Why are we compelled to give Lance Armstrong a second chance? Didn’t he lie to us repeatedly about his cheating as a professional cyclist over a twenty-year period despite overwhelming evidence that he was guilty? Not only that, there is substantial evidence that Armstrong threatened and coerced fellow cyclists, bribed officials and used his tremendous influence in the sport to keep others from coming clean about their and his rampant cheating, and his willful disregard for the integrity of the sport. Didn’t he have ample enough time to come clean? At what point does he exhaust his window of opportunity to tell the truth and live with his fate as a cheater and be remembered that way? How long has he been lying to us about his doping? Now he is ready to confess his sins? And we should accept his admission of guilt and allow him to clear his conscience? I say no. Let him remain branded a cheater, because that’s who he was and is. Lance Armstrong is an athlete who thought the rules didn’t apply to him. Sometimes heroes don’t deserve a second chance. Armstrong is one of them.
Oprah and others in the media should have taken a stand and denied his request to publicize his confession. Why should we allow him to apologize to us? What kind of message are we sending to our children? That you can lie, lie, lie, lie, lie…and then finally, tell the truth and all is forgiven? It doesn’t work that way for the rest of us. The message we are sending is that there is no reward for telling the truth right away; if you’re a hero or a public figure, you can cheat and lie repeatedly and when you eventually come clean years from now, all will be forgiven.
The same thing is happening with our baseball heroes. Why as a society do we allow our heroes or public figures this grace period and ultimate forgiveness? It’s as if they are living by a different set of rules than we live by and expect our children to live by. Why can’t we just allow the heroes that fail to fall? We can use their failings as an opportunity to teach. Let us accept the fact that some of our heroes won’t measure up. Some of our heroes will decide not play by the rules, and therefore we can’t and shouldn’t recognize them for their achievements and enshrine them for immortality. Why do we need to see them climb back on the pedestal and attempt to right the wrongs they did in their public lives?
Furthermore, this isn’t the sudden realization of a man repentantly searching his soul and finally coming to grips with his cheating ways. Armstrong’s 'mea culpa' regarding performance-enhancing drugs on Oprah is a calculated and orchestrated attempt by a man who wants to resume competing legitimately on a professional level in the sport of triathlons. To do so, he needs to have the lifetime ban issued by the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) in August 2012 rescinded. It seems unlikely he will successful in accomplishing that. The USADA not only issued Armstrong a lifetime ban from competition but also stripped him of the record seven 'Tour de France' titles he won from 1998 to 2005. In their report, the USADA said that Armstrong enforced "the most sophisticated, professionalized and successful doping program the sport has ever seen". The Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI), the sport's governing body, announced in October 2012 to accept the USADA's findings regarding Armstrong and enforce his lifetime ban.
How will the ban infringe on his ability to compete in future events? Last year, Armstrong entered and competed in several minor triathlon events such as the Half Full Triathlon in Maryland and the Superfrog Triathlon near San Diego. By accepting his entry in these events, organizers rescinded their opportunity to be recognized as USA Triathlon (USAT) certified events in exchange for the increase in entry fees and the added notoriety that resulted directly from Armstrong’s participation. Confronted with the moral dilemma of whether to accept or deny his presence in their contests, some of these relatively unknown competitions are choosing to embrace Armstrong as a savior not as a cheater. Another example of how greed corrodes the fiber of our moral character. It should be noted that one professional competition last year did not cave in and welcome Armstrong with open arms. The Chicago Marathon rejected Armstrong’s bid to compete in their event and cited his lifetime ban as the reason for the rejection.
The questions each one of us should be asking ourselves as we watch Lance open up on Oprah is… Should we blame him for trying to reinstate his legitimacy in professional sports? Or are we responsible for allowing it to happen if it does? Are we capable, as a society, of recognizing and separating the real heroes from the fake ones? When do we stop giving someone the opportunity to tell the truth and come clean? By acknowledging that our heroes have failed does it imply that we failed too by idolizing them? Is that why we have such a hard time coming to terms with it? We don’t want to admit that we were fooled. The same reason why a majority of financial scams go unreported every year. Admitting their failure is admitting our failure. Now is the time for us to admit we were wrong about Lance Armstrong. More importantly, let us use this acknowledgement as a teaching moment and make certain the message is clear to all future generations: No matter how great the accomplishment, you can’t be a hero unless you play by the rules.
Oprah and others in the media should have taken a stand and denied his request to publicize his confession. Why should we allow him to apologize to us? What kind of message are we sending to our children? That you can lie, lie, lie, lie, lie…and then finally, tell the truth and all is forgiven? It doesn’t work that way for the rest of us. The message we are sending is that there is no reward for telling the truth right away; if you’re a hero or a public figure, you can cheat and lie repeatedly and when you eventually come clean years from now, all will be forgiven.
The same thing is happening with our baseball heroes. Why as a society do we allow our heroes or public figures this grace period and ultimate forgiveness? It’s as if they are living by a different set of rules than we live by and expect our children to live by. Why can’t we just allow the heroes that fail to fall? We can use their failings as an opportunity to teach. Let us accept the fact that some of our heroes won’t measure up. Some of our heroes will decide not play by the rules, and therefore we can’t and shouldn’t recognize them for their achievements and enshrine them for immortality. Why do we need to see them climb back on the pedestal and attempt to right the wrongs they did in their public lives?
Furthermore, this isn’t the sudden realization of a man repentantly searching his soul and finally coming to grips with his cheating ways. Armstrong’s 'mea culpa' regarding performance-enhancing drugs on Oprah is a calculated and orchestrated attempt by a man who wants to resume competing legitimately on a professional level in the sport of triathlons. To do so, he needs to have the lifetime ban issued by the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) in August 2012 rescinded. It seems unlikely he will successful in accomplishing that. The USADA not only issued Armstrong a lifetime ban from competition but also stripped him of the record seven 'Tour de France' titles he won from 1998 to 2005. In their report, the USADA said that Armstrong enforced "the most sophisticated, professionalized and successful doping program the sport has ever seen". The Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI), the sport's governing body, announced in October 2012 to accept the USADA's findings regarding Armstrong and enforce his lifetime ban.
How will the ban infringe on his ability to compete in future events? Last year, Armstrong entered and competed in several minor triathlon events such as the Half Full Triathlon in Maryland and the Superfrog Triathlon near San Diego. By accepting his entry in these events, organizers rescinded their opportunity to be recognized as USA Triathlon (USAT) certified events in exchange for the increase in entry fees and the added notoriety that resulted directly from Armstrong’s participation. Confronted with the moral dilemma of whether to accept or deny his presence in their contests, some of these relatively unknown competitions are choosing to embrace Armstrong as a savior not as a cheater. Another example of how greed corrodes the fiber of our moral character. It should be noted that one professional competition last year did not cave in and welcome Armstrong with open arms. The Chicago Marathon rejected Armstrong’s bid to compete in their event and cited his lifetime ban as the reason for the rejection.
The questions each one of us should be asking ourselves as we watch Lance open up on Oprah is… Should we blame him for trying to reinstate his legitimacy in professional sports? Or are we responsible for allowing it to happen if it does? Are we capable, as a society, of recognizing and separating the real heroes from the fake ones? When do we stop giving someone the opportunity to tell the truth and come clean? By acknowledging that our heroes have failed does it imply that we failed too by idolizing them? Is that why we have such a hard time coming to terms with it? We don’t want to admit that we were fooled. The same reason why a majority of financial scams go unreported every year. Admitting their failure is admitting our failure. Now is the time for us to admit we were wrong about Lance Armstrong. More importantly, let us use this acknowledgement as a teaching moment and make certain the message is clear to all future generations: No matter how great the accomplishment, you can’t be a hero unless you play by the rules.
