-
The trouble is, a lot of them were duped by Armstrong so now they feel they have to be especially sceptical about pro cycling. They've become parodies now though, calling foul at anything remotely suspicious, such as that grainy video of Wout Van Aert's wheel moving in the Italian CX World Cup round, even though it was obvious at a high resolution that his crank caught a tree root and that was what turned the wheel, rather than a hidden motor.
I think a healthy dose of scepticism is essential, but you also have to evaluate all the available evidence to come to some kind of objective view. With Team Sky, it's clear, I think, that they've pushed right up against the line of what is allowed under the current rules, but so far there's no concrete evidence of any rule breaking and it would appear that UKAD have come to the same conclusion. That Team Sky have handled it poorly should also come as no surprise, their PR has been laughably poor pretty much since their inception.
andyp-
Yeah but we have to move beyond what Armstrong and the rest of the peloton was doing at some point. Comparisons between Sky and US Postal are rife, yet the evidence against Sky is minuscule compared to the mountain that formed against USP. Lets face it, compared to Astana '15 the jiffy bag, TUEs and testosterone is minor and they escaped censure.
And Armstrong doesn't excuse being nasty pricks on Twitter.
Jimmy_Fingers
The biggest problem I have with all the self-appointed doping crusaders like Kimmage, Ross Tucker, Vayer and Digger, not to mention the clinic menagerie, is just how fucking nasty and sneering they are all about it, and the fact those sneers are selective. Ross Tucker directed a nasty tweet at Owain Doull and Tao got a load of shit for supporting Brailsford, both neo-pros. Not fucking on.