Brennan: Armstrong Has No Room to Whine

9:14 AM, Jun 14, 2012   |    comments
  • Share
  • Email
  • Print
  • - A A A +

Washington, DC (written by Christine Brennan/USA Today) -- Contrary to the opinion of one very famous American athlete and cancer survivor, what happened to Lance Armstrong on Wednesday is not a witch hunt, nor is it unfair or unwarranted.

Armstrong can whine and complain all he wants, but the organization that alleged Wednesday that he engaged in a massive doping conspiracy from 1998 to 2011 is just doing its job.

It is the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency's mission to investigate Armstrong if it has evidence that he cheated his sport, its fans and its sponsors - and clearly, there are strong allegations at the very least that he did. USADA has investigated hundreds of other athletes in similar ways. Why should Armstrong be any different? Why should he not be investigated to the full extent of USADA's powers?

For all those who have been bothered by the fact that people like Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens have been parading through our federal court system, USADA is the answer. The agency, with its well-documented procedures and series of checks and balances, is exactly the right place for us to find out if one of the great icons of U.S. sport and culture is in fact a cheater.

As Armstrong copes with the enormity of this news, first reported Wednesday by The Washington Post, he would be wise to remember one important fact:

He asked for the USADA investigation that has brought formal doping charges against him, could cost him his seven Tour de France titles and has resulted in his first banishment from sport - an immediate suspension from competition in triathlon, a sport he turned to after he retired from cycling in 2011.

After Sports Illustrated published a story in January 2011 alleging that Armstrong used performance-enhancing drugs, he tweeted that he looked forward to being vindicated by USADA.

In hindsight, Armstrong should have been more careful what he wished for.

In February, Armstrong looked to have finally shaken free from the last of his pursuers when the federal government abruptly dropped its case against Armstrong on the Friday afternoon of Super Bowl weekend. But buried deep inside the news stories that day was this paragraph:

"Unlike the U.S. Attorney, USADA's job is to protect clean sport rather than enforce specific criminal laws," said Travis Tygart, USADA's chief executive officer. "Our investigation into doping in the sport of cycling is continuing, and we look forward to obtaining the information developed during the federal investigation."

Boy oh boy, did it continue, and rightly so.

"USADA only initiates matters supported by the evidence," Tygart said in a statement Wednesday. "We do not choose whether or not we do our job based on outside pressures, intimidation or for any reason other than the evidence. Our duty on behalf of clean athletes and those that value the integrity of sport is to fairly and thoroughly evaluate all the evidence available and when there is credible evidence of doping, take action under the established rules."

What's next for Armstrong? If an independent review board decides to move forward, the allegations would become charges of anti-doping rules infractions under the World Anti-Doping Association code.

Armstrong then has the right to contest the charges before an arbitration panel. If he loses there, he can always appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport, the ultimate authority.

USADA's allegations against Armstrong have been a long time coming, too long for many Armstrong fans and apologists who continue to maintain he has taken more than 500 drug tests and never failed a one.

Considering that admitted cheaters Marion Jones and Mark McGwire, among others, also never failed a drug test, that argument wears a bit thin.

This of course leads to the "enough already" argument, which, on some level, we all can endorse; the manifestation of the steroid fatigue we all suffer as our long national nightmare with cheating sports heroes continues unabated. This philosophy often leads otherwise normal people to say we can't catch everyone, so it's not fair to catch anyone.

Bank robbers around the world hope this idea catches on.