Updated: UCI queries reasons behind delay in USADA's delivery of Lance Armstrong report

It's been over 13 years since Armstrong tested positive for corticosteroids in the '99 TdF. It's been over 7 years since L'Equipe revealed that a WADA accredited lab in '04 had found EPO in 6 samples taken from Armstrong in the '99 tour. It's been over 6 years since David Walsh and Pierre Ballester published "L.A. Confidentiel" which included eye-witness testimony that Lance doped. It's been more than 2 years since Floyd Landis came out with detailed allegations of Armstrong doping, including a revelation that UCI made a '01 EPO positive result go away - a result which the head of the lab concerned, Dr Martial Saugy, has since described as a "suspicious result" which he notified the UCI of. etc. etc.

And yet the greatest injustice in all this, according to some, is that USADA is taking 2 months to write up the report on this (indeed, it'll be just 1½ months if they deliver it mid-October)?

And that despite the fact they were sued by Armstrong immediately before giving a finding, and got nastygrammes from McQuaid, effectively backing up Armstrong. Which almost certainly requires an extra level of legal argument to go in to the report, and double-checking of everything, to ensure its reasoning is water-tight against UCIs' jurisdiction claims.

There's more than a decades worth of allegations against Armstrong. None of which have been properly investigated by a body with sanctioning power, because the UCI has ignored them, dismissed allegations out of hand and, worst of all, even sued those making allegations. It's possible that it's only because Floyd Landis emailed USADA that an independent body, without a vested interest in Armstrong but with authority over him, was able to investigate him.

Regardless of the result of an investigation, it is right that allegations be properly investigated. Indeed, it is crucial for the integrity of the sport. USADA ultimately found against him, but had Armstrong been innocent, it would have been as important to investigate so as to clear him.

It's not USADA that has delayed this investigation, delayed the results, or delayed justice. It's the UCI.

What a great picture from Low Speed Wobble! I love it!!

I used to really respect this guy. Now I think he's such an arse.

That he doped, regularly and serially, is now beyond any reasonable doubt and he deserves all the vilification and every punishment that the cycling world seems ready to mete out to him - his (former) fans especially.

The only decent thing this once all-powerful gobshite can do now is own up to it, confess and humbly apologise to all and everyone that he has fooled, insulted, duped and successfully sued.

Armstrong - you're nothing to no one anymore.

And if you want his books in pristine hard cover, pls write me and I'll send them to you. I want nothing more to do with anything Armstrong, says, writes or thinks.

Disgusted of Berkshire!!

Now that IS intriguing. Over the last two days Travis Tygart has got more confrontational as Pat McQuaid has got less...Lets hope the show lives up to the hype, as the saying goes.

Accoridng to the latest update this is whats been happening:

The long-awaited report into Lance Armstrong's lifetime ban from cycling should be sent to the sport's governing body, the UCI, by 15 October.

Cycling's governing body, the International Cycling Union, is awaiting the report before deciding whether or not to confirm Armstrong's ban.

UCI president Pat McQuaid admitted it was likely to be a case of rubberstamping Usada's decision though.

"Unless the Usada's decision and case file give serious reasons to do otherwise, the UCI has no intention to appeal to Court of Arbitration for Sport or not to recognise the Usada's sanctions on Lance Armstrong," he said

Thats a straight lift from the BBC website.

Surely this is the USADA just treating the UCI with the contempt they deserve. Why should they bother to keep the UCI informed beyond what is absolutely necessary? UCI can bleat all they like, but it looks like the USADA is the body cleaning up a sport which they have mismanaged for years.

"interesting that they mention they want to see details of the reduced sanctions offered to people who testified against LA...

wonder if the UCI plans to pull another vindictive PR disaster in the form of trying to toughen those reduced sanctions, or some kind of attack on the whistle-blowers?"

They can hardly be considered whistle-blowers if they were willing participants in doping. I fail to see why some riders should escape relatively lightly for testifying against a big name in the sport. Is doping to be considered worse if the doper wins races?

Are we seriously willing to accept that the USADA had evidence that they could provide to a court of law yet isn't in a form that can be published? For a case to be heard it would have to be written down for judges to read it in advance.

They basically haven't finished their witch-hunt against Lance and are looking for more evidence to bolster what was already a weak case. It'll all end in tears. I note that the above contradicts earlier reports that they'll publish at the end of the year.

I think the USADA will have a lot of "oeuf sur le visage" pretty soon.

McQuaid is a politician. Is Cameron/Clegg any better worse than Blair? I have to say every time I see PmQ I feel slightly queazy, just looks totally unreliable to me. Totally a superficial opition I know but nothing he does ro says allays my fears.

While I would love to see Pat McQuaid go, I cannot help but feel that the UCI would be exactly the same without him.

The sooner McQuaid is out of the sport the better.

Announcing the result before the written case file is ready sounds like a PR step - was USADA merely showing it's teeth while cycling was so high profile globally, what with the olympics etc?

Is it me ... but there are still a few days to go until the end of the month

Rumpo Kid: No, the USADA result management process is that an independent review panel forms a recommendation, based on the evidence, which may include sanctions. The athlete and others are notified of this. The athlete then has 10 days in which to request to go to arbitration, via AAA. The recommendation from that arbitration may itself be appealed to further arbitration at CAS, by the athlete, USADA, WADA, the national or international governing bodies concerned.

See pages 29 to 31 of the USADA athlete handbook. This USADA process follows the general outline for results management specified by the WADA Code.

Armstrong's case is at the stage where he has been notified of a recommendation, and he forewent arbitration. He is deemed to have accepted the recommendation - no arbitration involved. USADA now must send a full report to WADA, USCycling and UCI (they might also send one to USOC - they do so for the test results at least). At least WADA and UCI have the option to appeal the recommendation to CAS (not 100% sure USCycling also have that option, but I think they do - at least the WADA Code would allow it).

Is it only me or would anyone else like to see a new photo at the top of the Lance Armstrong stories?

Or are we waiting for one where he finally looks a little less arrogant?

WADA's John Fahey has already said that he considers Lance Armstrong's decision not to contest the charges against him to be nothing more than an admission of guilt:-
"He 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."
I'm sure many people here will disagree with his interpretation, I'm just telling you what he said.

But USADA cannot keep its cards close to its chest. It HAS to report to UCI and WADA with its decision's.

The continued delay and with them continuing to collect evidence shows they were not ready to make a decision on the Armstrong case. They should have complied their documentation firstly and made the decision secondly. It seems they have made a decision, knowing they had to justify it to the governing bodies and cannot get their papers in order to do that in a timely manner.

Given the UCI's sudden interest in the Garmin trio, I personally would not blame USADA for keeping its cards close to its chest.

The UCI seem none to happy

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/19749763

Rumpo: I think you mean something else when you write arbitration. This case has not been through any arbitration process yet.

Presuming you mean the USADA investigation, Armstrong could have chosen to co-operate with it and gotten lighter sanctions. Yes.

Rumpo kid: Armstrong was not under any obligation to go to arbitration. Arbitration exists to allow an athlete to appeal if they disagree with a finding. Armstrong chose not to exercise this option, as he is entitled to. WADA and UCI are also entitled to refer the case to arbitration via CAS. Which UCI might do on the jurisdiction question, if the federal case is a guide.

The process is fair. Armstrong sued USADA in federal court, just around the time when they were to notify him of their finding (I think shortly before), arguing it was unfair and didn't afford due process. The Texan federal judge ruled the USADA and WADA processes *were* fair. Leading up to / during that case, Pat McQuaid, on behalf of UCI, sent letters to USADA, effectively joining Armstrong's side, with arguments about jurisdiction (which WADA said UCI were wrong on).

These are all points which came up *after* USADA had finished its investigation into the question of Armstrong doping. These are complications which have been introduced by Armstrong and UCI. These complications have pretty much *nothing* to do with the question of Armstrong's doping, but of legal technicalities. All these arguments about technicalities from UCI and Armstrong have so far failed - though UCI may yet still try to go to CAS on the jurisdiction question.

tl;dr: If this is taking longer than it should, it's cause *Armstrong and UCI* have been trying to frustrate and block USADA from actually making its judgement, through legal technicalities.

The situation is complicated in that three members of USPS have opted to go to arbitration. I would suggest that USADA would not wish to go public with all of its evidence while this process is ongoing, particularly in view of the fact that the UCI has acted more like a counsel for the defence than a sports governing body.

The sanctions against Armstrong were imposed not because he doped, but because he refused to go to arbitration AS HE WAS OBLIGED TO. You may think this unfair. I personally would have preferred to see sanctions imposed on Armstrong after the hearings, if only to prevent him from presenting himself as a victim.