pedaling squares said:
Great thread and all but... has anyone mentioned Landis or Vaughters in the last ten pages or so?
Fair enough.
Here's my Vaughters-related remark for now: it seems a little premature for the front page cyclingnews opinion piece to be proclaiming that JV is exactly what cycling needs right now. I respect the fact that it's an "opinion" piece (but, then again, most newspapers don't allow editorials to appear as page one cover stories...)
Admittedly,
if JV is simply enforcing the rules, then that is great for the sport. But, it seems a few questions need to be put to rest before anyone can be comfortable calling JV the cure to what ails cycling.
Was Matt White referring Slipstream riders to a doping doctor?
Was JV purposefully "unaware" of White's activities (i.e. plausible deniability)?
Was this move meant to preempt an inevitable public revelation (such as one arising from the current Spanish investigation)?
Is JV willing to openly address his doping past and explain how exactly he is moving past it?
I'm sure we can think of a few more questions to ask.
I want to believe in JV, but I don't think he has earned my trust just yet. Hopefully firing White will ultimately help to earn that trust, but I think that only 36 hours or so into this mess, it's a little early to be singing his praises. I also think cyclingnews.com has been
awfully happy to build up JV's public image over the past few years.