My thoughts:
I was utterly dissappointed by USADA's declaration of guilt based on circumstantial evidence, heresay, and Lance's decision not to persue the case to arbirtration. I never really believed Lance was not a doper, to me it was pretty obvious that he was. It is kind of like the excuse I used in college that just because I went to parties where people smoked pot, hung around with people who smoked pot, read articles about growing pot, and kept a giant water bong in my room, in no way meant that I was actually a pot smoker (former I might add, by choice, not because I think there is anything wrong with it), I mean come on, give me a freaking break bro.
The way the case was handled was atrocious, but so was Contador's case. It is curious to say the least that 50 picograms of clenbuterol can be detected in urine (that is 0.00000000005 grams) but it takes almost 2 years to issue punishment. Frank Schelck received proper treatment at this year's tour, you failed your out...how hard was that?
Another point I am considering is why ban drugs in the first place? Controlling drug use with laws has not been very successful (IMO) in society so why would it be more successuful in sports? The only logical reason I can think of is to pay respect to those atheltes who competed before the advent of many of these drugs. But that is somewhat illogical in itself too, we don't restrict technology as it applies to advancing business or academic interests. Perhaps we should all read by candle light so as to be fair to all Abe Lincoln contributed too...
If drugs can be administered safely and fairly and help athleltes perform better and reduce injury, why not do it? Avoiding danger seems obvious, as does education to the youth that just because a little is good doesn't mean a lot is better. Ibuprofen releives swelling, why is that not a performance enhancer but coritsone is?
Ultimately I know that politics dictates the answers to all the above questions and the decisions that are made, but I want to hear what you all think personally.
Though I would have loved Lance to be a clean racer, the good that he has done for cycling, cancer patients, and humanity as a whole FAR outweighs what Travis Tygart has contributed to society, and for that reason alone I will still side with Lance (despite the fact that if I ever met the guy I would probably think he was an egotistical douche bag!
)
