Even the judge in the case thinks there is bias. "USADA's conduct raises serious questions about whether its real interest in charging Armstrong is to combat doping, or if it is acting according to less noble motives," such as politics or publicity, U.S. District Judge Sam Sparks wrote.
I've mentioned my stance on this before, a couple of times (here and here). I'll simply sum up here:
- Either Armstrong did not use PEDs and he was the superior rider over his rivals of the day, many of whom have been found to have used PEDs OR,
- Armstrong did use PEDs and was the superior rider versus his rivals of the time, many of whom have been found also to have used PEDs.
This certainly feels like a witch hunt and I respect Armstrong more for stepping away from it after years and years of fighting. He is still an inspiration to Cancer survivors everywhere and hopefully he can focus more on raising money for that worthy endeavor.
And, hopefully, one of the groups like the UCI will continue to challenge this on the merits of the case. Hearsay should not overwhelm the tests. Now, if they were able to test his blood and urine again and this time, with today's technology, they found PEDs, I would be singing a slightly different tune (but, actually, not much). But unless or until that happens, I'm taking the dozens and hundreds of tests over the word of people who hate and envy Armstrong every day.
No comments:
Post a Comment