Landis Done...

[emartin10]

They upheld the ruling, he's done for 2 years....Booooooooo!!!!

http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/cyclin...ory?id=3029089

E

[Pman]

I guess I kind of expected it...and I agree! Booooooooooo!

[Mark57]

This quote from an MSNBC story sounds kind of laughable, until you pause to reflect how absurd and asinine it really is:

“... the Panel finds that the practises of the Lab in training its employees appears to lack the vigor the Panel would expect in the circumstances given the enormous consequences to athletes” of an adverse analytical finding, the decision said.

The majority repeatedly wrote that any mistakes made at the lab were not enough to dismiss the positive test, but also sent a warning.

“If such practises continue, it may well be that in the future, an error like this could result in the dismissal” of a positive finding by the lab.

So apparently it's no big deal that an error like this might have cost an innocent man his career, lively-hood and reputation. Someone might get away with something, which would be a lot worse.

[Patricia]

I had read that much weight was given to the LeMond testimony, too.


Now, I'm STILL on the side of Landis and am hoping he DOES appeal with ....that...not sure of the exact name...board.

[Chris Correia]

I'm on his side, but what's the whole argument?

Any independent commentators/analysts got a take on this? Links?

[emartin10]

Not independent, but Landis' camp showed how poorly the French lab that was testing the case broke protocol. The lab was mislabeling samples, spelling names wrong, not sealing sample prior to moving them, not labeling them at all, etc. etc. That's kind of what Mark is talking about - the panel agrees that the lab messed up, but still ruled against Floyd. Just a mess.

E

[Mark57]

Originally Posted by Chris Correia

I'm on his side, but what's the whole argument?

Any independent commentators/analysts got a take on this? Links?

I don't know that anything could sum it up better than the dissenting opinion: http://www.velonews.com/media/LandisDissent.pdf

I sincerly hope that he appeals this, I think the UCLA finding alone would be grounds for "reasonable doubt" by any fair standard.

[Chris Correia]

Originally Posted by emartin10

Not independent, but Landis' camp showed how poorly the French lab that was testing the case broke protocol. The lab was mislabeling samples, spelling names wrong, not sealing sample prior to moving them, not labeling them at all, etc. etc. That's kind of what Mark is talking about - the panel agrees that the lab messed up, but still ruled against Floyd. Just a mess.

E

In other words, typical French.

Mark57: Thanks for the link.