Originally Posted by
Lemond1985
Or you can simplify it down to, "Lance broke the rules, therefore he's guilty." It's not a very sophisticated POV, but it's completely accurate statement of fact and can't be disproven.
Exactly. We can all make excuses, or appeals to context, such as 'well everyone in that era was doping.' But the fact of the matter is that he broke the rules. Further, he cheapened the sport, screwed those who were NOT doping (assuming there were any), and made it more difficult for clean athlete to break into the elite ranks. Any appeal from him or on his behalf should not be framed as an appeal for leniency (or that there should have been...), but that all athletes should be held accountable, and not just one.
A case can be made that his individual decision should not be judged too harshly..., as in damn him as an individual and a bad person, that he was doing what he had to do to remain competitive. But he still was not competing in what the sport classified as cycling, and therefore any punishment he received was more than warranted. He clearly did not want to follow cycling rules. Therefore he clearly should not be allowed to be a cyclist.