Re: Re:
But aren't there questions over 'due process' - which should contribute to any scrutiny into the way the sport is governed. Sadly, I've yet to see evidence the debate is moving on from 'Wiggins witchhunt' to 'WTF were the team doing' and the 'was there collusion / favouritism (or just tacit acceptance of TUEs being 'legalised' doping)' in what seems like rubber stamp signing off.
I am a lot less interested in Wiggins being questioned than I am interested in seeing team management, team doctors, sport governance held to account.
Benotti69 said:hrotha said:Froome's TUEs aren't nearly as blatant and obvious as Wiggins's. That is a fact.
True, but his performance and transformation was greater than Wiggins.
Walsh knows Froome never mentioned asthma for the book.
But aren't there questions over 'due process' - which should contribute to any scrutiny into the way the sport is governed. Sadly, I've yet to see evidence the debate is moving on from 'Wiggins witchhunt' to 'WTF were the team doing' and the 'was there collusion / favouritism (or just tacit acceptance of TUEs being 'legalised' doping)' in what seems like rubber stamp signing off.
I am a lot less interested in Wiggins being questioned than I am interested in seeing team management, team doctors, sport governance held to account.