EXCLUSIVE! Remarks cut from USADA’s final response to Liggett.

//EXCLUSIVE! Remarks cut from USADA’s final response to Liggett.

EXCLUSIVE! Remarks cut from USADA’s final response to Liggett.


Phil goes kwazy.

Yesterday, Phil Liggett offered a critical assessment of the USADA investigation of Lance Armstrong on South Africa’s Ballz Radio.

In the course of the interview, the long-time race announcer parroted much of the language that Armstrong’s lawyers and public relations experts have used to defend the seven time Tour de France champion — “witch hunt,” “500 doping tests passed,” statue of limitation abuse and political “conspiracy.”

The USADA has responded to Liggett’s claims with the following statement:  “It is blatantly false information from someone who has never had the courtesy to contact USADA for truthful and accurate information,” said USADA media relations manager, Annie Skinner.

However, Twisted Spoke has obtained several additional statements that were edited out of the final USADA response. Here are the lines that USADA wisely cut at the last minute:

“Phil, are you on crack? Jesus Christ, put the pipe down.”

“Clearly, the early-onset Alzheimers is hitting you pretty hard. If you can’t put two coherent sentences together, keep your damn mouth shut.”

“Next time, don’t give any interviews when you’re jet lagged from flying back from Colorado and four pints into the Guinness.”

“Don’t think we don’t have doping testimony on you, Phil — the cut rate “Super” Viagra you ordered from Mexico? The use of certain stimulants and “party” drugs so you stay awake long enough to party with the podium girls back at the hotel.”

“No evidence? Have you ever read the WADA code? After spending most of your life as a cycling journalist, are you just plain clueless?”

“Wake-up, Phil, wake-up. Don’t make Travis come over and slap you around.”

“Good to have any shred of evidence for outlandish claims, Phil. Evidence — sign of a functioning brain, higher reasoning, use of logic, facts, testimony. Blather doesn’t really qualify.”

“If you’re going to read from the Armstrong PR script, at least hold it up on camera so we can actually see the paper you’re reading from.”

“Next time you show up for the Tour of California and US Pro Cycling Challenge we’re going test you three times a day. Urine, blood, genetic profile, bowel check. It won’t be pretty, Phil. We may even confiscate your shoes, just for fun.”

Fortunately, these statements were only contained in the initial draft of the USADA response to Phil Liggett. They were expunged from the final version delivered to the media.




By |2019-02-03T16:07:10-08:00August 31st, 2012|Uncategorized|5 Comments

About the Author:


  1. Censored Cyclist August 31, 2012 at 10:06 am - Reply

    There is so much hate against Liggett’s remarks because, by and large, they hit the mark. Leaving aside his conspiracy claims, it is extraordinary that the USADA has spent so much time going back 14 years against this one rider, and is willing to let off about ten others – even letting them ride the tour – just so they testify against him. It’s a bloody shower. Well done Liggett for speaking up for the sport.

    • James September 1, 2012 at 7:38 am - Reply

      One rider?? Armstrong is much more that just one rider. He is the most influential cyclist in history. There is a valid arguement, as Paul Kimmage has repeated expressed, that Armstrong doped to win the 1999 Tour and got away with it, sending a message to the rest peleton – dope if you want to win, quit if you want to stay clean. Armstrongs actions had a major impact on the careers of a whole generation of cyclists.

      • walshworld September 2, 2012 at 11:37 am

        Amen. Justice coming soon — well not soon, slowly, but coming. Matt

  2. Jorge August 31, 2012 at 11:46 am - Reply

    Money talks. Liggett is just protecting his job in cycling. The majority of people in cycling are looking the other way when it comes to doping. That is evident from the support that Lance is getting, after so many years of doping.

  3. IWearSpandex August 31, 2012 at 1:54 pm - Reply

    I don’t get Phil. In his regular ocmmentary, he usually avoids the “doping talk” and leaves it to Paul, if it comes up at all. I really think that Phil believes he is somehow protecting the integrity of the sport by avoiding all the “nasty business” that goes on. Phil can say whatever he wants, he’s not held to journalist standards, but I think many fans look at him that way. I think that’s why we saw such a severe reaction against Phil. Thanks for “exposing” the lost USADA comments. Great stuff. And great picture of Phil.

Leave A Comment