Josh Spivey
This is a very good take on this. Not one that I had even considered.
On 8/29/12 11:04 AM, "Andy Stahl" wrote:
> When Lance voluntarily purchased a USCF-issued license to race bicycles
> internationally, he signed a contract that states, in relevant part, I agree
> to submit to drug testing and to comply with and to be bound by the UCI
> anti-doping regulations, the World Anti-Doping Code and its International
> Standards to which the UCI anti-doping regulations refer as well as the
> anti-doping regulations of other competent instances as foreseen by the UCI
> Regulations, the World Anti-Doping Code, or the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency
> (USADA), provided such regulations comply with the World Anti-Doping
> Code.
Lance does not claim that USADA has violated its regulations or the
> World Anti-Doping Code, which include an arbitration process to contest
> USADA's doping ruling. Instead, he has simply walked away from the
> contract.
In other words, it's not about whether Lance doped or not. It is
> about whether he lives up to his end of a contract that he entered into
> voluntarily when he decided to work as a professional cyclist. Lance has
> chosen to unilaterally terminate that contract, rather than abide by its
> terms. Thats his prerogative. But Lance shouldn't expect the other parties to
> the contract to sit by idly and watch Lance continue to benefit from the
> awards earned under that contract while he walks away from the contract's
> penalty process.
_______________________________________________
OBRA mailing
> list
obra@list.obra.org
http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
Unsubscribe
> : obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org