Many thanks for explanation!
Hello Jonathan - Good to hear from you - thanks for that. Also thanks again from me & everyone else for taking the time to chat to us openly, when really you have no obligation or rational motivation to do so

.
JV1973 said:
While my quotes re this during the TdF could seem untruthful, at that time no bans had been given or agreed to by my riders. Why? My guess is that USADA was hoping that there would be a broader truth and reconciliation effort across the sport and that bans would be put aside, as the need for full disclosure from multiple parties would be needed. However, when UCI started kicking up about jurisdiction, etc, they figured it would not be a cooperative effort, but instead a contentious one. Too bad.
Anyhow, at that point, my guess is, they realized the need for 6 mod bans, as no truth and reconciliation would occur.
Yes, that all makes sense now. And to think that I thought that there was something a little nefarious going on - need to learn (yet again…) to trust, and it‘s sometimes hard with pro-cycling, ya know! Sorry again for the excessive interrogation a few posts ago - but I was in fact fairly confident you’d be able to explain in some fashion I was unable to think of.
I’m even more impressed now knowing that your guys and the others went to the front-line with USADA without there even being a discussion of a deal being in place, and completely of their own volition, to improve cycling. Everything I read re. DZ was particularly sad - an abusive relationship with Johan, his breakdown/crying and the family history of course. Not surprised he wanted Travis there during his testimony. (Just out of curiosity - not particularly important - but who was the other guy who wanted Travis present during his testimony?) Any particular reason DZ wanted him there - personal appreciation of Travis’ efforts? I'm not at all surprised that DZ has not had a single unsupportive comment on his blog (out of 50-ish) - shame GH had a few bad comments - not sure why.
I’m still vaguely wondering about whether the riders got offered a choice of dates for their bans - but I guess it’s not much of a step beyond the off-season ban concept - or was it just a coincidence of scheduling etc? I also vaguely wonder your opinions on the ‘off-season’ aspect (which does appear to have at least one precedent).
I guess we don’t really need to ask much about your opinion of the heavily reduced bans - I’d assume you agree with David Millar‘s recent comments on the subject. Do you agree with David that there should not be ‘no consequence’ to their actions? Does this differ in the case of an extended amnesty (any updates on that btw - sounds like it’s been under pretty serious discussion, and I imagine it’ll be on its way sometime, once the details get hammered out between WADA/riders/teams).
So I guess it must have been a source in WADA who leaked the details for the Dutch press report (must have been a knowledgeable source given the accuracy wrt detail). I wonder what could have been their motivation? My guess would be the love of gossip. I wonder why WADA hasn’t made a brief comment, which would easily have been buried in the rest of the news, although I guess it’s not all that important. Would they punish the anonymous leaker if they knew who it was?
How did the guys all feel about being asked to withdraw from Worlds/Olympics selection? Might they have not been asked to withdraw if it were all already out in the public domain (c.f. Millar and the repeal of the UK Olympic ban this year), but riders/USADA didn’t want a media s**t-storm or any implication of a cover-up? I recall that GH was particularly looking forward to his 6th Olympics. Will those who have not retired by then be putting themselves forward for Rio?
Any idea of the riders’ plans during their 'extended off-season’? Is there any particular type of training which can only be utilised to full effectiveness during this kind of ‘extended break from racing’, so that you can 'take advantage' of this in some kind of fashion? Training which 'breaks you down' before it 'builds you up' for instance? Much needed family time? I guess they’re all welcome to team camps etc. - for the morale boost as much as for the training (I guess they’re all pretty experienced now wrt charting their own training regimes). While the ‘UPS 3’ are off the roster, will your roster be limited to 27, or is there room for 6-month stagiaires (if this is ever done). Will the ’UPS 3’ be paid normally during their bans? Are they still keeping up with their 'doping-confession' daily email support group?
Any plans to recruit Jullich/White as DSs? (I know you found it hard to replace Whitey). Any idea why Julich didn’t testify to USADA? I guess he must have been worried about losing his job with sky due to ‘zero-tolerance‘ (similarly possibly for Whitey with CA/OGE). I still don’t understand why Kevin hasn’t testified - anything to do with Mellow Johnny’s being associated with LA? Know of any of the other 19 unidentified ‘riders’ who’re planning to come forward at some point (you don’t have to give their names)? Seems you’re still on good terms with Whitey, but not unfortunately Lim - how did Whitey react when you sacked him, as I guess he loved his job. I’m sure you gave him good refs for his job-hunt. Any issues with DZ & CVdV still working privately with Lim?
Crazy that it seems to have been the UCI who put a spanner in the works re. ‘no-bans’ in the generalized amnesty proposal - but they do a lot of crazy s**t it seems. Maybe since they don’t seem to like the amnesty idea? Omerta speaking?
You had no ban - statute of limitations? Was a personal ban something you were concerned about? I guess you’ve got plenty of competent people who could have run the show for a few months in your absence whilst you got on with your MBA etc.
Will you voluntarily ‘asterix’ your palmares semi-officially sometime? Do any of your riders/friends have plans to do the same? Seems like the best solution in the absence of any reasonable way to ‘reallocate’ the results.
Best Wishes

,
- Argyle_Fan