In an interview conducted earlier this week with the talk show host, Oprah Winfrey, aired Thursday on the OWN cable network and on the internet, cycling legend, Lance Armstrong finally came clean and admitted to using performance enhancing drugs during his cycling Career.
The seven-time Tour de France Cycling champion, Lance Armstrong admitted in the interview to using testosterone and human growth hormones as well as EPO, a hormone naturally produced by the human kidneys to stimulate red blood production, which increases the amount of oxygen that can be delivered to muscles, improving recovery and endurance. . .
. . . And delivering you SEVEN Tour de France titles!
There has been a lot of public rumour about the interview - that Lance was going to finally admit to drug use, and eventually he came clean on the issue, calling himself, "deeply flawed" and saying, "(This was) one big lie, that I repeated a lot of times."
That's understating the obvious, Lance. Years of denials and castigation of those who'd made the allegations seem to have placed Armstrong in a precarious position which even this confession may not be able to extricate him from.
Why'd he do it? Well, the 2002 Sports Illustrated Sportsman of the Year admitted to Winfrey that he took blood transfusions to excel in the highly competitive, scandal-ridden world of professional cycling. Doping was as much a part of the sport as pumping up tires or having water in a bottle, Armstrong said, calling it "the scariest" that he didn't consider it cheating at the time.
The same man who insisted throughout and after his career that he'd passed each of the "hundreds and hundreds of tests I took" contended in the interview that he wouldn't have won without doing what he did. While Armstrong didn't invent the culture of doping in cycling, he said, he admitted not acting to prevent it either. "I made my decisions," Armstrong said. "They are my mistakes. . . "I am a bully"
Armstrong admitted he was "a bully ... in the sense that I tried to control the narrative," sometimes by spewing venom at ex-teammates he thought were "disloyal," as well as suing people and publications that accused him of cheating.
The Texas-born Armstrong grew up to become an established athlete, including winning several Tour de France stages. But his sporting career ground to a halt in 1996 when he was diagnosed with cancer. He was 25. He returned to the cycling world, however. His breakthrough came in 1999, and he didn't stop as he reeled off seven straight wins in his sport's most prestigious race. Allegations of doping began during this time, as did Armstrong's defiance, including investigations and a lawsuit against the author of a book accusing him of taking performance enhancing drugs. He left the sport after his last win, in 2005, only to return to the tour in 2009, finishing third in that year. However, he insists he was clean at that time.
Now, the All American Hero has been stripped by the International Cycling Union of all his Tour de France titles, this coming in October last year ahead of the overwhelming evidence by USADA (United States Anti Doping Agency)n that Armstrong was involved in "the most sophisticated professionalized and successful doping program"
Then the IOC (International Olympic Committee) stripped him of the bronze medal he won in the men's individual time trial at the 2000 Olympic Games. This of course is in addition to the myriad of endorsement deals, contracts and partnership programs he's lost in the wake of the allegations last year.
Can Lance Armstrong bounce back from this? Is there any scandal bigger than this? Who will the sporting public and the world at large look up to again for hero worship?
Personally, I think if a Bill Clinton can resurrect from his scandal, and remain a hero in the eyes of the public then Armstrong can do it too.
The hurtful truth is: Doping goes on everywhere in every sport. It didn't start with Armstrong, and it won't end with him. . .
. . . Cut the guy some slack, will you.
Time they say, heals all wounds, even this one.
Oh, yeah, I forgot. . . This interview is part one!
No comments:
Post a Comment