After all of the cases with athletes who have been caught cheating using performance-enhancing drugs and penalized as a result, should Lance Armstrong be treated any differently? Of course not.
The seven-time Tour de France winner has been stripped of every title he won between 1999 and 2005 for admitting to doping in an interview with Oprah Winfrey that was leaked this past Monday. The interview was aired for the public to see Thursday and Friday night.
Once considered a national hero, Armstrong is now just another example of an abysmal disgrace to the world of sports. It would not be fair to give recognition for his cycling accomplishments over other professional athletes who have been stripped of their achievements.
Yes, the man did survive testicular cancer that spread to his brain and lungs. He should be honored and remembered in this manner.
And yes, even though steroids make one stronger, bigger, faster, among many other things; there still is a lot of hard work and endless training one needs to go through before biking over 140 miles. We all know Armstrong worked harder than most to get to his point.
With that said, however, he cannot be recognized for fairly claiming his titles. It goes against the integrity of sports. Just recently, steroids have been considered cheating. Although it may have taken over 30 years to come to the decision, it's the rule now. If one cannot follow the rules, they can't be honored.
Armstrong didn't follow the rules; it's as simple as that.
Now if he hadn't denied his accusations for over a decade, we might be diving into some different water. Alex Rodriguez admitted to using performance-enhancers and it didn't take him what felt like an eternity. A man like that should obviously be punished, but he also should be worthy of his achievements that he made when he wasn't cheating.
On the other hand, Lance Armstrong has been questioned ever since winning his first Tour de France back in 1999. The cyclist has taken over 600 drug tests throughout his career and is reported to have never tested positive in one single test.
Where is the line drawn here?
Look at the recent outcomes of this year's Hall of Fame votes.Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens easily deserved making it in, but didn't because of the constant suspicion that both used steroids. This situation is somewhat different because there is no clear-cut evidence that shows they were using illegal substances, but when it comes to determining their Hall of Fame worthiness, the people of the Veterans Committee obviously don't agree.
So when we tie this back to Armstrong and his case, he cannot be acknowledged for his victories.
It's a big debate now and will remain one for several decades. This is a hard question to answer, especially considering Armstrong survived cancer and started the Livestrong Foundation to support those who experience his disease.
Still, the man defied the rules of his sport and continued to lie to save himself.
So is he worthy of keeping his titles? Can we make an exception for Lance Armstrong? I don't really see any good reason.