Must Read: Tygart details Armstrong case in L'Equipe

Full story: Velonews 28
U.S. Anti-Doping Agency CEO Travis Tygart is confident of his agency's lifetime ban on Lance Armstrong, as well as its case against Johan Bruyneel, and believes his case file will go to the UCI before the end of September. Full Story
First Prev
of 2
Next Last
turtle

Huddersfield, UK

#21 Oct 4, 2012
GeeMan wrote:
turtle you are truly devoid of being able to make a new fresh and cogent comment/point without trying to write nonsense and use other peoples posts as the basis.
Y
Forgot to impart a comment about one of your earlier rants about me and my lack of knowledge about cycling as a whole. By the way, thank you for the award and praise for comedy gold. I really do appreciate your acknowledgement of such great humour, thank you. Now i can return to (hopefully with the same comedy verve) your uncalled for outburst about my apparent vacuous knowledge and reference to L'Equipe and their connection to Le Tour. You rant that " as you are incapable of spending time to discover your comments make no sense" and "Your comments about L'Equipe demonstrate how little you know about Cycling and highlight that you truly are unable to research anything before you say it" and of course your classic "you are incapable of spending time to discover your comments make no sense you will never find that out, unless of course someone else on here corrects you and educates you" only matched by the lovingly phrased "There is a saying where I come from about people like you turtle who wants to keep saying stuff but make no sense and have no real opinions of their own and that is...íyou are full of wind and pissí"
True comedy gold also geeman, i take my hat off to you. If i recall these one liners were in reference to my proposition that there was a certain wholeness to L'Equipe reporting interviews, and being the one media outlet to present the most up to date progress on anything to do with Le Tour. That L'Equipe was the appropriate place for this to take place, was something you clearly thought with your vast knowledge and understanding of all things "cycling" that was an imbecilic thing to even consider never mind propose. Also that my research participation was indeed laughable to you. I would accept that i had in fact done no research at all in my reflection of this thought. That it was actually long standing knowledge which led me to such a conclusion. The notion i forwarded of L'Equipe being firstly and most importantly being a paper whose leanings would be overtaken by its dedication of being for the tour. You clearly thought were nonsense and of no relevance.
If you knew your cycling history and were not in need of researching before you presented any of your opinions or facts. You would know that Le Tour would not exist without the existence of a paper known as L'Auto and that in fact, this paper had gone on to become L'Equipe. That through the whole of the last century this paper had been the strength Le tour had needed on many occasions to keep it the spectacle it was but more importantly to keep the good and true sporting values it was based on. Separate of trends and controversies of the time, this paper had stood up for Le tours core values time again.
Of course i know you knew all of this as you belittled me and my research and that you just thought it was so insignificant it was not worth a mention. Again i bow down to you superior knowledge and mostly your research before you make any unwise or just daft comments.
GeeMan

Worcester, UK

#22 Oct 4, 2012
turtle you have surpassed yourself this time!

I applaud you for doing some research however in your efforts you have Completely Missed the Point and continue to make Erroneous comments.
I am also sure some will be happy with your Wiki cut and paste however try a web link next time and save time!

You dont disspoint turtle and if you go back and actually READ what I have written about L'Equipe you will see I dismissed them along with your other referenced newspapers as credible sources for the simple reason they had a long standing Vendetta against Armstrong, its all there in the post.
It was YOU who decide to state they were good newspapers but that doesnt mean they dont write stories about him. I told you he sued both and was paid out by News International but did not continue with his case against L'Equipe as they stopped printing the stories on demand from Armstrong Lawyers. That is why David Walsh hates Armstrong because he got burned.

SO thansk for the update but try and make sure that you get the context and subject matter correct next time but I dont think you will.

Its easy to look at Wiki to get a background but you will now have to read their issues to understand where the Vendetta started!

Why do you think only L'Equipe and David Walsh have been allowed exclusive access to USADA for interviews and commentary?

tortue si vous ne promets d'essayer plus dur et acurately faire des posts ŗ l'avenir le diable vous dire que je suis vous visitez
turtle

Huddersfield, UK

#23 Oct 4, 2012
GeeMan wrote:
turtle you have surpassed yourself this time!
I applaud you for doing some research however in your efforts you have Completely Missed the Point and continue to make Erroneous comments.
I am also sure some will be happy with your Wiki cut and paste however try a web link next time and save time!
You dont disspoint turtle and if you go back and actually READ what I have written about L'Equipe you will see I dismissed them along with your other referenced newspapers as credible sources for the simple reason they had a long standing Vendetta against Armstrong, its all there in the post.
It was YOU who decide to state they were good newspapers but that doesnt mean they dont write stories about him. I told you he sued both and was paid out by News International but did not continue with his case against L'Equipe as they stopped printing the stories on demand from Armstrong Lawyers. That is why David Walsh hates Armstrong because he got burned.
SO thansk for the update but try and make sure that you get the context and subject matter correct next time but I dont think you will.
Its easy to look at Wiki to get a background but you will now have to read their issues to understand where the Vendetta started!
Why do you think only L'Equipe and David Walsh have been allowed exclusive access to USADA for interviews and commentary?
tortue si vous ne promets d'essayer plus dur et acurately faire des posts ŗ l'avenir le diable vous dire que je suis vous visitez
Geeman geeman geeman geeman, read think think a little more maybe even a little more. Then just maybe reply, but first make sure you understand and have read correctly. As i wrote the post in good humoured jest about 12 hours ago i would be surprised if any of my comedy gold has reached wiki, in the i am guessing here, maybe 3 hours before you read it ! because that would be the only way anything here appeared to come from wiki !!!
But talent does rise to the top and people are always looking for the best. So i suppose it is just about possible, but unlikely.
I actually am having to go back again and again to your post and still cannot quite grasp your total lack of reality and continuity with this post. What are you talking about? I have never mentioned any other newspaper to you, oh shit maybe i did when i cut and pasted from wiki. But no, i aint that clueless.
I can not even muster myself to debate this nonsense, please reread .i will await your humble apologies.
Just one salient point to make, the point about L'Equipe stands. It has supported the tour from its inception (was in fact the creator) whatever short term issues there have been. Going back to the original post where i said "Your notion of Lí…quipe being against la is wrong, it is for the tour. Always has been and always will be" (this being the only cut and paste i have done) The point still stands , and i think you would probably agree if you took the time to think about it.
You give la too much value, the tour will exist long after his records have been wiped from the slate.
Oh and my french is just a little rusty i think, i get the turtle promise to try harder + make posts in the future but i am not sure on the last bit about the devil telling me he is visiting? i am asking so you can tell me, no silly point ect , i genuinely want to know?
GeeMan

Crossgates, UK

#24 Oct 5, 2012
turtle I will say this again for a final time that my issue is not exclusively with the newspapers but the reasoning behind Tygart choosing them for exclusive interview and access to commentary on the File that we all are waiting on.

Both newspapers have an accepted vendetta against Armstrong and that is why I believe he chose them. They offer him sympathetic press to report his views as he wishes them to be presented, i.e. in a controlled manner.

I have no issue with Tygart motivation to pursue Armstrong but I will always have an issue when the Law makers want to be Law breakers or seek to bend them to the hilt to achieve their objectives and he is unfortunately doing both.
Credibility of Anti-Doping should be upheld at all times even in tough times like now when the dopers appear to be over the hill and gone and it shall take a very long time to catch up to them.
A win at all costs against Armstrong appears to be his and USADA sole objective which I also see as disrespectful to all the other Athletes under his charge and USADA must be missing some activity as a result.

You know my feelings if Armstrong took PED's but I would rather see him, and anyone else, brought to task in an appropriate manner and have all charges stick rather than the way itís being done just now. He also did not invent doping but was part of the whole EPO etc era and I think finding a clean Cyclist at the time is like looking for a needle in a haystack and concentrating on Armstrong ignores the rest. USADA/WADA may want to have a Trophy Head to pin on the wall however if Armstrong wins it takes Anti-Doping back years and when I say win I mean any reduction in his sanctions is bad news. The sanctions USADA applied also went over the top instead of playing clever and sticking to the 8 year statute of limitations which every other relevant body would find virtually impossible to resist i.e. UCI. Armstrong response, I believe, would be the same if it was 1 week or Life and anything in between!
I personally would have less of an issue with USADA if they stuck with their rules as well.

When the dust finally settles on this matter, and I believe it has a long way to run yet, it shall either make or break Anti-Doping and USADA/WADA and the more that is revealed as a result of this issue the more distasteful I find it from every side, and I mean every side. The actions of USADA lend far more weight to those who want to cite a witch hunt when it could have been avoided especially after the Federal case being closed and a softer less high profile approach would have been far more appropriate than a bull in a china shop but I believe we are seeing the personality of Tygart the man than the role of a CEO in an organisation of this nature. The other long term risk in this matter is making a martyr out of Armstrong which would not be good for Sport in general.

For me, in Justice the ends donít justify the means it needs to within the rules and done consistently across the board for everyone before during and after this case.

I genuinely donít understand the L'Equipe history against the point I have been making and the common thread through all my posts but you clearly do and we are going around in circles with it.

I will leave you to work out the French.
turtle

Huddersfield, UK

#25 Oct 5, 2012
GeeMan wrote:
turtle I will say this again for a final time that my issue is not exclusively with the newspapers but the reasoning behind Tygart choosing them for exclusive interview and access to commentary on the File that we all are waiting on.
Both newspapers have an accepted vendetta against Armstrong and that is why I believe he chose them. They offer him sympathetic press to report his views as he wishes them to be presented, i.e. in a controlled manner.
I have no issue with Tygart motivation to pursue Armstrong but I will always have an issue when the Law makers want to be Law breakers or seek to bend them to the hilt to achieve their objectives and he is unfortunately doing both.
Credibility of Anti-Doping should be upheld at all times even in tough times like now when the dopers appear to be over the hill and gone and it shall take a very long time to catch up to them.
A win at all costs against Armstrong appears to be his and USADA sole objective which I also see as disrespectful to all the other Athletes under his charge and USADA must be missing some activity as a result.
You know my feelings if Armstrong took PED's but I would rather see him, and anyone else, brought to task in an appropriate manner and have all charges stick rather than the way itís being done just now. He also did not invent doping but was part of the whole EPO etc era and I think finding a clean Cyclist at the time is like looking for a needle in a haystack and concentrating on Armstrong ignores the rest. USADA/WADA may want to have a Trophy Head to pin on the wall however if Armstrong wins it takes Anti-Doping back years and when I say win I mean any reduction in his sanctions is bad news. The sanctions USADA applied also went over the top instead of playing clever and sticking to the 8 year statute of limitations which every other relevant body would find virtually impossible to resist i.e. UCI. Armstrong response, I believe, would be the same if it was 1 week or Life and anything in between!
I personally would have less of an issue with USADA if they stuck with their rules as well.
When the dust finally settles on this matter, and I believe it has a long way to run yet, it shall either make or break Anti-Doping and USADA/WADA and the more that is revealed as a result of this issue the more distasteful I find it from every side, and I mean every side. The actions of USADA lend far more weight to those who want to cite a witch hunt when it could have been avoided especially after the Federal case being closed and a softer less high profile approach would have been far more appropriate than a bull in a china shop but I believe we are seeing the personality of Tygart the man than the role of a CEO in an organisation of this nature. The other long term risk in this matter is making a martyr out of Armstrong which would not be good for Sport in general.
For me, in Justice the ends donít justify the means it needs to within the rules and done consistently across the board for everyone before during and after this case.
I genuinely donít understand the L'Equipe history against the point I have been making and the common thread through all my posts but you clearly do and we are going around in circles with it.
I will leave you to work out the French.
i thought we had reached some sort of comedy zenith which would make posting and reading posts a little more palatable.
unfortunately i was mistaken. I can not bring myself to reprint points, opinions and posts all over again. We get it and understand the very large hammer you are using to go over and over and over again irrespective of what reply you receive.
Still no sign of an apology, oh well one can only hope. It might just be the case that usada feels it has evidence to go after la, i am just sort of guessing here but maybe.. I will write no more as it will only lead to further misunderstandings.
GeeMan

Crossgates, UK

#27 Oct 5, 2012
ditto

Its a pity the File has been delayed as we would have sonething better to discuss and if Tygart is correct it should be dynamite, lets hope.

As soon as its out I expect WADA to be all over it and in the press putting pressure on UCI, which I would do also if I was them.

UCI I expect to ignore everything and do their own thing otherwise it see as the the end for McQuaid and he has clung to power for a long time.

Landis will have to be the entertainent till then!
lee512

Portland, OR

#28 Oct 6, 2012
GeeMan wrote:
Why is it that Travis Tygart has a need to share what he purports to have discovered with a French newspaper that has long been against Armstrong rather than everyone else who is entitled to it first and without prejudice and/or Public debate or exposure i.e. confedential.
To be fair to L'Equipe they just hate anyone who is not French and wins Classics and the TDF because they have been unable to produce a home grown winner!
I said before lets see who leaks to the press and suggested it would be USADA and they dont dissapoint!
The time taken for this case has been Tygart trying to wind it up when the evidence and its security of tenure should be all that matters.
It looks like Tygart enjoys being in the media a lot and knows that no one else will be able to feed his need like Armstrong's name in the same way Hamilton has basically wrote a book Armstrong and what he says happened, who would buy his book if it was about him?
Tygart also says he offered Armstrong a chance to work with USADA and confess however it appears that offer is about as much worth as the paper is wasnt written on and all Armstrong needs do is deny it was offered, if indeed it was offered!
Tygart would have been better to issue the evidence then talk about it instead of winding everyone up about it before its issued but he appears to be self obsessed to be in the media and reeks of a wannabee Politician and it looks like, to me, he sees Armstrong as his ticket to that.
If anyone wants to take issue with my views on Tygarts behaviour please explain why his actions are acceptable, fitting and do not contravene Armstrong's constitutional rights?
Its OK for Tygart and USADA to go around saying what they want and go outwith the rules, bearing in mind their ability to go beyond 8 years needs an agreement at a Panel Hearing and that hasnt taken place and his defence in doing this is Armstrong cheated.
Lets say he is guilty of everything USADA say he is that does not mean they are entitled to do what they want outside their Code and questionable as a contravention of Armstrongs Constitutional Rights, a Judges comments not mine.

I agree GeeMan. It is overkill, and this is politics, and Lance is being used as a Martyr to represent the US, and on top of it, it has taken as I mentioned years after each consecutive medal. Perhaps one medal stung, but 7 was the tipping point? Especially someone who had cancer? Sorry that it was not a Frenchman.mI would have applauded just as heartily for a Frenchman who went through what Lance went through, as I do not have that hatred, I just know how I as a single woman back in the 1980's traveling alone in Europe was treated as I contributed to the tourism of France. I was singled out, spoken to in French while I struggled to speak French after every question, I was laughed at for my horrible accent, I was quiet, alone, and I was not told when my train changed at 5am, and though I had a first class ticket, I was put on the seats, not the cushettes (the sleeping couch which I paid for), I had an attempted rape on the French train, no one came to my aid as I made plenty of noise,and yes it was a frenchman attempting to do so, but I woke up, and slammed him outside the glass, barricaded myself inside the room, and no one came to my aid. But that still did not dim my opinion of the beauty of the Southern French countryside. Anyway, did not happen in the other countries, treated wonderfully, but that is beside the point. I am not sure what is going on with this Frenchman. I just feel strongly that politics is involved, and someone had a case of sour grapes.
GeeMan

Crossgates, UK

#29 Oct 7, 2012
Lee sorry to hear about your horrific experience in France and more power to you that it didnít taint your opinion of the country as a whole which would be perfectly understandable if it had.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Cycling Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Do you want to buy all kinds of cycling jerseys? (Dec '11) Sep 10 Jeremy 2
Can Armstrong ever be forgiven? Sep 8 Rider 1
pongo59 Aug '14 pongo59 1
Pagcor's homegrown artists take center stage th... Jul '14 shirley oliva 1
Last week,i bought a very cheap cycling jersey (Sep '10) Jul '14 Jeremy 2
Hope 2014 Tour is Clean Jul '14 Cyclingfan 1
Not Even Lance Deserves This (Dec '13) Jul '14 DCDierking 38

Cycling People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE