If a Tree Falls in the Forest

Ray Lewis of the Baltimore Ravens

Today a story came out about Ray Lewis, the retiring NFL superstar about to end his career in the Super Bowl, where he is accused of purchasing performance enhancing drugs. The story isn’t actually new though. Two years ago the same man, Mitch Ross, said he sold PEDs to Lewis previously. Lewis has once again the denied the allegations and within a few days this story will blow over most likely.

Obviously I have no idea if this Ross character is telling the truth or just trying to get fame, publicity, money or whatever else he can by lying. Ray Lewis has never failed a drug test so for now we assume he is innocent.

However the problem here isn’t the accusations or even whether Lewis did it or not, but rather the fact that the NFL has a long list of banned substances, including the one Lewis is alleged to have used (deer antler spray… seriously), but then doesn’t even test for most of them.

Basically the league is operating on the “honour system” for many of the substances that can be as helpful as the ones they do test for such as steroids and HGH. It has long been known that PED use is rampant in the NFL, much like it was in baseball, but that not only do they not do much to catch the users, but it seems fans truly don’t mind.

There is a prevailing theory that the attitude of NFL fans is that they know many players use PEDs, but given the nature of the sport, they are fine with it. There are a lot of skeletons in the NFL closet, such as the Bounty-gate scandal and thus PED usage doesn’t really get much attention or interest.

If Ray Lewis is using the deer antler spray he is accused of purchasing, you can see why he would have done it.

The guy wanted to come back in time to play again this season, which was always likely to be his last. He had an opportunity to use something to make that happen that he cannot actually get in trouble for and he knows for a fact that lots of other players are using it too.

As humans we are always influenced by the culture we are surrounded by. That’s how a lot of well-meaning cyclists end up on EPO even if they had always been anti-PED previously. That doesn’t mean what they are doing is right and shouldn’t be punished, but it’s how these things become epidemics.

The NFL doesn’t seem to want to catch people using these PEDs, so of course the players are going to take them in such a physically demanding sport with one of the shortest average career lengths around.

What use is a rule if it’s never going to be enforced?

Lance Armstrong admitted one of the main ways he got away with doping was simply that they weren’t testing for what he was doing for much of that time. Sure, by nature the cheaters will always be one step ahead of the testers, but they can still make it a lot harder to do. There are tests that exist to test everything, or almost everything, banned by the NFL.

Having the rule but not enforcing it is purely a publicity stunt to make it seem like they are running, or at least endeavour to run, a clean sport. But while the testing stays as it is, it shows that the NFL have no real interest in opening the can of worms that surely awaits them were they to crack down on PEDs.

With everything going on surrounding the concussion issue in football, the last thing Roger Goodell needs is another scandal about the safety and integrity of the league he runs. So this story about Ray Lewis is something for talking heads to go on about for a couple of days and then forget all about the fact that underlying it is a much bigger issue.

Even if Ray Lewis had tested positive, the suspension would only have been four games for a first offence. Compare that to sports where you can be wiped out for entire seasons, multiple years or even lifetime bans.

Perhaps one day, once there is nothing ahead of it on the to-do list, the NFL will actually take drug testing seriously. But in the meantime, you are kidding yourself if you think half the players in the league aren’t abusing the rules in one way or another.

I love American football and am very excited to watch the Super Bowl this weekend (Monday our time). In fact I am hoping Ray Lewis goes out on top. However I am not naïve enough to believe I will be watching a sport where the athletes are clean, just like when I watched Le Tour during the height of the doping years.

When a tree falls in the forest, I hope someone will show up to drug test the lumberjack.

Bad Time to be an Armstrong

Generic photo of Lance not looking pleased

This article is totally about Lance Armstrong, but hey, I can’t write this article and not mention that a few days later, an even more famous Armstrong in the great Neil Armstrong passed away. I certainly don’t think there was any performance enhancing drug scandal about the moon landing though.

I deliberately waited a while before writing about the Lance Armstrong case, partly so some of the dust could settle, but also because I figured and still think this story isn’t over yet. Yes he has officially been stripped of his titles and says he is done fighting the charges, but I still think you’ll hear the occasional comment from him in the media and you’ll also get new information from others coming out every once in a while.

Overall, public opinion on this one seems to be divided. Most people I’ve spoken to or read their thoughts seem to think Lance is guilty. Others think he is either innocent or that they didn’t get anywhere near close enough to proof to take this sort of action. As usual, I think the truth lies somewhere in the middle. I do think Lance most likely was doping, however I think he was doping only as much as literally every other guy in the race was. Also I do have some concerns about the unusual way in which this decision was reached.

Normally when someone gets banned for doping, it’s simply a matter of failing a drug test, testing the B sample to confirm and then taking the appropriate action. This situation on the other hand came from testimony in court from witnesses and blood tests that whilst not proving he was on drugs, imply that he may have been taking EPO. If that sounds confusing, it is because it is. The best source I’ve found to explain the situation is this piece from Deadspin.

Whilst the testimony of some of Lance’s former teammates doesn’t really carry much value with me because it’s obvious why these people may have been willing to cut a deal, there is one man whose testimony certainly stands out. George Hincapie, at least in my opinion, had nothing to gain by lying to cut a deal. The guy is by all accounts one of Armstrong’s closest friends in cycling, even after his testimony, he was retiring anyway so a reduced sentence on his own doping ban was irrelevant and most importantly he didn’t have to testify that he was doping at all. No one was coming after George Hincapie and he is one of the most respected guys in the sport, yet he chose to testify that he was cheating along with Armstrong. The only options in my mind as to why this would occur is that he took being under oath seriously and wasn’t going to lie, or he was bribed or something else sinister. Of course I don’t believe he was bribed, so I’m going with the former.

If I had to believe one conspiracy theory in all this mess, it’s probably the long standing rumour that Armstrong did in fact fail drug tests in 2001, but they were covered up by the UCI because it would destroy the sport. However, obviously those are just rumours and I can’t use that as complete justification for what has happened now.

I still have concerns about the precedent that has been set by this situation. Regardless of whether I personally think Armstrong is guilty, it should take a serious amount of proof to get to the stage where you strip him of his titles. I know the stakes aren’t the same, but if Casey Anthony is found not guilty because there wasn’t enough proof, you’d think it might be similar in this case, but I guess USADA disagrees.

That’s why I don’t think Armstrong should have had the titles stripped, I just would put an * next to them. Much like Barry Bonds’ home run record and other controversial drug scandals, there isn’t the proof to wipe it from the books, but I think we can all agree it was very fishy. Most importantly, I don’t want the titles given to the guys who came second. Much like giving the 1988 Men’s 100m sprint gold to Carl Lewis, giving titles to guys like Jan Ullrich and others who were either definitely doping or allegedly doping doesn’t sit right with me. Let those years be blank and let’s just move on.

I would like to think these sorts of scandals are going to become a thing of the past as testing improves, however that is probably somewhat naive, as newer and sneakier drugs are always coming out and some athletes are always going to look for that edge. But as long as they get caught at the time, the sport should be able to maintain some level of integrity.