Originally Posted by Tommy_Vercetti
I don't understand what the point in all of this is, other than those seeking the press. So many cyclists have been accused of being dopers, including ALL of Armstrong's rivals, both historically and during his own reign. If the French and Spanish think that doing everything possible to hurt his reputation is going to give more glory to their own more documented dopers, then they are kidding themselves.
It's been so many years, unless he actually says that he was doping (and it's clear by now that IF he was illegally doping, then he's not going to admit it) they are not going to be able to sanction him or strip him of anything. And if they did, which suspected doper would they give credit to? Another Óscar Pereiro situation where another almost certain doper (but non-American) was considered the winner? It's not like Armstrong took different tests. If he passed and is still said to be a doper, then so is everyone else by the same criteria.
So I fully buy that much of this has to do with getting press and staying relevant for the agencies and nothing but pettiness from European "fans" and his team members who got caught doping.
Frankie Andreu never got caught doping, neither did Jonathan Vaughters. Hell, even Motorola teammate Stephen Swart admitted, but he never tested positive either.
Also, according to USADA, they have numerous witnesses, whose names are easy to guess. Danielson, Vandevelde, Zabriskie, Leipheimer, Hincapie, I'm cerianly missing a few. All never tested positive.
I think it is safe to say that UCI's track record of catching dopers is very poor. Mostly, riders get suspended after a police operation linked them to a doping ring.
Finally, does it matter who gets the titles? Armstrong can keep them (with a big *), they can be made vacant or, my favourite, they can be awarded to doctor Ferrari.