-
There was that evidence though. The failed test in 99 for cortisone that was covered up with a backdated TUE, a French TV crew filming team staff dumping medical waste, including Actovegin packaging, in a bin in a lay-by miles away from the race, the testimony from the likes of Emma O'Reilly, Steve Swart, Betsy Andreu etc, the links with Ferrari and l'Equipe's work on the 99 urine tests.
With Froome and Sky there is nothing like this in the public domain. Which suggests it either doesn't exist or there is a conspiracy so successful that they've managed to cover it up. I know which one I think most likely.
andyp-
My point is that Lance had evidence against him and yet he still went on to to win 7 Tours so evidence or lack of it in Tour terms doesn't mean much when it comes to winning the race. If he can cover shit up enough to get away with 7 wins, why can't another mob do the same?
Maybe it is just perfected training and diet and a bit of luck but the Tour always going to be a bit...
for me.
-
This 100%, a brief association with a dodgy doctor and a few ex-dopers as DS's is as bad as it gets with Sky and British Cycling, JTL aside, who doesn't really count. But because they are good they are guilty, and because they are British and rich they get more hate than they really deserve.
hippy
Jimmy_Fingers
Just like those Lance years where all that evidence popped up to stop him and his team winning another Tour... oh...