Lance Armstrong is set to be stripped of his seven Tour de France titles and banned from sport for life after deciding to not to opt for arbitration to fight the charges brought against him by the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA).
In a statement published on his website in which he continued to protest his innocence, the 40-year-old said: “There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, ‘Enough is enough.’ For me, that time is now,” describing USADA’s pursuit of him as an “unconstitutional witch hunt.”
USADA, which will issue a full statement today, has already confirmed that it intends to ban Armstrong for life and to take away the record seven Tour de France titles he won between 1999 and 2005.
USADA CEO Travis Tygart said: "It is a sad day for all of us who love sport and our athletic heroes. This is a heartbreaking example of how the win-at-all-costs culture of sport, if left unchecked, will overtake fair, safe and honest competition."
Earlier this week, US district judge Sam Sparks, sitting in Armstrong’s home town of Austin, Texas, rejected a lawsuit brought by him and confirmed that USADA had jurisdiction over the case, rather than the UCI or USA Cycling.
The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) had backed USADA's stance. Both the UCI and USA Cycling are signatories to the World Anti-Doping Code (WADC), which provides that the national anti doping agency is the competent body in a case such as this.
As a result, Armstrong had to choose by midnight Colorado time (where USADA is based) yesterday whether to contest the charges through arbitration or accept USADA’s sanctions.
Despite that decision, in which Judge Sparks did express reservations about USADA’s motives, Armstrong’s legal team continued to insist yesterday that USADA lacked jurisdiction in the case.
His attorney Tim Herman writing a strongly worded letter to the agency saying that its case against him should be submitted to the UCI or the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) to deal with.
Armstrong’s own statement suggests, however, that certainly as far as any proceeedings from USADA are concerned, the battle is over.
At the end, he said: “Going forward, I am going to devote myself to raising my five beautiful (and energetic) kids, fighting cancer, and attempting to be the fittest 40-year old on the planet.”
There does remain the possibility, however, that the UCI, which had contested USADA's jurisdiction, might decide to challenge any formal decision from it at the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
In a statement, the governing body said: "The UCI notes Lance Armstrong’s decision not to proceed to arbitration in the case that USADA has brought against him.
"The UCI recognises that USADA is reported as saying that it will strip Mr. Armstrong of all results from 1998 onwards in addition to imposing a lifetime ban from participating in any sport which recognises the World Anti-Doping Code.
"Article 8.3 of the WADC states that where no hearing occurs the Anti-Doping Organisation with results management responsibility shall submit to the parties concerned (Mr Armstrong, WADA and UCI) a reasoned decision explaining the action taken.
"As USADA has claimed jurisdiction in the case the UCI expects that it will issue a reasoned decision in accordance with Article 8.3 of the Code.
"Until such time as USADA delivers this decision the UCI has no further comment to make."
The specific allegations against Armstrong himself, including the testimony of former team mates who have never been formally identified by USADA although their names have been the subject of press speculation, will not now be presented in an arbitration hearing.
However, it is likely that much of that evidence will be heard at other hearings including that relating to Armstrong's manager at US Postal and elsewhere during the period concerned, Johan Bruyneel, who himself has been charged by USADA but who chose the arbitration route.
Reacting to the news of Armstrong's decision on his personal website, Bruyneel, now manager of RadioShack-Nissan, wrote: "Today, I’m disappointed for Lance and for cycling in general that things have reached a stage where Lance feels that he has had enough and is no longer willing to participate in USADA’s campaign against him. Lance has never withdrawn from a fair fight in his life so his decision today underlines what an unjust process this has been.
"I hope that it will soon be determined that the case that USADA initiated against me should never have gotten as far as it has. Due to the sensitive nature of legal proceedings, I have been advised that it would be inappropriate for me to comment further at this stage."
John Fahey, President of WADA, reacted to the news by saying that he believed Armstrong's actions proved there was "substance" to USADA's allegations.
"He [Armstrong] had the right to rip up those charges but he elected not to, therefore the only interpretation in these circumstances is that there was substance in those charges," Fahey, quoted on Eurosport, told Reuters.
"My understanding is that when the evidence is based upon a career that included seven Tour de France wins then all of that becomes obliterated."
Add new comment
84 comments
Thank you USADA for nothing. Anyone who ever supported Armstrong properly will just ignore your 'findings'. I certainly will be because that's my childhood of cycling and my childhood hero.
Not convinced - can you believe a self governing, self determining, self appointed body to be objective - they're only serving their own ends at the end of the day.
They have no authority to strip any cyclist of Tour wins - that's the jurisdiction of the UCI.
Lets have ALL their evidence - including names of those prepared to swear to Armstrong's guilt, and the inducements offered.
There's always no smoke without fire so come on USADA show us the flames of proof.
Well, well, well.
There's a surprise, after years of passive- aggressive legal threats and media attacks on all who dared to question the cancer victim to sporting super hero myth LA now seeks to play the "I'm the tired victim of a USADA witch-hunt card".
LA can now sit back and enjoy the (huge pile) of cash and celebrity whilst denying the cycling world (and those clean-riding victims who tried in vein to to compete with him) the full and proper answers to the many questions of how this breathtaking fraud was carried out for so long under the nose of the UCI.
In light of this news watch this interview clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZgns7CXeUI
to see how Armstrong's uses the cancer cloak to attack those who had the temerity to ask reasonable questions. I wonder how effective the new USADA witch-hunt cloak will be? - maybe someday be he'll make another pile of cash by selling the inside story about how he pulled it off.
I see what you did there!
It's sort of Kafkaesque. He was going to be pursued until he gave in or was convicted but he is either an incredible superhuman who, riding clean, beat lots of other riders who were doping, or he is just another doper that got the most out of the drugs.
Some have said that he never tested positive but part of the game with doping is being one step ahead of the testing so thats always going to have an air of inconclusive about it.
As others have said, its hurting the sport but this shit has been going on for years and cycling has been under the spotlight the most for it. I've tried to find an interview with the guy that was helping lots of US athletes dope and coming up with more ingenious compounds that evaded detection.
Maybe the way forward is to raise the stakes if caught doping with lifetime bans and huge, near bankrupting, fines so that getting caught really isn't worth it?
It is tragic to see doping agencies resort to corrupt practice to convict someone.
Now we will never know for sure if Lance is guilty. Or what it was that was worse than losing seven tour titles that Lance did not want exposed.
The doping agencies are meant to be the tower of strength against cheats. Now can we trust them? The whole anti doping regime risks becoming a farce.
The life ban is pure vindictiveness and shows USADA for what they are.
TBH glad it's all done and dusted.
I think that's probably his feeling too. He knows that he'll still be remembered as the guy who won the races, whether or not he was guilty as charged. And this is especially the case since so many of the other riders in the peloton have the same question hanging over them.
I like the way armchair pundits often wade in on this subject with such certainty. Like anyone not directly involved can really know one way or the other.
Now back to my position squarely atop the fence of apathy.
This is a pathetic witch hunt IMHO.
Why on earth don't they present the evidence they have now, rather than smear a man who tries to do so much good in the world and continues to keep himself in great physical condition?
Many suspect he's been "bang at it" for a long time, but again, where is the evidence ?
You only had to hear Ned Boulting on TalkSport this morning to get a distinct feeling that Armstrong isn't held in high regard within cycling or at least the cycling media any more. If that is the case what do the cycling media know ?
Put up or shut up time !
Evidence would have been presented at the arbitration hearing, but LA foreswore that. It will be presented at the hearings if any of the others under investigation actually go to arbitration. If they all opt to refuse arbitration, it will be made public at the end of the process.
Does he have to give back the prize money?
Whether he did or not for me Lance will be the winner of those 7 tours right or wrong. It's stupid in my opinion to hand the victories to others, especially in the period we are talking about. As said above who is going after Merckx, Anquetil et al?
Now as for whether he should be sued to reclaim the winnings gathered unfairly is a different, but equally muddy question. As prizes are split up across the team who rode is it a matter of suing each individual who took a share (surely unfair) or sue the winner for the value for him to solely stump up?
Time to draw a veil over the past surely (as in taken reprisals etc, certainly the lessons learned are not to be ignored) and concentrate on the present and future?
Not a very satisfactory conclusion, USADA should have been made to lay their case out warts and all.
[[[[[[ You don't need drug-tests and stufflikethat. Just say, "Oy, Jones---has Smiffy been doin' drugs?"
Jones: "Yeah, loads of 'em"
Case solved. Sorted!
P.R
does this mean the anti- Armstrong gang will now go after Shleck? what will they do now?
Who's ever going to remember who won any of those 7 tours?
I still want to believe that he did it clean... Maybe that makes me the bigger mug in it all, but I still want to believe.
Do I believe he's innocent? Probably not, much as I'd like to. Has he been tried in the fashion which anyone accused has the right to? No. But he has done something I think quite clever by taking on the mantle of a martyr.
When did cycling get clean?
2001? 2005? 2009? 2012?
Do we now need to put a big asterisk after all pre-200X (tbc) results?
Is there an age of cycling now where the majority of race winners are clean?
Or will we be looking back in 2030 saying how we all feel cheated (again)
I suspect if you went and delved into the pasts of Ullrich, Zulla, Beloki, Kloden & Basso (2nd to Lance in the TdF) you would find some skeletons (or worse)
So in some tours, is it now the guy who crossed the line 4th who is the winner?
Surely only the top 3 podium places were doping; anyone 4th or below must be squeaky clean.
give it the guy who came last 'cos he can't have been doping
Going after Merckx and Coppi next!
what about Indurain ?
Of course he is giving up the fight - because he's a guilty man who has no defence that's why. Guilty as charged, and the loss of his seven TdeF wins is very welcome ....
I feel there is more to emerge from the next phase of these charges against his colleagues. Something tells me we may be looking back on this in years to come as gross mis-justice.
Pages