Lance Armstrong; why people don't care about one of sport's biggest ever stories. |
| Lance Armstrong celebrating his record breaking 7th Tour de France win in 2005 |
Thursday, August 23rd is the day when Armstrong will enter his decision to either accept a lifetime ban and the loss of his 7 Tour de France titles or defend himself against the USADA's extensive doping charges in court.
The US Anti-Doping Authority, USADA, charged Armstrong and 4 others with being part of a sophisticated conspiracy in which they used banned drugs and blood transfusions to gain an advantage. 3 of Lance Armstrong's associates; team doctor Luis Garcia del Moral, Jose Marti and hugely controversial consulting doctor Michele Ferrari have already received lifelong bans after deciding not to contest USADA's charges. Armstrong and his former directeur sportif, Johan Bruyneel decided to question the USADA's jurisdiction and lodged an appeal to block the proceedings against them. The appeal was thrown out with derision; "This court is not inclined to indulge Armstrong's desire for publicity, self-aggrandisement or vilification of defendants" wrote US district court judge Sam Sparks. After rewording their appeal, they were granted a 30 day reprieve, but a U.S. federal judge concluded that Armstrong must answer the USADA's charges.
Hero
Lance Armstrong is a hero to millions of people the world over. In 1996 Lance was diagnosed with testicular cancer which spread to his brain and lungs. Not only did he survive and recover from this but he then went on to return to pro-cycling and dominate the world's most gruelling sport's event, the Tour de France, winning it in 7 consecutive years. People, thankfully, survive cancer every day but few can doubt that Lance's story is truly remarkable. Lance details his story in his autobiographical books 'It's not about the bike' and 'Every second counts', both of which I enjoyed reading. If you can get over his American brashness it is impossible not to be inspired by Lance Armstrong. He is the poster boy of cancer sufferers and survivors everywhere. He has helped raise millions of pounds for his cancer charity Livestrong, most memorable for it's iconic yellow wristbands. For his story, for his accomplishments, for the way he rode his bike and for the people he's helped, he will always be a hero.
 |
| Controversial Dr Michele Ferrari |
 |
| Tyler Hamilton accused Armstrong of doping |
The Armstrong story however is not that simple. Armstrong's career has never been far from controversy, not helped by choosing to associate himself with numerous controversial figures including the above mentioned Ferrari and Bruyneel. Dr Michelle Ferrari's name became synonymous with doping in the mid nineties and Johan Bruyneel has worked with numerous cycling dopers including 2 times TDF winner Alberto Contador and Tyler Hamilton. Lance Armstrong's ex team mates 2006 TDF winner Floyd Landis and Tyler Hamilton publicly accused him of doping in their own doping hearings. Their accounts, much chastised by Armstrong for being the words of convicted liars, are thought to make up some of the evidence against Armstrong, alongside the testimonies of other former temmates Levi Leipheimer, George Hicapie, Christian Vande Velde and David Zabriskie.
Cycling journalist Paul Kimmage's story featured heavily in an excellent book 'Bad blood' by Jeremy Whittle, about doping in cycling, which focused much of it's attention on Armstrong. It was an illuminating insight into the personality of Armstrong. His brash, alpha male, me-against-the-world personality never helped endear him to the sceptics and by all accounts he used to rule the peloton with an iron fist. Kimmage was one of a number of sceptical journalists who were barred from Armstrong press conferences by his support team. He also raised objections to the UCI (cycling's governing body) acceptance of a $100,000 donation from Armstrong 8 years ago.
During my research for this article two things stuck in my mind and I'll leave you to make up your own mind about them. The first comes from former doper and now anti-doping advocate David Millar's book 'Racing through the Dark'. Speaking candidly after receiving a two year ban for doping Millar said that the moment he doped he became more professional, meaning that because of using EPO he put a new pressure on himself to train and win races. I thought to myself, who was the most professional rider out there? The answer I came up with was Lance Armstrong; the man who'd ride up mountains on his own on Christmas day, the guy who'd weigh out his food and leave nothing to chance.
The second was the story of Italian cyclist Filippo Simeoni, and his feud with Armstrong. Simeoni spoke out against Dr Ferrari, claiming that he had administered doping products to him. Armstrong called him a liar and Simeoni began legal proceedings against him for defamation. In the 2004 Tour de France, Simeoni got into a breakaway with other riders who were no threat to Armstrong's overall race lead. Armstrong followed Simeoni, which meant that the peleton would have to chase him, and the breakaway riders would lose their chance at winning the stage. In exchange for the breakaway being able to stay away, Armstrong made Simeoni return with him to the peleton, where upon Simeoni was abused and spat on by some members of the peleton. Armstrong claimed that Simeoni wanted to destroy cycling by speaking against it but sceptics believed that Armstrong wanted to deny Simeoni the air time a stage-winning press conference would give him.
 |
| Armstrong and Simeoni 2004 Tour de France. |
So why is this huge story gaining so little coverage?
There are numerous reasons. Some people are sick of the constant speculation over Armstrong and whether he doped or not. Others have long since made up their minds and feel that the USADA's inquiry will not prove anything either way. There are also those to whom Lance is such a hero, either because of his comeback story or his charity work, that they don't care if he doped or not. After all, one might think, didn't all cyclist dope?
People within cycling are fed up with the whole affair and don't want it to overshadow their sport, which in my opinion is far cleaner than it was. For a long time there has existed an 'omerta', silence, amongst professional cyclists. The idea being that if you get caught you carry the can on your own and you don't implicate your fellow professionals. After years of scandal and controversy this approach is not surprising, after all, there are careers and vast sums of money at stake. For these reasons there is not much noise on this story coming from within cycling.
Decision time
Lance Armstrong must now decide; he can either contest the charges and take his chances in court or accept the charges and face losing his titles and also his right to compete in Ironman triathlons, his current occupation. Armstrong knows that public opinion is what holds weight in his current situation. He has always been a fighter so I would expect him to contest the charges. The potential downside for him is that in doing this all the evidence and the testimony against him will reach the public domain. The other option, accepting the charges, could allow him to protest his innocence and dismiss the USADAs investigation as a politically driven witch-hunt against him. The third option would be to plead guilty to the charges. This no one expects, he has come too far and protested his innocence too long for this to be a valid option.
As Lance often says "he is the most tested athlete on the planet", this is extremely worrying. If USADA and others think that it is possible for the most tested athlete on the planet to be a doper, surely that would mean that the tests were ineffective and by extension that any athlete over the last 20 years could've been a doper.
The Lance Armstrong story has long been the elephant in the room but over the next week or so, people are going to have to talk about it!
No comments:
Post a Comment