You are reading a single comment by @noBlakes and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
-
That first bit, I can agree with. I'll still watch and enjoy sport, but I have fully checked out when it comes to believing it's credibility.
I'll also agree with the fact that testing has come on leaps and bounds, but I honestly believe that Sky are far worse than any of their competitors, and utilise a much more systematic approach to doping, or as you put it, taking advantage of the grey areas.
noBlakes
Walk away then. It’s only sport, it’s not important.
The UCI have been at the vanguard of anti-doping, the biological passport was a game changer in fighting doping. Anne Gripper fought long and hard to get that past internal opposition and WADA indifference.
The sport has changed because of it, and for the better. Long gone are the outrageous dopers who effectively laughed in the faces of the authorities, today the sport is far, far cleaner. Of course it’s not perfect, and there are teams, including Sky, who exploit the grey areas around what is medical need and what is performance enhancing.
But the days of police raids and dodgy doctors are gone.