-
if this were about the facts everyone would wait for due process to be followed before they condemned.
UCI rules are fucking shit, and the timing of the leak at a point when Cooke was leaving didn't help, neither did their mooted rule change for salbutamol that had been tabled that gave the impression a special pass was being given. i.e due process is only as valuable as the process itself, and given the process so far it's shown to be pretty imperfect.
Wiggins did the "once this process is over I will be permitted to say my part" and lots of people believed it would exonerate him. When the time came he had nothing to say apart from 'trust me this is bullshit'. Froome's asking for the same patience and saying everyone will be satisfied, going against all precedents for salbutamol adverse findings that have seen other riders banned.
People see it as exceptionalism. I don't know if they're wrong-the rules, imperfect as they are-remain the rules and I'm interested to see him prove that he had a liver disfunction or that the test is not valid. Even if he can, people will probably still just see it as Sky getting special treatment.
You are reading a single comment by @deleted and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
deleted
I actually doubt that. I mean, if this were about the facts everyone would wait for due process to be followed before they condemned.