Good point. But the future can be reformed without knowing the names of people involved with doping in the past. We can ignore the "who" of the past and still recognize there have been and continue to be problems as evidenced by recent positive test results. Reform? I'm for it. I just don't feel it is good for cycling to go on a witch hunt.
No affiliation with Garmin-Transitions here?
When the past is still present, and the past has every intention of dirtying the future, then names SHOULD be named.
If you dont get what I mean by that, as long as the likes of Lance, Bruyneel carry on having a part in this sport, nothing will ever change. The Past is still with us! If the likes of BRuyneel have there way doping will continue as it always has done, they already have their little group of livestrong boys ready to come through to the pro squad and learn the ways of their fathers.
As long as names from the Past like McQuad continue to remain in the present, and intend to be part of the future then yes, names SHOULD be named.
As long as the riders are able to employ sockpuppets like Liggett and Sherwen to peddle their propaganda, and those sockpuppets from the past continue to be in the present, and intend to be part of our future, then yes, names SHOULD be named.
The past hasnt gone away!