Professional snark about Lance Armstrong

http://gawker.com/5924468/lance-arms...p-off-his-jock

Lance Armstrong Files Restraining Order to get the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency to Ease Up Off His Jock
Caity Weaver

Cyclist and rubber bracelet artisan Lance Armstrong filed a federal lawsuit and requested a restraining order against the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) on Monday, to prevent its punishing him for doping violations that could cost him his seven Tour de France titles.

The Washington Post reports that Armstrong accuses the agency of severe jock-riding, claiming the organization and its CEO Travis Tygart "have engaged in an obsessive, unlawful, and meritless campaign" against him, stemming from a personal vendetta against him perpetuated Tygart.

If stripped of his titles, Armstrong would have his official profession downgraded to "Sheryl Crow's Ex-Boyfriend Who Loved Bikes." He also faces a lifetime ban from Olympic sports and the forfeiture of the prize money that accompanied his Tour de France wins.

On Jul 9, 12:09*pm, Michael wrote:
http://gawker.com/5924468/lance-arms...ning-order-to-...


See also:
http://www.opposingviews.com/i/sport...y-usadas-game#

DR

On Jul 9, 12:09*pm, Michael wrote:
http://gawker.com/5924468/lance-arms...ning-order-to-...


For anyone who may be interested the complaint is available he
http://media2.kxan.com//PDF/ArmstrongFinalComplaint.pdf

DR

On 09/07/2012 20:14, DirtRoadie wrote:
On Jul 9, 12:09 pm, wrote:
http://gawker.com/5924468/lance-arms...ning-order-to-...


See also:
http://www.opposingviews.com/i/sport...y-usadas-game#

It's the lack of a requirement to share evidence that is most surprising, how
the **** do they get away with that?


--

Lance is asserting his Constipational rights.

On Jul 9, 5:12*pm, Anton Berlin wrote:

Lance is asserting his Constipational rights.

You're the poor man's Lafferty or Ed Dolan...but lacking the
charisma. ~

R

On Monday, July 9, 2012 2:14:05 PM UTC-5, DirtRoadie wrote:
On Jul 9, 12:09*pm, Michael > wrote:
> http://gawker.com/5924468/lance-arms...ning-order-to-...
>

See also:
http://www.opposingviews.com/i/sport...y-usadas-game#

DR

I'm not saying he's guilty or innocent. I have no idea. I posted this for the quality of the snark. The snark on rec.bicycles.racing is excellent, but the professionals take it to another level.

On Jul 9, 2:11*pm, atriage wrote:
On 09/07/2012 20:14, DirtRoadie wrote: On Jul 9, 12:09 pm, *wrote:
http://gawker.com/5924468/lance-arms...ning-order-to-....

See also:
http://www.opposingviews.com/i/sport...lance-armstron...

It's the lack of a requirement to share evidence that is most surprising, how
the **** do they get away with that?


I can understand some element of "we are a private organization so we
get to make our own rules," but there are also a bunch of weaknesses
to that argument.
But even assuming that they can enforce their own rules, the "statute
of limitations" issue (under their own rule) would still seem to be a
big one.

DR

On 09/07/2012 23:14, Michael wrote:
On Monday, July 9, 2012 2:14:05 PM UTC-5, DirtRoadie wrote:
On Jul 9, 12:09 pm, > wrote:
> http://gawker.com/5924468/lance-arms...ning-order-to-...
>

See also:
http://www.opposingviews.com/i/sport...y-usadas-game#

DR

I'm not saying he's guilty or innocent. I have no idea.

He's guilty but irrelevant. After Oliver Cromwell had been buried for a while
the Royalists dug the body up and hung it as a punishment. That's kind of what
Tygart is trying to do to LA.

--

On Jul 9, 4:14*pm, Michael wrote:
On Monday, July 9, 2012 2:14:05 PM UTC-5, DirtRoadie wrote:
On Jul 9, 12:09*pm, Michael > wrote:
>http://gawker.com/5924468/lance-arms...ning-order-to-...
>

See also:
http://www.opposingviews.com/i/sport...lance-armstron...

DR

I'm not saying he's guilty or innocent. I have no idea. I posted this for the quality of the snark. The snark on rec.bicycles.racing is excellent, but the professionals take it to another level.

Me neither. I just thought the counterpoint was well put together.
Even more significant was its accurate anticipation of the complaint
which LA actually filed. Now we wait to see whether that is refiled in
"Just the facts, Ma'am" form as might be accepted by the judge.

I predict the word "kangaroo" will not be found in any refiling.

DR