Giro D'Italia - where can I watch it?

You're right. Just glad I didn't make any presumptions about, for example, Schumacher when he was achieving so far beyond his abilities. What a fool I would have felt having defended his honour when the obviously doped-to-the-eyeballs bastard turned out to be, er, doped to the eyeballs. And I still believe that Richard Virenque never failed a dope test because he had never taken dope.

It too late at night for me to have a fully working sarcasm filter, so I assuming you are being sarcastic, and this would be my answer ....

Suspicion and proof are two very different things.

It is understandable to investigate someone if there is suspicion, but not to label them guilty without any proof. If there is proof someone has cheated throw the book at them, that is fair enough but not before.

Don't really see why you may disagree with this.