Skip to main content

Is anti-doping in sport proving to be more dopey as they sound?

Lance Armstrong (image: myhero.com)
If you thought the three stories that I have written today were slightly barbarically scandalous, the final story which is to be analysed tops this list. It is sport related and while David Beckham has to ignore stories regarding him and Katherine Jenkins, this person has to deal with the fact that his career has potentially gone to waste. Cyclist Lance Armstrong has been stripped of his seven Tour de France titles. The reason is complicated - he has been accused of taking performance-enhanced drugs in the 1999-2005 period. The American, who before those years was a sufferer of various cancers including testicular, lung, abdomen and brain, has backed out of a legal process which would have revealed if he'd taken such drugs.

Again, like the Beckham story, the Armstrong case is an allegation but regardless, losing his titles after all his efforts in one of sport's toughest competitions is devastating. However, backing out of this legal process leaves more questions needing to answer. Is he actually guilty? Did he not want to go through the legal process because of the amount of media coverage involved? Does he know he's innocent and feels he doesn't need this court case?

To me, he should have gone ahead with the legal process. It will then give everyone a peace of mind that he was guilty or not. I'm guessing these performance-enhanced drugs were something to do with the process of recovering from his cancers. That's when the anti-doping agencies in the US have to be clear which drugs aren't permitted when competing. Are Vitamin tablets allowed? Aren't caffeine tablets allowed? Perhaps not but as long as you are prescribed to them, you'll be given the thumbs up, that's my understanding. It's all about clarification.

My main concern about this case is the timeliness. It's taken the anti-doping agency so long to decide that legal proceedings go ahead. They haven't considered Armstrong's fan base and cancer foundation where on other occasions, they cannot wait to disqualify athletes in cycling, athletics and so on. So why Lance Armstrong, and why now?

Comments