Quote:
Originally Posted by mooby
I don't think it's about what they can prove, it's more about the fact Lance Armstrong gave up his fight against them. So naturally their reaction was to "crush" him. Honestly, if he was doping, and it was as widespread as we are led to believe, I think that's more of a systemic problem than it is the fault of one man. I mean, what are they going to do? Promote the 2nd place winners to winners now? What if they were doping too? Give it to the 3rd place guy? What if he was doping too? It's an endless cycle.
I'm not saying I approve of Armstrong doping, but I think there's fault on both sides of this. I think the USADA needs to do a better job, and I do think Armstrong was doping.
|
The endless cycle was the organizations accusations against Armstrong. I think his cancer treatments gave off suspicious testing results. But he never failed a drug test, never had any evidence against him but hearsay (especially from guys who were proven dopers).
If the usada or whatever says they care about keeping the sport clean, and the tests are important, then how can they punish Armstrong when he passed every test?
I think that unless there's evidence that proves Armstrong cheated, he'll always be remembered as the real 7 time Tour Le France champion, the greatest cyclist ever.
edit: If it wasn't about proof, what was the fight about?