WADA backs sanctions in Armstrong case
TribLIVE Sports Videos
MONTREAL — The World Anti-Doping Agency accepted the decision that stripped Lance Armstrong of his seven Tour de France titles, saying Friday it was the “right and proper sanction” for the disgraced American cyclist.
Last week, the International Cycling Union also accepted the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency's sanctions, wiping Armstrong's name from the Tour winner's list, banning him for life and asking him to return millions of dollars in prize money.
WADA had 21 days to decide whether to take the case to the Court of Arbitration for Sport, but the Montreal-based agency announced Friday it wouldn't appeal.
“This case has resulted in a right and proper sanction for the athlete ... and has served as a revelation to the world of sport. For this, USADA must be applauded,” WADA president John Fahey said in a statement.
WADA also said it was waiting with “considerable interest” for details of UCI's proposed independent inquiry into the cycling body's handling of the case.
Fahey took a shot at the UCI, while praising USADA.
“This is not a situation in which just because the athlete did not return a positive test, there was nothing more the governing body of cycling could do,” he said. “It has taken a major effort and undertaking from a national anti-doping organization to gather the compelling evidence following allegations raised by Floyd Landis in 2010.”
Subscribe today! Click here for our subscription offers.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.