The Problem with the Lance Armstrong Case

This post is going to be not only very informal, but could come off seeming as if it is a rant - which it partly is. Bear with me please, and understand that this is not me defending Lance Armstrong, but rather me defending due process, the legal system, and morality.

As we all know by now, Lance Armstrong has been stripped off all 7 of his Tour de France titles stretching from 1999-2005, as well as having his name removed from numerous record books, the face of Nike, and as the head of the Livestrong foundation.

I am not here to state whether or not I believe he cheated - as far as I am concerned that is not for me or the public to decide. That is for a blood, urine, or hair analysis test to decide. Unfortunately, there are people in many organizations throughout the world that have decided that hearsay and court statements are enough to indict and convict Armstrong of using Performance Enhancing Drugs.

I see one small problem with where these statements are coming from. Cyclists such as Tyler Hamilton, George Hincapie, and Alberto Contador are the ones coming out in the press and admonishing Lance Armstrong for using drugs. It is on their words, amongst others, that the International Cycling Union, the Tour de France, the American Anti-Doping Agency, the World Anti-Doping Agency, and the kangaroo court that is public opinion have decided to label Lance "guilty as charged".

My problem with this is that it seems that the words of proven cheaters, known corrupted organizations *cough Nike cough*, and public hate (need I refer people to the HUNDREDS of hate articles the French media wrote about Lance during his amazing run of 7 straight TDF's?) are all it takes in today's society to determine that someone is a cheater. How is it possible that we, as a society, are completely fine with accepting the words of those who have cheated, and been caught, and then apologized as legitimate? I find it impossible to ignore the fact that Lance Armstrong has been tested thousands of times, has made himself available for more drug testing, and has let his drug testing record be public when considering his case. If athletes such as Contador have failed drug tests, would it not make sense that Lance, who has unquestionably been tested more than Contador has, fail a test as well? Drug tests don't lie, but people do. And I don't think it is out of the question that people who have been caught cheating and lying to cover up their cheating are capable of lying again.

My point isn't that Lance is clean or dirty. My point is that there is a due process to be followed, and the due process suggests that Lance Armstrong never took performance enhancing drugs. The drug tests are more valid to me than the statement of a convicted drug cheat.

Look at it this way. This would be like trying someone for capital murder with a jury that is comprised completely of men sitting on death row. The court of public opinion is taking science out of the equation and allowing testimony and hearsay to be all that is needed to convict him.

This is a major problem that could spell the end for athletes everywhere. Who is going to be targeted next? Allowing hearsay and testimony to win sets the stage for anyone to say whatever they want about whomever they want, and apparently we have to take that as true.

Give Lance a drug test. In fact go back and retest his old samples. The truth doesn't lie in a statement from George Hincapie. It lies in the results of those drug tests.

Lets Just Play Hockey

I haven’t written a blog post about the lockout yet, simply because I’ve kind of been naïve enough to think that if I don’t talk about it, it will end. Plus there’s that whole “@#$& you Bettman” attitude I’ve got going too.

But with the NHL cancelling the first 82 games of the season today (October 11 through October 24), I had a little bit of an epiphany. Obviously it is a little bit out there with over 100 players having signed over in the various European leagues, and each team having assigned a majority of their younger stars to their AHL affiliates; but in this post I will outline my plan to have an NHL type season without the NHL owners needing to get involved (like I said, “@#$& you Bettman”).

Remember this is just a pipe dream, but if the NHLPA really is as united as they are then this could work (in some alternate universe).

As we have seen with groups of players getting together to practice and train in the off season, it isn’t hard to imagine groups of teams getting together for a prolonged period of time while the season is on lock out. In reality it probably wouldn’t take more than 3 months for this entire plan to unfold and would benefit each team, their fan bases, and some charities greatly.

My proposal would take place in cities across Canada (sorry USA, a lot of your franchises are the reason we’re in this position to begin with), and would see each team play one exhibition, charity game against each team from across the NHL. These would be organized in charity style, like we are seeing with the mini tour that is taking place in Quebec right now. It would be a glorified round robin tournament that saw the top 16 teams after the 30 games square off in a March Madness type bracket where the team with the best record in the round robin plays the team with the 16^th best record after the round robin. Obviously it doesn’t take rocket science to figure out where I’m going with this.

Round 1 would see a 30 game round robin.

Round 2 would see 1 vs 16, 2 vs 15, 3, vs 14, 4 vs 13, 5 vs 12, 6 vs 11, 7 vs 10, and 8 vs 9 in a one game elimination method until we reached only two teams left standing.

This would be Round 3 where the remaining two teams would play a best of 3 series to win what I want to call the NHLPA Cup.

Games would be three 20 minute run time periods with a flood after 2 periods of action and all proceeds (money not needed to rent ice time and hire referees) from ticket sales would go to a chosen charity of the winning team.

Obviously the logistics are hard to figure out, but its not as if this would fail miserably. Think about just how many Canadians would be willing to go out, and pay 15 to 20 dollars a piece in order to see NHL quality hockey, knowing that it benefits charity? And as I pointed out earlier, its not impossible to think that the players would be willing get together to keep team chemistry together, and actually play hockey games without having to move overseas.

The games would take place in the best kinds of rinks – beaten down old barns that will hold a maximum of 2000 people, and the players would be playing for love of the game; the type of thing that we as fans want to see.

Like I said, it is a pipe dream, but I’d rather watch this than sit through a lockout. Wouldn’t you?