10-Year Ban for Bruyneel

[Uncle Jam's Army]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/johan-bruyneel-handed-10-year-ban-by-american-arbitration-association

Arbitration panel gives Bruyneel 10 years. Bruyneel seems to admit to his complicity in the doping conspiracy, with his only defense a procedural one (i.e., AAA and USADA had no jurisdiction over him). I would imagine this is the end of Bruyneel's involvement in bicycle racing.

[oldpotatoe]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/johan-bruyneel-handed-10-year-ban-by-american-arbitration-association

Arbitration panel gives Bruyneel 10 years. Bruyneel seems to admit to his complicity in the doping conspiracy, with his only defense a procedural one (i.e., AAA and USADA had no jurisdiction over him). I would imagine this is the end of Bruyneel's involvement in bicycle racing.

should be lifetime like his 'wayward charge'...

[Nooch]

should be lifetime like his 'wayward charge'...

but had Armstrong gone to arbitration, perhaps the AAA would have said 'you're right, a lifetime ban is too much, here's ten years...'

[El Chaba]

Bruyneel has always given me the creeps. There is a certain sleazy look about him; he just exudes dishonesty....

[ultraman6970]

Well, he will come back in 2025.

[leooooo]

Well, he will come back in 2025.

2022! it was backdated

Cant wait for him to be back :rolleyes:

[gianni]

Who will fall next: Tom Wiesel, Bjarne Riss, Och ?

There is still a alot of tainted meat out there.

[CunegoFan]

If Armstrong was smart and Bruyneel has financial issues that prevent him from appealing to CAS then Armstrong would give him the money to do so. There are many procedural issues that could be contested, like using American precedent to toll the SOL, applying the WADA code to incidents before WADA even existed, USADA jurisdiction over foreign nationals, length of ban beyond what WADA code allows, etc.

[oldpotatoe]

Who will fall next: Tom Wiesel, Bjarne Riss, Och ?

There is still a alot of tainted meat out there.

At least Riis admitted to use. Anybody who thinks as a manager, he didn't promote doping on his team, well, I have a bridge I'd like to sell ya.

[redir]

Bruyneel has always given me the creeps. There is a certain sleazy look about him; he just exudes dishonesty....

Man, I'm glad you are not on my jury ;)

Lifetime ban would be more appropriate.

[jpw]

At least Riis admitted to use.

He did?

[54ny77]

I bet the cocktail party chitchat between him & Lance in the intervening years was fun.

:rolleyes: :p

[brando]

When does Amgen's 10-year ban from cycling begin? :banana:

[ntb1001]

He did?

He did.

but...it seems to be ok for him.

[cnighbor1]

Bruyneel and Gene therapy If that article I posted on Gene Therapy is correct we haven't seen the end of boosting Pro athletes performance a lot!!! so more types like Bruyneel will be forth coming. Soon

Charles

[bthomas515]

Wait, so its only until 2022? So its only like 8 years...

[Mark McM]

He did?

http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/cycling/news/story?id=2882380

COPENHAGEN, Denmark -- Bjarne Riis became the first Tour de France winner to admit using performance-enhancing drugs to win the sport's premier race, further eroding cycling's credibility after a series of doping confessions.

His admission Friday means the top three finishers in the 1996 Tour have all been linked to doping -- and two have admitted cheating.

The retired Dane said he used the blood-booster EPO from 1993 to 1998, including during his 1996 Tour victory, confirming years of speculation that he benefited from banned substances. He also admitted taking cortisone and human growth hormone, but didn't say when.

"I have taken doping. I have taken EPO," Riis said at a televised news conference. "I have made errors and I would like to apologize."

[Mark McM]

Wait, so its only until 2022? So its only like 8 years...

The start of the ban was back-dated to when he was originally charged with the doping violations (in late 2012).

[harlond]

If Armstrong was smart and Bruyneel has financial issues that prevent him from appealing to CAS then Armstrong would give him the money to do so. There are many procedural issues that could be contested, like using American precedent to toll the SOL, applying the WADA code to incidents before WADA even existed, USADA jurisdiction over foreign nationals, length of ban beyond what WADA code allows, etc.Not all of those seem like "procedural" issues to me, but putting that aside, why would a resolution of any them in favor of Bruyneel have a favorable impact on Armstrong?

[54ny77]

When Bruyneel comes back to run their masters team, which is surely clean as a whistle. :p

When does Amgen's 10-year ban from cycling begin? :banana:

[Uncle Jam's Army]

When Bruyneel comes back to run their masters team, which is surely clean as a whistle. :p

Come on, Jim. It was only Meeker, right?

[CunegoFan]

Not all of those seem like "procedural" issues to me, but putting that aside, why would a resolution of any them in favor of Bruyneel have a favorable impact on Armstrong?

I later skimmed through the decision. It is interesting that the panel firmly rejected equitable tolling of the statute of limitations saying the precedent USADA was trying to use was not applicable. It would seem that USADA's stripping of Armstrong results back to 1998 was not kosher. Results should have been stripped from 2004 onward. The panel also rejected USADA's request for lifetime bans. Overall the whole affair smells bad. Life long dopers like Leipheimer and Danielson get six months during the off-season, never missing a day of racing, the supposed mastermind gets ten years, and Armstrong gets life.

What Armstrong wants is information that he was treated unfairly. This is more for public relations purposes than anything. CAS chipping away at the reasoning used to give Armstrong such a harsh sanction would help his case. Total cost for him to fund Bruyneel's appeal to CAS should be less than $200K judging by what Landis spent.

[Rueda Tropical]

Overall the whole affair smells bad. Life long dopers like Leipheimer and Danielson get six months during the off-season, never missing a day of racing, the supposed mastermind gets ten years, and Armstrong gets life.

Armstrong was offered the same deal, cooperate for consideration. He turned it down. They didn't. Armstrong elected to be treated differently.

[Mark McM]

Armstrong was offered the same deal, cooperate for consideration. He turned it down. They didn't. Armstrong elected to be treated differently.

One possibility for Armstrong choosing not to cooperate with USADA is that USADA required their witnesses to testify under oath. Since Armstrong had previously testified under oath that he had had never taken PEDs, there was a small possibility that he could have been charged with perjury, and been criminally prosecuted.

So far, despite facing several lawsuits (and admissions on national television with Oprah), he has still managed to avoid testifying under oath, and it appears that he intends to keep it that way.

[nathanong87]

http://media.ziptied.com/members/files/270/gifs/Dying.gif

[CunegoFan]

Armstrong was offered the same deal, cooperate for consideration. He turned it down. They didn't. Armstrong elected to be treated differently.

That is what USADA would have you believe. Armstrong says he was not offered the same deal. USADA's offer was basically "come out with your hands up". JV worked out sweetheart deals for his boys years in advance.

I don't believe USADA when it claims it is only concerned with cleaning up cycling. According to them, out of the goodness of their hearts, they took it upon themselves to clean up Euopean sport that has almost no presence in the U.S. Armstrong just happened to get in the way and would not cooperate. It is ludicrous. They were specifically targeting Armstrong. We know that in 2006 Landis was offered a deal if he would turn on Armstrong, so it was a long running hunt. It does not help the process for Tygart to lie about it. He should sack up and admit he was going after Armstrong.

It is easy to say that Armstrong and Bruyneel are jerks and deserve whatever happens to them. I cannot say I am unhappy watching Armstrong's reputation being shredded. But the two are being used as scapegoats for systemic doping in cycling. There was not a successful top team during that era that did not have team doping support. Everybody knew, the riders, the team staffs, the race organizers, the national and international governing bodies, the cycling media, and any fan who was not stupid. To paint USPS as a unique and unprecedented conspiracy is grandstanding by USADA, especially when not that many years ago USADA busted a lab making its own undetectable steroids.

This seems like one big sordid mess desperately in need of a reboot after an honest acknowledgement of how endemic doping was. No one looks good, including the "ends justify the means" anti-doping agencies. The situation is even more galling when one realizes that climbing speeds are right back to where they were in 2004, the height of the blood transfusion era. From the early season results of riders who have found their legs once again after a season or two of sub-standard results, it looks like a lot of riders have adopted whatever new stuff one team has been using during the last two years. Some cleanup.

[Mark McM]

That is what USADA would have you believe. Armstrong says he was not offered the same deal.

You should have learned by now that you can't believe anything that comes out of the Armstrong PR machine.

Many of Armstrong's statements have come to be known as pure fabrications. Can you point to any documented evidence that any of USADA's statements are untrue?

It has been said that USADA has been playing by a different set of rules when it comes to Armstrong. This is true - Armstrong plays by the rules that if his sound bites and PR statements can be repeated enough times they must be true (even if they are plainly not - "Most tested athlete in history?" "More than 500 doping tests?" both statements by Armstrong's lawyers turned out to be fabrications.). USADA plays by the rules that all evidence can be examined and judged by independent arbitrators.

Until Armstrong is willing make statements under oath, nothing he says has to be believed.

[Shortsocks]

Guy is a major D-bag god sure. ;)

But look at his previous wins as a pro:

Tour de l'Avenir
Rund um den Henninger Turm
Tour de France, 2 stages
Vuelta a España, 1 stage

I mean he beat Indurain in a Sprint to win a stage on a tour...even managed a podium spot on the 1995 Vuelta a Espana. Hell of a life.

I'm just excited that I don't hit any red lights on my daily ride.

[CunegoFan]

You should have learned by now that you can't believe anything that comes out of the Armstrong PR machine.

You should have learned by now that you cannot believe anything that comes out of the USADA PR machine either. Tygart is outright lying about not targeting Armstrong.

Sure Armstrong has manipulated public opinion. But so has USADA. Just last year it claimed A-Rod "was using the most potent and sophisticated drug program developed for an athlete that we've ever seen." BS. A-Rod was using a self-taught quack with no medical training. Let's not even mention BALCO. USADA had just finished interviewing European pro cyclists who should have told him there were two dozen teams, each with multiple real doctors, that had more sophisticated programs than A-Rod's testosterone and a few peptides. That statement was untrue and was made purely to sway public opinion, the same tactic Armstrong is fond of.

[enr1co]

Guy is a major D-bag god sure. ;)

But look at his previous wins as a pro:

I mean he beat Indurain in a Sprint to win a stage on a tour...


That was the stage that he totally sucked Indurain's wheel for the final 10K and then came around him in the last ~50 meters.

The dirtbag should have been banned for life.

[AgilisMerlin]

http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/photos/races12/misc12/rabobruyneel.jpg

http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/7YCuQsGVV20/hqdefault.jpg

http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/810000/images/_813171_bruyneel150.jpg

http://www.johanbruyneel.com/sites/all/themes/jb/images/timeline/1996.jpg

http://www.nbcsports.com/files/nbcsports/styles/gallery_slide/public/migrated_images/080627_1996_7thstage_v.jpg?itok=QrKGh9Ez

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YCuQsGVV20

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SUZTiZFGF7E

http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/photos/races12/misc12/raboearly.jpg

http://www.astro.com/imwiki/adb/nat/I047/I047357.yMF_IHgm.pThUfccAzqdkw.c2atw.250.jpg

[BumbleBeeDave]

Armstrong was treated differently because he is a giant, economy-sized, big, bad, and nationwide PR*CK.

His actions in doping were beyond others because he and Bruyneel not only orchestrated a doping program, but they gave riders no choice but to participate or be booted off the team.

Same for his treatment of anybody that disagreed with him or didn't toe his line. He used every bit of power and connection at his disposal to try to destroy their reputations, livelihoods, and lives. Not just to make them go away, but to destroy them.

If Lance had simply been a nicer guy none of this would have happened to him. End of story.

BBD

[Shortsocks]

That was the stage that he totally sucked Indurain's wheel for the final 10K and then came around him in the last ~50 meters.

The dirtbag should have been banned for life.


LOL. You're right, you're right.

[shovelhd]

Come on, Jim. It was only Meeker, right?

bwahahahahahaha

[jimoots]

His actions in doping were beyond others because he and Bruyneel not only orchestrated a doping program, but they gave riders no choice but to participate or be booted off the team.



I think you're not being honest with yourself if you don't think that this was the situation in most teams at the time... and let's be straight with ourselves... it probably still is the situation now.


If Lance had simply been a nicer guy none of this would have happened to him. End of story.


That I completely agree with.

[BumbleBeeDave]

I think you're not being honest with yourself if you don't think that this was the situation in most teams at the time... and let's be straight with ourselves... it probably still is the situation now.



That I completely agree with.

But the other I stand by. Lance could have boiled and eaten babies in full view on the team bus and still been a legend if only he had been a nicer guy. He is living proof of karma. He knocked people down then kicked them until there was a limitless supply of people eager to help take him down.

BBD

[djg21]

If Armstrong was smart and Bruyneel has financial issues that prevent him from appealing to CAS then Armstrong would give him the money to do so. There are many procedural issues that could be contested, like using American precedent to toll the SOL, applying the WADA code to incidents before WADA even existed, USADA jurisdiction over foreign nationals, length of ban beyond what WADA code allows, etc.

You're presuming that Armstrong has the financial resources to fund Bruyneel's defense. Armstrong may be under siege himself given the liabilities he faces.

[Elefantino]

Andrew Talansky summed the doping era and its fellow travelers succinctly: "**** 'em all"

[CunegoFan]

His actions in doping were beyond others because he and Bruyneel not only orchestrated a doping program, but they gave riders no choice but to participate or be booted off the team.


This is USADA's ridiculous slant on pro cycling designed to blame a few individuals for a systemic problem. Everyone who got a European pro contract was well aware of how prevalent doping was and what was required to keep a job at the top end. The notion that pro teams would hire someone then keep them around if they cannot do the job is absurd, just like it would be for any other job. With EPO giving a 5-15% performance gain, anyone not using the stuff would not be capable of providing support at the Tour, i.e. they could not do their job. That is the reality of a PED that provides large performance gains and is used prevalently. With guys like Zabriskie willing to do anything, including accepting a $15K salary, to stay on a team, there was no shortage of people willing to do what was necessary. No one had to force anyone to dope. Team managers just had to measure performance then make a decision about whether a rider was useful to the team or not. It was up to the adult rider to decide whether he wanted to do what was needed to stay employed.

Instead, after a decade of a well paid and successful career, we get this whinging. "The bad man forced me to dope even though I could have gone back home and made more and easier money working at McDonald's. Oh, woe is me."

[CunegoFan]

But the other I stand by. Lance could have boiled and eaten babies in full view on the team bus and still been a legend if only he had been a nicer guy. He is living proof of karma. He knocked people down then kicked them until there was a limitless supply of people eager to help take him down.


It was not just Armstrong. McQuaid can be largely blamed. The man is an idiot. He blacklisted Hamilton, Landis, Jaskche, etc. It was only a matter of time before someone flipped. Omerta is a two way street. In exchange for keeping quiet when they go to prison, the soldati expect to be welcomed back into the rackets when they get out. Instead Landis found that no one would hire him.

[cfox]

One possibility for Armstrong choosing not to cooperate with USADA is that USADA required their witnesses to testify under oath. Since Armstrong had previously testified under oath that he had had never taken PEDs, there was a small possibility that he could have been charged with perjury, and been criminally prosecuted.

So far, despite facing several lawsuits (and admissions on national television with Oprah), he has still managed to avoid testifying under oath, and it appears that he intends to keep it that way.
Lance testified under oath last November and named names. The story came out a couple of weeks ago. No one made too big a deal about it, because, well, no one really cares that much anymore.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/cycling/2014/04/09/lance-armstrong-named-names-written-answers-doping/7532825/

[dpk501]

I think that Saiz and Bruyneel should start a unicycle racing league.

They have to live with the fact they're liars but too bad they're so pathological that it won't affect them.

A more appropriate punishment is to have Bruyneel and armstrong and all dopers ride the tour de france every year right after donating pints of blood as penance.


I would actually contribute to livestrong if Lance did that every year. Restitution via blood and suffering.

[Mark McM]

Lance testified under oath last November and named names. The story came out a couple of weeks ago. No one made too big a deal about it, because, well, no one really cares that much anymore.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/cycling/2014/04/09/lance-armstrong-named-names-written-answers-doping/7532825/

Yes, Armstrong provided testimony under oath last November. But he still managed to avoid cross-examination in person. The testimony provided was in the form of written answers to 16 pre-arranged questions (most likely negotiated ahead of time by his lawyers).

[laupsi]

Andrew Talansky summed the doping era and its fellow travelers succinctly: "**** 'em all"

thanks for the opportunity to post; taken in April of 2014, Garmin Team Facility. Great Guy that Talansky!!!

[saab2000]

Armstrong was treated differently because he is a giant, economy-sized, big, bad, and nationwide PR*CK.

His actions in doping were beyond others because he and Bruyneel not only orchestrated a doping program, but they gave riders no choice but to participate or be booted off the team.

Same for his treatment of anybody that disagreed with him or didn't toe his line. He used every bit of power and connection at his disposal to try to destroy their reputations, livelihoods, and lives. Not just to make them go away, but to destroy them.

If Lance had simply been a nicer guy none of this would have happened to him. End of story.

BBD

I don't think you're wrong about any of this but I think the thing that really did him in was his comeback. Had he just stayed out of the spotlight (can anyone say Big Mig....??) and not tried a comeback this whole thing may never have come to light. There were lots of suspicions and a lot of winking and nodding but it probably would have remained water under the bridge had he brought that water back upstream.

His comeback and subsequent TdFs are what brought him down in my opinion.

Oh, and you're right about the karma comment. He wasn't a nice guy and seemingly made as many enemies in cycling as friends. And you'd rather have friends in life than enemies. Look at Merckx. Lots of friends. Few enemies. Treated his competitors and rivals with respect for the most part and stands tall.

[CunegoFan]

Andrew Talansky summed the doping era and its fellow travelers succinctly: "**** 'em all"

This is what Talansky tweeted when Armstrong was charged, knowing full well from his manager and colleagues that Armstrong was a doper:

“don’t care what you think of @lancearmstrong, USADA really shouldn’t repeatedly accuse someone of something with ZERO hard evidence.”

[jpw]

http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/cycling/news/story?id=2882380

thanks. i missed that news. he'd always said that he never failed a test when asked.

[Rueda Tropical]

Omerta is a two way street. In exchange for keeping quiet when they go to prison, the soldati expect to be welcomed back into the rackets when they get out. Instead Landis found that no one would hire him.

Bingo!!!! Even by the lower bar of organized crime Armstrong was a douche. He got what he deserved. Kudo's to the USADA for bringing him down.