Lance Armstrong has been formally stripped of France’s highest civilian award, the Legion d’Honneur. The news comes in a week in which it has also been confirmed that he will have to testify under oath about his doping next month.
The disgraced cyclist was made a Chevalier de la Legion d'Honneur in 2005, the year of his seventh and last Tour de France victory. He was stripped of those titles and banned from sport for life in 2012 following an investigation into doping by the United States Anti-Doping Agency.
Last year, an aide to the grand chancellor of the order, founded by Napoleon Bonaparte in 1802, confirmed that an investigation would be opened to examine whether or not to take the Legion d’Honneur away from Armstrong following his confession to doping.
According to the Associated Press, a spokeswoman for the Legion d’Honneur confirmed that he has now been stripped of the award, although she was unable to confirm when the decision was made.
Although foreigners are not admitted to the order, they can be awarded its insignia, with Chevalier – Knight – being the most junior rank. Eddy Merckx was made a Commandeur of the Legion d’Honneur, the most senior of the three ranks, in 2011.
Meanwhile USA Today reported this week that the arbitration panel hearing the SCA Promotions case, in which the insurer is seeking $12 million related to bonuses it paid Armstrong for his Tour de France victories in 2002, 2003 and 2004, has ordered Armstrong to give videotaped testimony under oath on June 12.
Armstrong is continuing to try and block that happening, saying that a 2006 settlement with the insurer, which had originally withheld the bonuses as allegations of doping began to surface, is legally binding, and has reportedly appealed to the Texas Supreme Court to rule in his favour.
43 thoughts on “Lance Armstrong stripped of Legion d’Honneur, plus date set for sworn testimony”
Who?
Who?
don simon wrote:Who?
Lance
Lance Armstrong – Probably one of the worlds most recognisable sportspeople and definitely the most famous cyclist on the planet.
Was
farrell wrote:don simon
Was
Now universally recognised as just some d***head loser
anarchy wrote:Was
farrell
Now universally recognised as just some d***head loser— don simon
Not really, no matter how many times you repeat it.
farrell wrote:don simon
Fixed that for you :.)
leqin wrote:farrell wrote:don
Fixed that for you :.)— don simon
A very strange echo indeed.
don simon wrote:Who?
Some
Some d***head loser
Farrell, how does his knob
Farrell, how does his knob taste?
anarchy wrote:Farrell, how
I’ve no idea, why are you so interested in what his genitals taste like?
farrell wrote:anarchy
Your Momma
Sorry Farrell that was
Sorry Farrell that was uncalled for.
Lance is certainly one of the most recognised ex sportsmen on the planet, sadly now more famous for being the worst cheat in the history of all humanity, and an all round scumbag than for actually winning anything, and rightly vilified by all right minded people.
Anyone who still defends him should be sympathised with, not mocked, no matter how hard that is to do
anarchy wrote:Sorry Farrell
I have thicker skin than to be offended by some internutters attempts at humour.
He’s not, the vast majority of people remember him as a Tour de France winner. You’re average person on the street won’t have a clue who Emma O’Reilly or Betsy Andreu even are let alone what happened with them.
As much as you dislike it, the truth is that he is, and will be, remembered as a champion bike rider.
I have the same approach with stupid people, hence my replies. I’ll even help you out a little bit by asking the very leading question of “Where have I defended Lance Armstrong”?
I find people who scream hysterical nonsense about Lance Armstrong equally as bad as his unquestioning fan boys. Unless of course you scream equally as hysterically about every single other cyclist in history who doped, then I just wonder why you still have an interest in cycling at all.
“Unless of course you scream
“Unless of course you scream equally as hysterically about every single other cyclist in history who doped, bullied and threatened anyone who spoke out against them with leagal action, lied, earnt significant sums while lying, denied everything in the face of the truth and continues to fight in order to keep their ill-gotten gains, then I just wonder why you still have an interest in cycling at all.”
He’s a little unique, no?
don simon wrote:He’s a little
That kind of goes against your original point of “Who”, no?
Did you honestly think I
Did you honestly think I didn’t know who he was?
The comment was more about where he should be in the world of cycling. A nobody. Obviously it was too subtle. 😀
don simon wrote:Did you
No, I got where you were trying to go, I just thought it was a silly point.
You say he should be a nobody, but you also say he is unique.
I just don’t get people’s desire to respond childishly to anything Armstrong related.
Farrell. Chill
Farrell. Chill
Quote:You say he should be a
You don’t understand, do you?
He is unique in his standing among other dopers.
He is a nobody in the world of cycling and should be treated so.
don simon wrote:Quote:You say
I fully understand, I just don’t see what benefit doing the internet equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and stamping away to your room shouting “lalalalalalalala” could possibly bring.
“I just don’t get people’s
“I just don’t get people’s desire to respond childishly to anything Armstrong related.” Cos he’s a cnut
“the truth is that he is, and will be, remembered as a champion bike rider” Just because you say that, doesn’t make it true. I disagree with you, as so many others.
“Where have I defended Lance Armstrong?” Your original post is in support of him
“Unless of course you scream equally as hysterically about every single other cyclist in history who doped” I despise other riders who doped, Stephen Roche, Sean Kelly etc almost as much. I despise Armstrong more, cos he was the worst. I admire Kimmage and leMond because they didn’t
“I just wonder why you still have an interest in cycling at all” Cos I hope it is now (generally) clean. I certainly think Wiggins and Froome are
Armstrong is remembered as a
Armstrong is remembered as a champion by ordinary people? I think perhaps you don’t get out much – he’s pretty much the icon of a sports drugs cheat to the world at large now! 🙂
Paul J wrote:Armstrong is
Most people know about his cheating and drug use, his other more malevolent behaviour isn’t really known or talked about outside of cycling because most people don’t really care that much but if they were on Family Fortunes and asked to name a famous cyclist the answer of Lance Armstrong sure as hell wouldn’t be getting the infamous noise and a big X now would it?
He’ll be remembered as a champion bike racer the same way that Jimi Hendrix is remembered as a brilliant guitarist as opposed to a failed vomit gargler.
farrell wrote:He’ll be
Failed vomit gargler? Really? That’s appalling. Truly disgusting.
IMO, such as it is, I think
IMO, such as it is, I think LA is trying to preserve some kind of legacy, but within a couple of years he will be known more for his sporting fraud, bullying and disdain for the sport. time will tell
Farrell hearts Lance
Farrell hearts Lance
anarchy wrote:Farrell hearts
Farrell would probably let Lance take him out to dinner.
farrell wrote:anarchy
Farrell would probably let Lance take him anywhere Lance wanted 😀
anarchy wrote:farrell
Farrell would probably let Lance take him anywhere Lance wanted 😀— anarchy
Probably, but no kissing.
I learned that from that Pretty Woman documentary.
The problem with LA
The problem with LA testifying under Oath is that he’s already done that and commited purjury in the process. Why should he not do the same again? he’s a liar with no currency so his words (as they say in The Game of Thrones) are wind.
so 2012 zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
so 2012 zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Only time will tell what
Only time will tell what legacy Lance’s career leaves behind. At the moment it’s convenient to see him as the ‘be all and end all’ of doping in cycling, but anybody with any knowledge of the sport knows that is nowhere near the case.
His massive contribution to the cancer community is also conveniently overlooked at the moment; indeed, here in the USA he is known as much for that as any of his TDF achievements.
He’s the bad guy now, but even now I for one can watch clips of those tours and enjoy them. Images like ‘The look’ and taking to the ploughed field to avoid Beloki can’t be erased.
It is what it is.
pwake wrote:Only time will
Actually I agree with what pwake said and in some respects feel a bit sorry for Lance. Problem is, it’s actually not helpful to blame LA for all that is/was wrong with cycling, it hides the true magnitude of what was happening. Sponsors, teams, managers, doctors, hell, the entire peloton…they were all in on it and all integral to the success of the doping programmes.
Even Bassons is on record as saying it wasn’t LA who forced him from the sport, it was the whole system.
I wouldn’t mind quite so much if there was a degree of consistency with the treatment of past dopers but when you’ve got Bjarne Riis running a team on one side and on the other side you’ve got Lance being sued left right and centre, it’s kind of unfair no?
Who!!
Who!!
Just wait until the current
Just wait until the current lot are found out (though it’s clear really as they have many times, only the blinkered deny what it is going on….
Another 10 minutes of my life
Another 10 minutes of my life wasted reading (and commenting) on lance 🙁
‘Only time will tell what
‘Only time will tell what legacy Lance’s career leaves behind. At the moment it’s convenient to see him as the ‘be all and end all’ of doping in cycling, but anybody with any knowledge of the sport knows that is nowhere near the case.’
He’s seen as nothing of the sort. He’s the most high profile doper, certainly.
‘His massive contribution to the cancer community is also conveniently overlooked at the moment’
His massive contribution being….what, exactly?
‘Images like ‘The look”
The ‘I’ve got the UCI on my side’ look?
‘taking to the ploughed field to avoid Beloki’
Ah, the time when he didn’t ride the entire course, yet still was given the top spot on the podium. That one.
(last point slightly facetious. Others less so.)
andyp wrote:’Only time will
Haters gonna hate.
Like I said; it is what it is…
So Lance is stripped of it
So Lance is stripped of it but Eddy is given the award in 2011. I guess Eddy never doped then. 8}
Did Eddy perjure, slander and
Did Eddy perjure, slander and destroy others’ lives and careers? That might have some kind of say in it.
Octomom? Octomom?!
Octomom? Octomom?!
In a slight aside, has anyone
In a slight aside, has anyone seen the Pantani film? They moved the goalposts of Rendall’s book quite significantly. They rather put a lot of focus on Armstrong’s ‘bullying’ of Pantani on the Mont Ventoux stage, which was only an aspect of his downward spiral dontcha’ think?
I don’t understand why the
I don’t understand why the French honoured Armstrong in the first place. By 2005 he was already pretty suspect in the eyes of the French cycle press. I would have thought the Elyseé would have taken that on board.
MercuryOne wrote:I don’t
My thoughts too, Mercury One. He was made a Chevalier de la Legion d’Honneur in October 2005, 2 months after he was exposed as a cheat in the famous l’Equipe article “Le Mesonge Armstrong”, which proved beyond reasonable doubt that he doped during the 1999 Tour de France.