Golferdow01
East-Coast Living
Go ahead and let the Middle East take France for all i care...fuckin idiots
Upvote
0
-
Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
- Thread starter Fungo Squiggly
- Start date
Bucktastic
Troy Smith for HEISMAN
The French are so pissed that Armstrong went over and ruled their sport for countless years, they are trying to scrap up some stories.
Go f-ing eat your croissants, drink your wine and shut the F up....damn frogs.
Go f-ing eat your croissants, drink your wine and shut the F up....damn frogs.
Upvote
0
OSUsushichic
Fired up! Ready to go!
They're tampering with his piss from a few years ago. Can he sue for that? Why are these samples being kept around that long anyway?
Upvote
0
I think this just reeks of cowardice. Who'd a thought that from a French tabloid? 
They couldn't beat him on the track and, now that he's gone, their race will be a shadow of what it was.
So, how to you build up your local stars now that they have a chance to win? You belittle a man with more character in his little finger than they have in their entire newspaper staff, try to belittle him, and pretend that he didn't really play fair to win by making allegations that cannot be proven.
It sucks, but not so much as the people who made these allegations.
They couldn't beat him on the track and, now that he's gone, their race will be a shadow of what it was.
So, how to you build up your local stars now that they have a chance to win? You belittle a man with more character in his little finger than they have in their entire newspaper staff, try to belittle him, and pretend that he didn't really play fair to win by making allegations that cannot be proven.
It sucks, but not so much as the people who made these allegations.
Upvote
0
OSUsushichic said:
Maybe Piss ages like Rhone Reds.
The French Would know.... "Mmmmmm a vintage '99 Lance Armstrong... C'est Magnifique!"
Upvote
0
scarletandgrey
Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult!
pussies! Maybe one day they'll let it be. I know that he's been the center of controversy in the sport for years now that he's gone let him be.
Upvote
0
They had 7 years to prove he was cheating and couldn't do it. Fuck the French.scarletandgrey said:
Upvote
0
scarletandgrey
Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult!
no shit now it just seems they are making stuff up. I watched some of this lastnight on outside the lines but I agree FUCK THE PUSSIES!
Upvote
0
OSUsushichic
Fired up! Ready to go!
AKAKBUCK said:
I called you one yesterday. Got a mirror?
Upvote
0
OSUsushichic said:I called you one yesterday. Got a mirror?
No... but I've got Porn passwords.
Upvote
0
OSUsushichic
Fired up! Ready to go!
Armstrong doping storm moves from science into law
By Francois Thomazeau 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
PARIS (Reuters) - As is often the case when doping allegations are made, the debate over whether seven times Tour de France champion Lance Armstrong took EPO in 1999 is rapidly moving from the scientific sphere into the legal.
Whatever the truth of the matter, and Armstrong strongly denies any wrongdoing, the report in L'Equipe that the American's urine samples contained the banned blood-boosting substance is very unlikely to lead to any retroactive sanctions.
Officials from the organizations involved - cycling's ruling body, the World Anti Doping Agency, French sports ministry officials and Tour de France organizers - agree normal anti-doping proceedings have not been followed.
Jacques De Ceaurriz, the head of the Chatenay-Malabry laboratory which conducted the tests, made it clear they were carried out for only scientific purposes and had no legal value because only one sample was tested.
According to WADA rules, no sanction can be taken against an athlete if one sample, rather than the normal two, shows traces of a banned substance.
The samples have been frozen since being taken during the 1999 tour, the first won by Armstrong. A test to detect EPO did not exist at the time.
Armstrong, who has denied ever taking performance-enhancing drugs during his career and has never failed a dope test, summed up the legal implications on Wednesday.
"Ethically, how can you put a guy's name or prosecute a guy like that when he has no defense?
"I know two pieces of the WADA code that are very important. Number one, if an athlete only has one sample left, it is strictly mandated that that sample must always remain anonymous.
"If any WADA-accredited laboratory wants to use that sample, for experimentation or scientific research, they must have the approval of the athlete.
"So right there, you have two serious violations of the new WADA code," he said.
REPEATED ALLEGATIONS
Armstrong, who has had to face repeated doping allegations by French media since his first victory in 1999, hinted he might not take legal action over the French newspaper report. He is currently suing the authors of a book alleging he took drugs.
"Who do you take action against in this case? Is it WADA? Is it the (French sports) ministry? Is it L'Equipe? Is it the laboratory? Who is it? They're all at fault there," he said.
The Texan, a cancer survivor deeply involved in working with others suffering from the disease, said he had better things to do with his money than indulge in another costly court battle.
Armstrong is currently involved in a legal case against a Texas insurance company who have refused to pay him bonuses he was entitled to after his 2002, 2003 and 2004 Tour victories after arguing the legitimacy of the wins could be questioned.
Regardless of their scientific validity, the way in which the results of the tests on Armstrong's 1999 samples have been obtained is in breach of anti-doping procedures.
WADA chief Dick Pound said Armstrong might have to "give explanations" about the tests but said the agency could not "do anything concrete" for the time being.
Pound passed the baton to the UCI, saying it was up to the world cycling body to act. UCI chief Hein Verbruggen said there was "nothing official" and it was waiting to find out whether the report was true.
As for Tour organizers, they insisted they had no power to ban or suspend an athlete on doping offences because UCI and WADA were the only institutions entitled to take action.
Tour director Jean-Marie Leblanc suggested retroactive sanctions might be the future weapon against doping.
"This case brings a new element in the fight against doping - retroactive testing, which is now possible and could, in my opinion, be used as another tool," he said.
RETROACTIVE SANCTIONS
Leblanc agreed, however, that current WADA or UCI rules made it impossible to sanction a rider retroactively.
Comparisons have been made in France with the BALCO doping case which led to American sprinters being banned for taking the THG steroid.
The athletes did not fail dope tests for the steroid at the time of racing as it was unknown. They were banned after tests were carried out in secret.
Tour de France deputy director Christian Prudhomme said the big difference was that in the BALCO case, U.S. athletes were banned after being shown undeniable evidence of testing which had been properly carried out. Some also confessed.
By comparison, confusion rather than clarity surrounds the L'Equipe accusations.
Armstrong quoted "four or five anti-doping experts around the world that have gone on the record and said this is crazy."
De Ceaurriz, the man who devised the EPO test, insists he is one hundred percent sure the tests were valid.
The problem is that the French scientists tested bottles bearing numbers on them, not names, and these names would never have been leaked if proper protocol had been followed.
By Francois Thomazeau 1 hour, 24 minutes ago
PARIS (Reuters) - As is often the case when doping allegations are made, the debate over whether seven times Tour de France champion Lance Armstrong took EPO in 1999 is rapidly moving from the scientific sphere into the legal.
Whatever the truth of the matter, and Armstrong strongly denies any wrongdoing, the report in L'Equipe that the American's urine samples contained the banned blood-boosting substance is very unlikely to lead to any retroactive sanctions.
Officials from the organizations involved - cycling's ruling body, the World Anti Doping Agency, French sports ministry officials and Tour de France organizers - agree normal anti-doping proceedings have not been followed.
Jacques De Ceaurriz, the head of the Chatenay-Malabry laboratory which conducted the tests, made it clear they were carried out for only scientific purposes and had no legal value because only one sample was tested.
According to WADA rules, no sanction can be taken against an athlete if one sample, rather than the normal two, shows traces of a banned substance.
The samples have been frozen since being taken during the 1999 tour, the first won by Armstrong. A test to detect EPO did not exist at the time.
Armstrong, who has denied ever taking performance-enhancing drugs during his career and has never failed a dope test, summed up the legal implications on Wednesday.
"Ethically, how can you put a guy's name or prosecute a guy like that when he has no defense?
"I know two pieces of the WADA code that are very important. Number one, if an athlete only has one sample left, it is strictly mandated that that sample must always remain anonymous.
"If any WADA-accredited laboratory wants to use that sample, for experimentation or scientific research, they must have the approval of the athlete.
"So right there, you have two serious violations of the new WADA code," he said.
REPEATED ALLEGATIONS
Armstrong, who has had to face repeated doping allegations by French media since his first victory in 1999, hinted he might not take legal action over the French newspaper report. He is currently suing the authors of a book alleging he took drugs.
"Who do you take action against in this case? Is it WADA? Is it the (French sports) ministry? Is it L'Equipe? Is it the laboratory? Who is it? They're all at fault there," he said.
The Texan, a cancer survivor deeply involved in working with others suffering from the disease, said he had better things to do with his money than indulge in another costly court battle.
Armstrong is currently involved in a legal case against a Texas insurance company who have refused to pay him bonuses he was entitled to after his 2002, 2003 and 2004 Tour victories after arguing the legitimacy of the wins could be questioned.
Regardless of their scientific validity, the way in which the results of the tests on Armstrong's 1999 samples have been obtained is in breach of anti-doping procedures.
WADA chief Dick Pound said Armstrong might have to "give explanations" about the tests but said the agency could not "do anything concrete" for the time being.
Pound passed the baton to the UCI, saying it was up to the world cycling body to act. UCI chief Hein Verbruggen said there was "nothing official" and it was waiting to find out whether the report was true.
As for Tour organizers, they insisted they had no power to ban or suspend an athlete on doping offences because UCI and WADA were the only institutions entitled to take action.
Tour director Jean-Marie Leblanc suggested retroactive sanctions might be the future weapon against doping.
"This case brings a new element in the fight against doping - retroactive testing, which is now possible and could, in my opinion, be used as another tool," he said.
RETROACTIVE SANCTIONS
Leblanc agreed, however, that current WADA or UCI rules made it impossible to sanction a rider retroactively.
Comparisons have been made in France with the BALCO doping case which led to American sprinters being banned for taking the THG steroid.
The athletes did not fail dope tests for the steroid at the time of racing as it was unknown. They were banned after tests were carried out in secret.
Tour de France deputy director Christian Prudhomme said the big difference was that in the BALCO case, U.S. athletes were banned after being shown undeniable evidence of testing which had been properly carried out. Some also confessed.
By comparison, confusion rather than clarity surrounds the L'Equipe accusations.
Armstrong quoted "four or five anti-doping experts around the world that have gone on the record and said this is crazy."
De Ceaurriz, the man who devised the EPO test, insists he is one hundred percent sure the tests were valid.
The problem is that the French scientists tested bottles bearing numbers on them, not names, and these names would never have been leaked if proper protocol had been followed.
Upvote
0
