Posts tagged ‘Tour de France’

January 24, 2013

Special Report: Lance Armstrong Confesses, Finally

Lance Armstrong finally got around to confessing that he engaged in illegal doping. He admitted that he would not have won the Tour de France a record seven times if he had not doped. He acknowledged that he has been a bully. He demonstrated to the world that he is a liar.

Bent Bike Wheel by tanvach via FlickrArmstrong’s confession in his interview with Oprah Winfrey did not surprise everyone. However, many people did stand-by Armstrong up until the interview. Some of those folks ended up feeling foolish. 

I received an email from one of my readers yesterday. Months ago, the reader had responded to one of my earlier posts about Armstrong. The reader had expressed support for the cyclist and said he should not resign from the Lance Armstrong Foundation (LIVESTRONG) board. This reader’s view was shared by 49 percent of those who responded to my survey.

In yesterday’s email message, the reader apologized to me for having been “incredibly naïve.” I want this reader, and everyone who was duped by this doper for so long, to know that you are not the one who has anything to apologize for. While I appreciate the gesture, I can find no fault in this reader’s desire to see good in a fellow human being. If Armstrong has made anyone more jaded and less trusting as a result of his lies, it’s just another of the many offenses he’s committed.

Unfortunately, it will take us more time to understand the complete fallout from Armstrong’s actions. Will his past connection to LIVESTRONG hurt the nonprofit moving forward? Will LIVESTRONG’s slow reaction time as events unfolded be held against the organization? Now that the world  knows that Armstrong is a liar, will that erode the public’s trust in the charity he created?

read more »

November 12, 2012

Update: Lance Armstrong Resigns from LIVESTRONG

Lance Armstrong has cut all formal ties to the LIVESTRONG Foundation, the organization he founded. Armstrong resigned from the LIVESTRONG board of directors on November 4 though the news was not released to the mainstream media until November 12, CNN reports.

Armstrong had stepped down as Chairman of LIVESTRONG on October 17. In a written statement, Armstrong said:

Today therefore, to spare the Foundation any negative effects as a result of controversy surrounding my cycling career, I will conclude my chairmanship.”

With the announcement that Armstrong has now stepped down from the board as well came the following statement:

He chose to resign from the Lance Armstrong Foundation — known by the name LIVESTRONG — ‘to spare the organization any negative effects as a result of controversy surrounding his cycling career,’ according to a statement by Jeff Garvey, the Foundation’s Chairman,” according to a report in The Washington Post.

Sound familiar?

Initially, Armstrong made no effort to distance himself from the Foundation when the doping-scandal story began to heat-up in August. Instead, he maintained his innocence, which he does to this day.

When the United States Anti-Doping Agency issued its report in October finding that the evidence of Armstrong doping was “overwhelming,” it took Armstrong a week to resign as Foundation Chairman.

On October 23, Armstrong was stripped by the Tour de France of his professional cycling titles after the International Cycling Union chose not to appeal the USADA ruling. After this news, it took Armstrong about 12 days to step down from his Foundation board position and it took another week for the information to be made public. Unlike when Armstrong resigned the Chairmanship, the LIVESTRONG website does not clearly mention his resignation from the board.

So, if Armstrong’s twice-stated objective was to avoid “any negative effects [to the Foundation] as a result of [the doping] controversy,” why did it take a week after the USADA report for him to resign as Chairman? Why did it take nearly two weeks for Armstrong to resign from the board after he was stripped of his titles? If he wanted to spare the Foundation from any possible negative effects, whey didn’t Armstrong resign from the board last summer? He had to know where things were headed. He certainly knew by October. So, why the slow and piece-meal resignations?

If the Foundation wants to be transparent throughout this controversy, why did it take a week before the news of Armstrong’s resignation reached the mainstream media? Why is there no information easily available on the LIVESTRONG website about Armstrong’s resignation?

read more »

%d bloggers like this: