-
Every big name in cycling ever has some sort of doping related taint, yet for some reason they all ok but Froome isn't.
I think history tends to be kinder to them eventually. Merckx was disliked during his time and was infamously punched by a spectator in the 1975 TdeF for instance.
While Froome is winning everything and Sky are so dominant in the Grand Tours haters gonna hate. Not helped by Sky and Brailsford being so fucking awful at PR.
Ste_S-
Everyone seems to forget Merckx was a doper. Froome isn't (that we know of).
-
I think a rider's popularity plays a lot into how history judges. Indurain remains high on people's shit list for being an early adopter of EPO and time trialling to his TdF wins, Contador and Pantani are celebrated for their swashbuckling style, like Merckx.
Sky and generally successful British riders, like the Americans before them, are seen an interlopers by a lot of traditional cycling fans, who only seem to like riders from traditional cycling countries, and riders from Southern Europe best of all.
hippy
Jimmy_Fingers
Tweeted by Susan Westemeyer. Hopefully taking cyclingnews with her.
The hand-wringing poor-me tweets over this TdF have been hilarious. So many 'I used to look forward to July but now it is ruined and so is the sport'.
Every big name in cycling ever has some sort of doping related taint, yet for some reason they all ok but Froome isn't.