Evo said:
It's the rules. Break the rules, you lose. "Everyone does it" is no excuse. Anyone that does it loses. That's the rules. To say there should be no punishment because of rampant abuse is idiotic, IMO.
I am not saying there shouldn't be any punishment, I am saying that he should not have his medals stripped away from him given his testimony of the performance enhancement culture and other cyclists admitting that, "you'd be quite stupid to not use performance enhancing drugs."
The context matters most to me as this isn't a black and white issue. Taking away medals won't detour cyclists from using the drugs.
@
Jimmy: I am not trying to show what Lance did was right or good, but rather, reasonable given the circumstances. It is true that if the UCI wants to take away the medals, they have the right, but I believe they are going about it the wrong way.
Punishments such as taking away the prize money, fines, and lawsuits would be much better while still acknowledging that he and other cyclists won a fair race.
Arguably this isn't true if you take into consideration that the title is for those who win and by definition in the case that means coming first without cheating.
Cheating is defined as having an unfair advantage. However, given the testimony of other cyclists, that isn't the case for the Tour de France.
What kind of comment is that? Are you saying that the people who have come forward deserved what they got? Do you think he is at all justified with the level of persecution that has come to light? Calling it "being mean" is disingenuous, being mean would have been to call them names not set out to ruin their career and have them sued.
I am saying we shouldn't look at them as the good guys in this rather we should scrutinize their reasoning. What prompted them to out Lance? The reason I am saying this is because people are demonizing Lance and heralding the people he lashed out towards as victims. We should look at both sides rather than choosing a side.
Being angry at people for revealing your cheating is one thing, persecuting them with every means you have is nothing short of evil. Unless you think it's morally acceptable to detour to devastate people financially and professionally so that they won't reveal that you don't deserve what you have?
The use of the word evil as a character description is too much here. We all have our own ways of dealing with, what seems to me, to be a targeted attack or betrayal. Lance dealt with it in anger, yes, and he did in my opinion go a bit overboard but saying he is evil is too much. We shouldn't be quick to judge how he personally dealt with the situation as he was, in my opinion, afraid of what would happen so, like any person afraid, they resort to what seems rational, "fight."
I heard people saying that because he wasn't fighting his medals being taken away (before admitting) he was guilty. So, was Lance at the time right to pursue those saying "slanderous" remarks? Probably so. But to me, it seemed to shed more light than cover up the situation.
], if everyone has access to the same performance-enchancing drugs and practices, and if people are willing to risk this for the sake of the big prize, money, then you would still have a level playing field. Just as people knowingly risk death in various other sports [auto racing, boats, motorcycles, airplanes...] and serious brain or spinal injury in other risky sports such as boxing and American football, and also those who put it all at risk in the settings world's records and so forth, people will do what it takes to win. Why are these drugs any more dangerous or unacceptable than other competitive sports and activities that we find perfectly acceptable? If everyone knew that bicycle racing means conceding to be a drug user, then at least one wouldn't go into this with their eyes closed. And maybe parents wouldn't be so quick to pressure their kids into things like this.
