The breaking news is that Lance Armstrong has elected not to appeal a decision by the US Anti-Doping Agency that found him guilty of allegations of improper use of performance enhancing drugs. Late yesterday, he was effectively stripped of his 7 Tour de France titles.
It’s sad but true that the higher the stakes we play for (and/or the more competitive we are), the more likely some are to resort to unethical or corrupt behaviour. To their minds, quite frankly, the end justifies the means. Call it a witch hunt by USADA (sadly, you can expect them to get some death threats), but if former team members’ testimony was credible and served to substantiate the allegations, Armstrong doesn’t deserve the acclamation he may have earned via unfair advantage. Does it tarnish the sport? Most definitely. Do I think we should be trying to get sport clean – absolutely. Does deciding to let it go now make him look guilty? Probably to many. He would know how his decision not to appeal would look to (most) others. Is it also possible he’s just decided as a cancer survivor that for the sake of his health and his family, he needs to let it go?
I have followed this story from the get go and I still don’t know that he cheated. And for the Lance fans out there, whether he did or didn’t, doesn’t take away from his extraordinary giftedness and his discipline and courage over so many years. But if he did, it does take away from the majesty of his victories. We get the behaviour we are prepared to put up with. We get the culture at work or in a sporting code we deserve.
So it might be a “silly cycling race”, but living in the long tail of the GFC, how do we feel when we learn someone cooked the books, misappropriated money, manipulated and drove others to bankruptcy out of greed, used political leverage for personal gain or otherwise won by cheating? They are variations on the same theme. I’d rather we rewarded true worthiness, not slick wily-ness.