It’s not about the bike!

When he wrote his autobiography following his first Tour de France victory, Lance Armstrong was clearly a visionary as well as a cyclist.  So what is he now, a serial cheat and bully, or a living legend and life-changing hero for 28 million cancer survivors? Possibly both? 

For me, the jury is still out – a great irony in that the only jury to have been involved in this great debate is one that effectively found him not guilty of using performance-enhancing drugs back in 2005.

USADA alleges Armstrong used banned substances as far back as 1996, including steroids, blood transfusions and the blood-booster, erythropoietin (EPO).

I must admit that there is now a lot of evidence to suggest that he may have hoodwinked millions around the world, but I am reserving a final opinion until the last judgment has been served.

This statement may appear strange given that Armstrong refuses to defend himself anymore. However, he has only refused to defend himself against the USADA, which he has accused of being ‘unconstitutional’ and having conducted a ‘witch-hunt’, targeting him specifically.

The latter point is largely understandable. Drug-enforcing agencies have always made the greatest advances in history when they have taken down the biggest names. Think Ben Johnson and Barry Bonds. Given the past record of drug use in professional cycling it is easy to understand why they have persisted in their ‘persecution’ of the cancer-survivor.

Armstrong’s story, after all, is one of a man who cheated death, returning from the hospital bed to claim more Tour de France victories than any man in history.

I do have some sympathy with Armstrong’s claim that there is no physical evidence against him, pointing to over 500 clean drug tests. Armstrong has now been damned on the basis of 26 personal testimonies, some of it new, much of it old and previously rejected. Eleven of these come from former teammates.

For every argument there is a counter-claim. George Hincapie, Armstrong’s long-standing friend, along with another former colleague, Tyler Hamilton, have produced personal accounts providing specific details of where, how and when a variety of performance-enhancing techniques have been used.

Some of this information had been provided previously, notably by Armstrong’s former masseuse, Irishwoman Emma O’Reilly, including allegations that a positive test in 1999 was argued to be the result of a fraudulently post-dated prescription for a Cemalyt cream to treat riders being saddle-sore.

Yet, one week later Armstrong claimed the first of his seven titles and his Livestrong Foundation, formed in 1997, truly gained global recognition. At the time of O’Reilly’s claim, she was discredited and ignored. The new accounts also detail a shocking level of bullying where Armstrong, colleagues and management allegedly forced team-members to subscribe to cheating. 
There are accounts of colleagues being offered two contracts – one if the cyclist took drugs, which was paid at 10 times the level than if he didn’t. Significantly, or sensibly, this was not specified in the contract, merely inferred. Scott Mercier, also an Olympian with Lance Armstrong in 1992, claimed to have rejected the lucrative offer only to then be unable to keep up, even in training, with cyclists previously inferior. 

The former US Postal cyclist in 1997 rejected the pressure to dope and has now also accused a team doctor of supplying and co-ordinating the programme.

Another Armstrong colleague implicated, Australian Matt White, has stepped down from his position as sporting director at Orica-Green Edge after finally admitting allegations made by Floyd Landis.

So, where does this leave the Tour de France? Current director, Christian Prudhomme believes that all results for the races won by Armstrong (1999 – 2005 inclusive) should be expunged.  

This is not the end of the road. The official governing body, the International Cycling Union (UCI), is currently reviewing the USADA’s report and will decide whether to ratify the removal of Armstrong’s titles. 

Its decision is expected before the end of October after lawyers have fully dissected the 1,000-page document.

Even then, I expect there to be further legal battles. If the UCI fails to side with USADA then there will be an argument as to whether Armstrong should be stripped of his title or not.
Should the UCI sanction USADA’s decision, there could well be a case for Armstrong to answer for perjury following a civil suit in 2005. Armstrong sued an insurance company that had withheld a $3.1 million bonus, claiming that they did not have to pay due to concerns over his use of drugs.

The report suggests that Armstrong made at least seven untruthful statements in a court battle that eventually secured him a $4.7m payout. At least this would allow for the cross-examination of an intriguing witness list, many of whom have changed their story to implicate Armstrong.

In 2008 when sprinter Marion Jones was convicted of perjury following her own drugs scandal, she was jailed for six months.

Armstrong’s lawyer has already laid the foundations for this defence, calling for lie detector tests for all witnesses, stating that he would not challenge any resulting testimonies if these tests were properly administered. 

His team also draw attention to the 600 other cyclists that have connected to Armstrong’s career who have not come forward, compared to the 11 who now have.

The new physical evidence in the report relates to the re-testing of a sample taken from Armstrong during his return to le Tour in 2009 when he claimed third place. While this originally tested negative, USADA, using new techniques claim to have identified EPO. 

Yet, while the sensational nature of the report has taken the world by storm, not everyone is jumping on the bandwagon. 

Sports attire giant Nike is sticking by its support of Lance Armstrong’s Foundation, Livestrong. Having helped raise over $100m for cancer survivors since 2004 the company expressed ‘disappointment’ that Armstrong may be unable to compete, but will support his protestations of innocence.

Sporting Kansas City, member of Major League Soccer, play at the Livestrong Sporting Park – this will remain unchanged as the club’s chief executive, Robb Heineman, preferred to focus on their support of the 28 million cancer sufferers worldwide rather than an individual concerns surrounding Armstrong.

From a personal perspective the most damning aspects of this case relates to the level of detail now provided, coming, as it does, from the people he used to call his best friends, along with the 2009 ‘positive’ test awaiting confirmation.

But does any of this matter? To cycling, certainly. A whole era of the sport has now been irreparably tarnished leaving enthusiasts to wonder if they were any ‘clean’ cyclists? What is the situation today?

Yet, rightly or wrongly, Armstrong’s story has inspired millions of cancer sufferers to believe anything is possible, helping them through their own tough times, ultimately steering some to survival. 

While many of them may feel cheated, there are still millions who remain grateful to him for giving them hope and inspiration in their darkest hour.