If many of you think I am being too suspicious of JV let us consider some context.
He appears here, prompted by a twitter post that exclaims there is a "leaked" team document from Steffen, and offers what possibly is a plausible explanation. Ok, fine.
The "leaked" communication is based on Steffen, who by all accounts is a fervent anti-doping MD, who "took a punch" for anti-doping and got himself in some legal bind with regard to statements he made about Hamilton and Jamison asking for doping products.
JV bestows on the forum (his words) "transparency" and then dodges very logical and valid follow-on questions stemming from his (sill plausible) explanation, choosing instead to focus on the tenor of the questions.
Bearing in mind, the current climate of doping and scandal in the peloton, as well as his own, yet to be clarified doping past, the truth of which MAY be relevant to an ongoing investigation.
All of this, to me, gives me pause. Enough to not want to simply accept his gloss over explanation of the email.
My view is that JV answers are incomplete:
1. He mentions the 2008 date as being the start of blood parameters being gathered and viewed by the UCI. This is not true. The UCI has been doing so LONG before then, and I cite Hamilton's case, in which he was waned at least twice of having unusual blood parameters, and Levi's warnings, which Holczer claims to be ignorant of. I called him on this and he went on a tangent about HCT, and its usefulness.
2. He mentions the requirement of Haematologist being retained by a journalist wishing to gain access to blood profiles of team riders. I challenged him to name, or at lease acknowledge that Slipstream has one, too. He does not answer. In fact, push the issue to the point where I mention his reliance on the UCI (how wise is that? they are haematologists?) to "assure" him that Wiggo's blood profile from the 09 Tour was "ok".
3. We still wonder what is going on with the White/Lowe situation. Facts are fuzzy but it seems the same Dr. Prentice and JV were too negligent to notice, or tacitly approved, two visits by Lowe to Del Moral in 2009, pushed there by JV's trusted DS, White. JV seems to be pushing the limits of what is reasonable accommodation for Lowe to gather with his new team, and withhold some of his pay. Lowe seems perturbed that JV is selectively applying some things (meaningless contract details) and not others (internal policy and procedure on doctor referrals/visits).
JV is playing both sides of the fence, and is placed in the unsavory position of having the Del Moral visits, which we know now they most certainly had notice of and cannot claim ignorance of the issue, come to the public. Placing White and Lowe under the immediate black cloud of visiting a known doping doctor, making JV and Prentice look suspect for having "overlooked" this pretty serious, and not isolated, violation.
So, no, I will not simply accept JV's cuffshot web posting addressing "perception is reality" or rules for journalist, or what appears to be selective application of his own rules, when it benefits him. Ask yourself this, if Lowe had not made the threat he was going to disclose how JV has selectively applied contract language and internal procedures, would JV have fired White?
Look, it may be something simple in explaining the email. JV may be honest on this topic. The questions I posed were valid, relevant, and were not formed in an confrontational tone. He chose to ignore them, under his wand of "transparency" and has played hit-and-run in choosing what he will and will not address.
I am not so trusting or gullible, in today's world where Contador is about to be acquitted, where the depths of the corruption and doping as revealed by Landis show JV stayed on the sidelines mute for years, not stepping doing the right thing and providing the authorities with what he knew about Lance, to the point where Lance returns to the sport and knocks his own (clean?) rider from the podium.