-
With my tinfoil hat on, I Had a stray thought on the ride home that could Sky/Froome intentionally upped the dose knowing Froome needed it, confident they would exonerate him later? Further tin foil time, maybe the leaker suspected that and bought it into the public arena to stop him getting a free pass.
Thinking the worst of people is fun.
But I will say this has taken the shine off the prospect of a new season. You can keep your GTs anyway, early season classics is where it's at.
Jimmy_Fingers-
this has taken the shine off the prospect of a new season
Where have you been for the last 100 years? There has always been cheating in cycle races, there will always be cheating in cycle races. If your enjoyment of it is contingent on everybody playing fair, you might as well stop watching.
The best Tour stage I've ever watched was 2006 stage 17; the fact that it later turned out that Floyd was off his tits can't go back in time and change that, and I knew before I fired up the pirate stream on the computer that there were probably dopers on the start line. While Floyd's epic solo was the catalyst, the real fun was watching T-Mobile at war with itself anyway.
gbj_tester
No, my position is that he is likely to be innocent. If this was a criminal matter, there's more than enough out there already, without lab testing Froome, to provide the reasonable doubt which would force a jury to acquit. It's not, though, and UCI only has to make out its case to the comfortable satisfaction of the CAS tribunal, an easier hurdle to get over than "beyond reasonable doubt". Froome's chances are further harmed by the fact that doping is a strict liability offence, so UCI only has to demonstrate that the permitted dose was exceeded, not that it was intentional or even negligent. Froome could offer evidence in mitigation if that case is made out, but it will only reduce his punishment, not overturn the verdict.