Why Lance Armstrong Deserves That Lifetime Ban Despite His Confession


I never really gave Lance Armstrong much thought before this summer’s news of lifetime bans and sanctions for doping. It was shocking to see some of the reports and the depth of performance enhancing drug use that had penetrated professional cycling. As much as it shocked some people (or confirmed the suspicions of others), professional runner Lauren Fleshman has a more personal view as a fellow athlete. Her response to Lance’s confession, and rumors that he is only confessing to get his ban on competing lifted, is an insight into how much of a dirty shadow Lance casts over professional endurance athletes:

There will still be pro athletes who are reluctant to speak up, but to them I will say this: For every cheater, there are 99 of us doing it right. If we allow our governing bodies to aid in softening Lance’s sentence, we will suffer far more than we benefit.

Her entire post is worth reading; I hope the USADA and WADA (anti-doping authorities) read it as well and take it to heart. Lance showed poor character and judgement, and his legacy of lying and cheating needs to end forever, so he doesn’t poison sports for future generations!

Via Ask Lauren Fleshman

As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases. If you are shopping on Amazon anyway, buying from our links gives Gear Diary a small commission.

About the Author

Zek has been a gadget fiend for a long time, going back to their first PDA (a Palm M100). They quickly went from researching what PDA to buy to following tech news closely and keeping up with the latest and greatest stuff. They love writing about ebooks because they combine their two favorite activities; reading anything and everything, and talking about fun new tech toys. What could be better?

6 Comments on "Why Lance Armstrong Deserves That Lifetime Ban Despite His Confession"

  1. It’s a question of character. We all thought Lance had that. We applauded when he returned to cycling after battling testicular cancer. We applauded him after he won the Tour De France after cancer. Now all of that was cast aside as we now know the truth: he cheated. So basically he has no character. He was dishonest. He lied. Lance Armstrong was someone kids looked up to. He was someone parents used as a good example of what can be achieved by an athlete. It was all a lie. Do we really want a guy who wanted to win at ANY cost? Including possibly his own life considering he COULD have gotten his cancer from taking what he did? Character. The man has non and he deserves the ban he got. Fessing up NOW after it was proven he did take performance enhancing drugs really makes it worse. I can understand forgiving him if he came clean at the beginning but he didn’t which increasing calls his character into question. That means he cannot be trusted and should not get the opportunity to race ever again.

  2. Not only did he cheat, he relentlessly attacked anyone who told the truth about him cheating.
    He’s a bad, bad guy.

  3. Oh I can forgive him….but forgiving doesn’t necessarily come without consequences. He’ll have to show he’s worthy on his own and in some other way than cycling.

  4. The only thing that MIGHT get him some credibility is if he worked with the anti-doping agencies and showed how he dodged the tests. That would help catch future Lance Armstrongs.
    That and a genuine apology to all the cyclists whose reputations he tried to smear because they tried to testify against him.
    But none of this will get him back into competition. All those performance enhancing drugs went to his head if he thought one interview would improve his ruined brand name.

  5. Is it really a “confession” if the entire world already knows you lied? And not just lied, but hurt people to protect your ongoing lies? Telling people what they already know to be true is not confessing. And he also neglects taking 100% responsibility for his actions by not offering recompense to the victims of his brutality.

  6. I think he should do your first two suggestions ANYWAY. But it still wouldn’t be enough to regain anyone’s trust. He was — and is — a snake in the grass.

Comments are closed.