-
I didn’t know for some reason, hadn’t bothered checking so assumed better. And it is very disappointing.
As far as validation is concerned, she can have her opinion and CN can give her a platform, but like Landis I’m not sure I’m interested. A lot of ex-dopers operate on the ‘we had to dope to race’ and so apply that to modern riders.
Jimmy_Fingers-
I didn’t know for some reason, hadn’t bothered checking so assumed better. And it is very disappointing.
Aside from the public confession, and the fact she rode for TVM, who by all accounts were juiced like lab rats, both public record... yet you care so much now, after years of reading her articles and presumably finding them of merit until the day she dared broach the subject of the credibility of Froome's ride on stage 19 and concluded with a "I genuinely don't know"?
I think a lot of people who respond this way would be theologians in another era, mumbling catchetisms whilst deliberating on the merit of rounding up disbelievers and burning them lest God be angry and give everyone the pox.
deleted
York/Millar publicly admitted doping years ago in a very roundabout way and explained why and what the background was in an article at a time when not many were for fessing up... http://www.cyclingnews.com/blogs/robert-millar/the-bare-minimum/
http://www.cyclingnews.com/blogs/robert-millar/robert-millar-silence-wont-stop-the-doping-stories/
...was pretty well received:
https://twitter.com/kathylemond/status/260760717614010368
Doesn't make it right but I don't see it as totally invalidating anything she has to say on the subject now either.