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

Popular posts from this blog

The 'cancel culture' myth

Let's cancel the term 'cancel culture' once and for all (Image: Fox News) In recent months, we have seen the UK's Supreme Court declare ' what a woman is ', the rise of the 'far right' in the United States and larger parts of Europe and the centre-left being accused of echoing words which were deemed unacceptable the day before. These stories as isolated items don't seem a big deal but, through their individual merits, have become significant societal shifts. That's largely thanks to the campaign groups who led them. For a long time, they have been playing cry wolf, sharing viral sop stories about how their 'plight' has resulted them being on the verge of 'losing everything', including relevance. With victories heading their way, and their crocodile tears turning into money eyes, it is fair to say that 'cancel culture' is officially over. Let's be honest, 'cancel culture' never existed. The myth has brainwashe...

The ultimate Bond review

Bonds from left to right: Timothy Dalton, Roger Moore, Daniel Craig, Sean Connery, Pierce Brosnan and George Lazenby (Image: Daily Express) Earlier this year, I set myself a challenge - an unserious one at that. yet it was something I took seriously. For years, I have been fascinated by the James Bond franchise but only based my interest on Daniel Craig's films, which were the only ones I had seen up to that point. April this year, I couldn't answer the important questions - what was my favourite Bond film? Who played the iconic character best? I could tell you which song I rated the highest because I knew and love each of them - I feel the 'Bond theme' is a genre of its own, they are that good. So over the last six months or so, I did it. I watched all 25 films, in order from Dr No to No Time To Die. Yes, there are two other 'unofficial' films - Never Say Never Again and the 1967 version of Casino Royale. While they included Bond as the protagonist, they aren...

A divided world cannot afford another Trump term

Donald Trump with Vladimir Putin (Image: The Atlantic) This time next month, we get to find out whether it is Kamala Harris or Donald Trump to replace Joe Biden as President. For the first time since Lyndon B. Johnson in 1968 , the chief in the White House is not seeking to fight on.  Biden didn't want to step back. Right up until his final decision, he stubbornly insisted he was the right person to take on former President Trump for a second time. However, questions were being asked about his wellbeing as the 81-year-old had been seen stumbling his words and steps , panicking key Democrat politicians and donors . Their warnings were stark and quite honestly, if he was to carry on by the party's convention, I doubt he'd have been endorsed by his peers. He, nor they, could afford any division when there is threat of another Trump administration looming. It's hard to define Biden's presidential legacy. I suppose he secured it in November 2020 when he defeated Trump w...