The French: Still Sore Losers
Good grief, I can't believe the French are doing this.
Okay, let's assume for a second that Lance Armstrong took performance-enhancing medication prior to that 1999 race. Let's assume that it was true then. If the tests were performed then, in 1999, then why did they let him race? Don't believe me? I give you another example.
At the 1998 Nagano Winter Olympics, there was a Canadian snowboarder named Ross Rebagliati. He won the gold medal in snowboarding, only to have it rescinded (and, unfortunately, later reinstated) because he'd been rockin' the ganj. This was, for all intents and purposes, within hours of Rebagliati's gold medal win.
This precedent having been established, do you honestly think that the French, hosting a French bike race, on French turf, would have looked the other way in 1999, or in the ensuing six years? Keep in mind, of course, that in 1999, Lance Armstrong was a professional cyclist, but had never raced in the Tour de France. Do you think that organizers of a high profile race would have just turned a blind eye to a first-time racer whose tests came back positive for performance-enhancing drugs?
I don't.
Armstrong could yet come out and admit that yes, he did take performance-enhancing drugs in 1999, and if he does, I'll be the first to admit that I was wrong in my appraisal. On the other hand, I think there's a lot more to this story than this French claim that it's "scientific fact" that Armstrong was taking a banned substance seven years ago. I think this is nothing less than a last ditch effort by a bitter and petty nation to rob a foreigner, an American, a rival, of a rightful victory. By claiming that he tested positive at the beginning of his run (which might have had him banned from the sport altogether, prior to his other wins), they're attempting to nullify his wins.
I've never met a Frenchman I didn't like, but it's asinine stunts like this that make me really detest them as a nation. This is lower than low, and it shows the French for what they've been since World War II: sore losers.
PARIS — The director of the Tour de France said it was a "proven scientific fact" that Lance Armstrong had a performance-boosting drug in his body during his 1999 Tour win, and that the seven-time champion owed fans an explanation.
In a story Wednesday, Jean-Marie Leblanc praised the French sports daily L'Equipe for an investigation that reported that six urine samples provided by Armstrong during the 1999 Tour tested positive for the red blood cell-booster EPO. The newspaper on Tuesday accused Armstrong of using EPO during his first Tour win in 1999.
"For the first time — and these are no longer rumors or insinuations, these are proven scientific facts — someone has shown me that in 1999, Armstrong had a banned substance called EPO in his body," Leblanc told the paper.
Okay, let's assume for a second that Lance Armstrong took performance-enhancing medication prior to that 1999 race. Let's assume that it was true then. If the tests were performed then, in 1999, then why did they let him race? Don't believe me? I give you another example.
At the 1998 Nagano Winter Olympics, there was a Canadian snowboarder named Ross Rebagliati. He won the gold medal in snowboarding, only to have it rescinded (and, unfortunately, later reinstated) because he'd been rockin' the ganj. This was, for all intents and purposes, within hours of Rebagliati's gold medal win.
This precedent having been established, do you honestly think that the French, hosting a French bike race, on French turf, would have looked the other way in 1999, or in the ensuing six years? Keep in mind, of course, that in 1999, Lance Armstrong was a professional cyclist, but had never raced in the Tour de France. Do you think that organizers of a high profile race would have just turned a blind eye to a first-time racer whose tests came back positive for performance-enhancing drugs?
I don't.
Armstrong could yet come out and admit that yes, he did take performance-enhancing drugs in 1999, and if he does, I'll be the first to admit that I was wrong in my appraisal. On the other hand, I think there's a lot more to this story than this French claim that it's "scientific fact" that Armstrong was taking a banned substance seven years ago. I think this is nothing less than a last ditch effort by a bitter and petty nation to rob a foreigner, an American, a rival, of a rightful victory. By claiming that he tested positive at the beginning of his run (which might have had him banned from the sport altogether, prior to his other wins), they're attempting to nullify his wins.
I've never met a Frenchman I didn't like, but it's asinine stunts like this that make me really detest them as a nation. This is lower than low, and it shows the French for what they've been since World War II: sore losers.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home