MSNBC posts the first comments from WADA chairman Dick Pound on the Landis arbitration result. Pound maintains that even though the Landis samples may have been handled improperly, the results from those samples still stands:
"I think if you read it carefully you'll see that maybe some of the early stages of this thing were not as precise and crisp as they could have been, what they found is synthetic testosterone, you can run but can't hide.''
"For the moment we just have to say that they speak for themselves and you can interpret them as well as we can,'' Pound said of the results. "Our policy is that if there is an appeal, we're probably going to get involved one way or another and therefore it's better if we don't say anything until the delay for appeal has expired or an appeal has been filed.''
Pound commented on the Landis arbitration result at a press conference following meetings of WADA's executive board.
The Globe and Mail finds Lance Armstrong in Vancouver for a cancer fund raiser. Armstrong refused to comment on the recent Landis arbitration decision saying:
“I'd love to answer the question but unfortunately I'm out of that business,” said Mr. Armstrong. “I'm here to fight cancer. I haven't looked online. I still love the bike and ride all the time but on the competitive side I'm just not engaged.”
He said cycling issues now are “just a distraction for me.”
The News Tribune's Tony Hawley thinks he is reading correctly between the lines of Friday's statements from Floyd Landis lawyer Maurice Suh.
The Lawrence Journal World posts a thoughtfully written op-ed piece on the Landis case results, and on the use of PEDs by athletes in general. Stating that not only do athletes need to compete without illegal enhancement, but also the testing done on them needs to be above reproach the column concludes:
The first step, of course, is to work on drug testing to make it as consistent and accurate as possible. Fewer loopholes will mean fewer opportunities for athletes to avoid detection and punishment. Reliable tests will make rigorous enforcement possible.
It’s sad for any sports spectator to have to wonder whether an outstanding athletic performance was made possible only through the use of “dope.” It’s even sadder for athletes to feel they must subject their bodies to such treatment in order to compete at the highest levels.
The San Francisco Chronicle's Scott Ostler tries to make a clumsy point about racial equality by comparing recent events in OJ Simpson's life to that of Floyd Landis'. It seemed only a matter of time before the two names would appear in the same column.
The Salt Lake Tribune feels Floyd Landis got just what he deserved.
In Forum (subscription may be necessary) in what appears to be a trend in op-eds today, says all cheaters are sorry, only after they get caught.
The Union Leader says cheaters never prosper, unless they are sports cheaters that is. The writer cites, along with the New England Patriots cheating scandal, the Landis case decision, but should probably ask Floyd Landis how much his assumed cheating has caused him to prosper in the past year.
The CyclingNews hosts a number of interesting stories this morning, none of which are directly related to Floyd Landis. The ASO is not pleased with the UCI over the adoption of a new pro tour schedule, WADA and the UCI are for once in agreement over the proposed exclusion from the World Championships of Alejandro Valverde, and Jorg Jaksche is upset at having a one year ban for the use of EPO and so for cooperating with authorities in his doping bust he will ask it to be shortened by half.
SANEPR.Com has perhaps the most interesting headline of the day:"A Fallen Hero That Has To Learn How To Cope With Reality", and had the Landis proceedings taking place far from Malibu:
Well a French court looked at all the evidence presented by the USADA and found Landis guilty, banning him for 2 years from professional cycling and took away his Tour de France title.
Rant writes a very long, very considered, and very elucidating piece on "the decision". To try and summarize the science discussed in it would do it a disservice, but Rant sums up what is a problem for any athlete trying to seek justice within the anti doping system:
One thing that kept sticking out in my mind while reading the majority opinion was this: Just how can an athlete rebut a charge against him/herself? Or even: Can an athlete ever rebut a charge? The evidence in the Landis case seemed strong enough to call into question the lab’s procedures, documentation and staff training, leaking of information to the media (even if not the original results, there’s no question that the results of the additional tests in April were leaked by the lab) and so on. The majority even cites such problems at points within their opinion, but rather than hold anyone’s feet to the fire, they simply slap LNDD on the wrist and say, “Next time, you might not be so lucky. Next time, we might throw out the case. So clean up your act.”
I’m left wondering if any athlete can ever get a fair hearing, and if any athlete can ever overturn an adverse analytical finding. Floyd Landis had a very strong case, but apparently not strong enough to win. It’s cost him 14 months and an unbelievable sum of money to try and defend himself. The message here from this panel seems to me to be, “If you’ve been accused, don’t bother to fight. Look what we did to Floyd Landis. We’ll do that to you, too.”
Cozy Beehive succinctly says that the Landis decision is sad.
PJ posts a look back now that the Landis decision has been made. He says some very nice things about TBV which are greatly appreciated, and also notes that Rant did a great deal of excellent writing during the past year or so. What will we all do now?
When Life Gives you Hitler, Make Hitlerade writes the usual piffle about cheaters.
Roch Around the Clock gives us lots of "axioms" about infamous athletes in the news, and tells us not to be too hard on Floyd Landis, for dubious reasons.
Kaiserstrasse says that Owen has been riding a LOT sincde the Landis decision came out, he wants to know if training wheels are allowed in the TdF.
Deep Thoughts from a Shallow Mind read about Floyd Landis and wrote a post about Lance Armstrong and wonders why when we make a mistake we can't just laugh at ourselves?