decision. i think the hide the weenie incident alone (lemond) was enough cause to strip landis of the MJ, not to mention the number of times he changed his story.
ed rader
skanking biker
Why isn't a unanimous vote required? It looks like a hung jury to me.
Because USADA decided only two was necessary to support a decision.
This is one of the things I hate about administrative agencies at all levels of government: they get to make their own rules (read make thier own laws) "interpreting" vague statutes enacted by congress; they get to enforce those rules; and then, their own quasi-judicial body gets to decide whether the agency erred in interpreting or applying the rules. Normally, decisions by administrative agencies can be challenged in court once a person "exhausts his administrative remedies" because an administrative hearing is a quasi-judicial process---so at least there is "some" oversight. Its even worse here where you have a panel of arbitrators (not administrative law judges) interpreting and applying the very administrative rules they helped create in an arbitration proceeding that is almost impossible to challenge in a court of law.
Because USADA decided only two was necessary to support a decision.
This is one of the things I hate about administrative agencies at all levels of government: they get to make their own rules (read make thier own laws) "interpreting" vague statutes enacted by congress; they get to enforce those rules; and then, their own quasi-judicial body gets to decide whether the agency erred in interpreting or applying the rules. Normally, decisions by administrative agencies can be challenged in court once a person "exhausts his administrative remedies" because an administrative hearing is a quasi-judicial process---so at least there is "some" oversight. Its even worse here where you have a panel of arbitrators (not administrative law judges) interpreting and applying the very administrative rules they helped create in an arbitration proceeding that is almost impossible to challenge in a court of law.
Keith99
There is still reasonable doubt on his guilt. Two of three voted to find him guilty, one voted not to, so there is still a 33% chance he is innocent according to statistics.
Why isn't a unanimous vote required? It looks like a hung jury to me.
If I remember correctly the 3 person board has one member that was selected by Landis. If it needed a unanimous vote then anyone could skate by just selecting someone who would vote against conviction no matter what.
Why isn't a unanimous vote required? It looks like a hung jury to me.
If I remember correctly the 3 person board has one member that was selected by Landis. If it needed a unanimous vote then anyone could skate by just selecting someone who would vote against conviction no matter what.
Previous - Top - Next
Copyright 1999 - 2007 BikeForums.Net - All rights reserved.
Common bike forum topics in clue bicycles, cycling, mountain biking,
cycling jerseys, shorts, socks, shoes and bike equiptment selection.
Common bike forum topics in clue bicycles, cycling, mountain biking,
cycling jerseys, shorts, socks, shoes and bike equiptment selection.