August 24th, 2012
12:32 PM ET

Statement from International Cycling Union on Lance Armstrong

The following is a statement from the International Cycling Union (UCI), regarding the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency's announcement that it was giving cyclist Lance Armstrong a lifetime ban and disqualifying him from all competitive results since August 1, 1998:

The UCI notes Lance Armstrong’s decision not to proceed to arbitration in the case that USADA has brought against him.

The UCI recognises that USADA is reported as saying that it will strip Mr. Armstrong of all results from 1998 onwards in addition to imposing a lifetime ban from participating in any sport which recognises the World Anti-Doping Code.

Article 8.3 of the WADC states that where no hearing occurs the Anti-Doping Organisation with results management responsibility shall submit to the parties concerned (Mr. Armstrong, WADA and UCI) a reasoned decision explaining the action taken.

As USADA has claimed jurisdiction in the case the UCI expects that it will issue a reasoned decision in accordance with Article 8.3 of the Code.

Until such time as USADA delivers this decision the UCI has no further comment to make.

Filed under: Cycling • Lance Armstrong • Sports
soundoff (16 Responses)
  1. Philip

    A great hero has fallen. RIP image of Lance Armstrong.
    My condolences to his family and friends as this tragedy unfolds, to most for the very first time.
    Really? You didn't think Armstrong was a doper before these reports? Where ya been? Mars?
    The only ones who didn't know Lance was a druggie are the ones that didn't want to know. (and those to young to understand the word fraud)

    August 24, 2012 at 12:51 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jeff

      phillip – your statement is strong; what substantiated, irrefutable evidence do you possess in support of your assertion of Lance's guilt? If you have it, then you should have shared it w/ US Federal Prosecutors and the myriad other investigative bodies who over the past decade have tried and failed to undermine Lance's credibility and achievements.

      if you read the USADA's own charter, it seems clear that they have way overstepped their stated raison d'être; nowhere have they been authorized to pursue an athlete this many years after the fact and with zero evidence of an Adverse Analytical Finding. I'm hopeful that the UCI will give a big Swiss middle finger salute to USADA, in support of a phenomenal philanthropist who also happens to be one of the greatest athletes of all time.

      August 24, 2012 at 3:44 pm | Report abuse |
    • Duke

      Correct, Jeff, this nitwit knows nothing, has nothing to contribute and evinces the sort of mindlessness off of which the USADA feeds. In a democracy, you have a right to see the evidence against you. That is how civilized people conduct investigations. USADA obviously needs to drop the first two letters of their name and replace it with T for Totalitarian.

      August 27, 2012 at 2:46 am | Report abuse |
    • JellyBean


      November 1, 2012 at 8:09 am | Report abuse |
  2. Philip

    *too young, rather.

    August 24, 2012 at 12:54 pm | Report abuse |
  3. banasy©

    Lance Armstrong's image is just fine; the image that is tarnished is the USADA, and rightfully so.

    Thank you, and very well put.

    August 24, 2012 at 7:24 pm | Report abuse |
  4. Penny

    Busted. deal with it.

    August 24, 2012 at 8:10 pm | Report abuse |
    • banasy©

      Not busted; tired of being maliciously persecuted.
      Nothing to deal with.

      August 25, 2012 at 3:54 pm | Report abuse |
    • Sun

      Where's your proof Sweetie? Oh, you don't have any? Big surprise.

      August 31, 2012 at 7:25 am | Report abuse |
  5. Mary

    Speaking in an authoritive tone doesn't make ones statement true; especially with no evidence to back it up. If your innocent, why refuse the offer of a retest?

    August 25, 2012 at 4:17 pm | Report abuse |
  6. Mary

    Yaw! Too bad you have no clue about frienship. Napping now.

    August 25, 2012 at 4:38 pm | Report abuse |
    • banasy©

      Have a lovely nap, Mary.

      August 25, 2012 at 4:55 pm | Report abuse |
  7. Paul

    Lance never tested positive, all the men that testified against him did test positive, and he beat them all anyway even when they were on drugs. If they take drugs and still can't beat him, Lance is the winner. Sounds more like jealousy to me.

    September 1, 2012 at 10:02 am | Report abuse |
  8. James

    How plausible is it that Lance Armstrong could win clean for seven consecutive years against the world's best cyclists in spite of the fact that many of them were doping?

    October 18, 2012 at 10:57 pm | Report abuse |
  9. pontoon4868

    Lance, I once owned a company called CRATEWORKS. It makes bicycle
    boxes and is still run by my cousin.
    One of my workers, a young local New Hampshire lad, had cancer.
    I qave him a copy of your book IT'S NOT ABOUT THE BIKE to take
    with him to a chemotherapy session at a Boston hospital. While there, the
    doctor treating him noticed the book and somehow got you on the phone.
    You spoke with my worker for almost an hour, inspiring him and telling him
    to have courage to fight the disease, etc.
    Lance, I have to say you inspired me just about as much as you did him.
    You were at the height of your fame. You didn't have to talk with this kid,
    basicly a nobody as the world goes. But you did. You changed his life..he's
    still alive. No one will ever bring you down in my eyes...or in the hearts of
    millions of people around the world who know you for who you really are,
    a true champion not only of sport but of spirit.
    I wish you well in your current troubles. Keep the faith you have given us.
    With Love and respect,
    Huntington Barclay
    Silver Lake, NH 03875

    October 25, 2012 at 2:47 am | Report abuse |
  10. Caron

    Nice script, Pontoon. I agree with Paul and James. I think, Like Lance says, it is a witch hunt against him. And as he says, he's been cycling for 17 years and they shouldn't be able to cast these charges against him for over 8 years in the past. So if someone says they saw him doing that in 1999, statute of limitations kicks in. Even so, they are lying because they are just jealous because they got caught and were bribed by USADA. It is very unfair and one sided. I don't blame him for giving up – unless his lawyers find a way to win, he probably doesn't stand a chance against this one sided facade.

    November 1, 2012 at 8:00 am | Report abuse |