I think the unfortunate thing here is that this case is not going to reform cycling, doping, and enforcement of rules by the UCI, WADA or USADA. Unlike in Baseball, or other organized sports, since there are unions involved, the US Congress and oversight committees are going to draw attention and force an issue. In a sport such as cycling or similar, there isnt a pathway for a major force to come through and clean house. As much as we want to see the top dog become fallible, and by a force of a court case express to the world that more needs to be done, we wont achieve that here. I think that for all of those on this Clinic forum, we mostly want to see an impetus for change.
Until some major force comes about that can truly either bring about a sociological, or bureaucratic method to shape up our sport we are not going to see change from all the US, Italian, Spanish or other potential court cases. Perhaps if the US Congress, or any other nationality can latch their teeth into the WADA or USADA to provide oversight, enforce rules, and give additional strength and resources to shape up amateur and professional sport worldwide, we wont see the change necessary. Novitsky's case in Balco did point out that NFL, MLB, USA Track and Field, and a variety of other sports have a problem. A certain amount of testing is see now, but it is easily averted. We still have yet to fully address the issues at hand, and by point of this, will not see the point at hand in cycling be addressed properly by this case.
This case needs to go through all the motions and rigors, it needs to prove that there is a systematic endeavor at hand. Bring the spotlight to the methods, pathways, and motivations. Perhaps with better knowledge, something can be done, but the case itself will not do that.