Dr. Maserati, when you quote JV...
“Now, what seems to me to be happening over and over again is that a high-profile person will test positive and that completely hijacks the fact that you’ve got a complete turnaround in the majority of the peloton’s direction as far as doping goes. And quite frankly, it’s offensive to those who work in anti-doping that their efforts are hijacked whenever a high-profile rider tests positive or whatever else.”
... i am not reading what you are reading ("
and not keep saying its a 'few bad apples").
I know some folk don't like picking on words for the exact meaning, but it does really matter if people draw conclusions which are not supported by the words they quote.
A change in
direction of the peloton is saying that from riders in general "using more and more", the majority has
started to use less and less. This is not the same as "not using" or "100% clean apples", or "high-profile users are the exception".
And he also states that, at the moment, (in his eyes) the efforts of "those who work in anti-doping" are
not helped by the sensationalism that gets triggered with each high-profile positive.
Like it or not, it appears that JV has concluded that when he adopts the softly softly approach, in the end it will help more than hinder. And that for his own involvement, that is more fruitful than the burn and start again approach.
I'll leave it in the middle if he judges that it "all" should be softly softly, or if he judges that the best communal route would be a combination of different attitudes, and he is simply on the chair which has "my most fruitful role requires me to tread softly".
We all have views on if he is right with this, but ultimately they are just "our best hunches", more or less informed. No one can guarantee which one works best, or works at all.
By the sound of it he also has witnessed from the inside looking out, how (in his eyes) blips of sensationalism are
genuinely hindering rather than helping.
I'm guessing here, but i expect it would put folk in various positions on the defensive, or side-tracks them, and the whole thing clamps down and becomes harder to nudge on in the right direction. Rather than simply get on with taking step towards an even cleaner goal, with further transparacy built-in too. If you witness backlash overwhelming peers, it tends to make herds cautious.
I doubt that JV is less open than you want him to be because he is against transparency and openness. But because he judges that "we the public/media" aren't ready to deal with it, and that in the current climate, his personal openness would actually hinder progress, rather than help. So he talks in tongues that are deflecting the hysteria, but are as open as he dares to be and judges wise, to careful listeners.
Personally I can see where JV is coming from, and I might agree or disagree with his personal judgement calm, but i think that if we are gonna badger someone, JV is the wrong person. I can also see that some judge him to be the lever that helps topple the lot and appeal to him to fall in line with a different philosophy about "best route home".
In the end we all see a path we think is best, but none of us have the map that proves where the road leads to, let alone know for sure if it was indeed the best route home. In the end we are all having hunches.
So all I can conclude is that JV is probably, at worst, someone who is trying to get me safe home too. Those people are never "problems" if we cannot guarantee the exact route of our own paths.
At best you can give argumentations why you think your route is better (which you do), and hope to persuade.
But to say" he is not taking responsibility for not saying yes now" is wrong though. IMO, JV's
entire course comes from trying to do it
utterly responsibly, to the best of his judgement. Maybe more than most.
I would be astonished if he judges, guessing where he comes from, that in the current media climate where the planet earth media is chasing a high-profile cycling dope story for the 24/7 feeds and consumer hungry businesses, that he thinks that saying "yes" now would help.
I am confident however that there will be a point where he will judge the time to be right for that "yes". When that will be I don't know. Possibly after his responsibility (that word again) to others has stopped, or when "we" are ready, or when circumstances create a momentum when he thinks it would help with a pushing the rot out.
[when quoting me please edit my posts to the relevant bit, or simply reply without quoting]