Permalink Reply by David B.o.R. on June 16, 2012 at 0:10 only 2?
USADA give it a rest there is no evidence (worthy of the name) against Lance Armstrong!
LET IT GO!
Permalink Reply by Martin Turner on June 14, 2012 at 23:11 It sure is taking an awful long time and alot of tax payer's money to nail Mr Armstrong.
Permalink Reply by Martin Turner on June 15, 2012 at 11:21 We shall see. If the USADA fails to nail LA then I wonder who'll be next in line to have a go?
Permalink Reply by Dstone on June 15, 2012 at 14:43 World Health organistation - cause this is giving everyone the sh#ts, The Ponds Institute?
Permalink Reply by Martin Turner on June 15, 2012 at 20:26 LOL
Permalink Reply by Darren Bosanko on June 14, 2012 at 22:35
Permalink Reply by Derek Hasel on June 14, 2012 at 22:40 I think that might very well be the point of this latest 'farce'. With LA winning (again) makes them look like fools (which they are) !
Permalink Reply by Gus K on June 14, 2012 at 23:50 8 year statute of limtations?
I think this might mean that his TDF victories 1999-2005 will be safe, which will save a lot of face for the UCI. Then again with a USADA "conviction" the UCI might pursue him, and revoke them like they did to Riis.
Permalink Reply by Dahondude on June 15, 2012 at 10:12 Interesting chart on the Cyclingtips website. If you take the titles away from Lance who do they go to? Most of the top ten riders in each year he won have either been found guilty of doping, admitted to doping or are under an equally, if not larger, cloud of suspicion of doping.
Permalink Reply by Martin Turner on June 15, 2012 at 11:22 Was wondering about that myself last night as I sat in front of the TV last knocking back a single malt.
© 2013 Created by Gus K.

