Read this article that was recently posted in the Landis-link-sticky by Smaryka:
http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/45...h-cycling.aspx
At first I thought (silly me) that he would actually weigh in with something good, but the further you get down it's almost as if he can't say anything but: "The past is in the past. Which, being in the past, is in the past and as such it's in the past and should stay there (in the past)... Because it's in the past."
Although I tend to agree with him regarding Basso and Millar, this whole interview is more a non-discussion discussion (is that related to the non-denial denial I wonder?). But, hey, it's good to know that Pat is a good guy in case anybody is in doubt, because he's apparently doing a great job fighting doping and "rebuilding confidence in cycling" in the present (which is not in the past and so it can stay in the present until it has passed into the past) regardless of whatever he, Hein and UCI did in the past (which we don't talk about as it, you guessed it, is in the past). Also good to know it's best not to talk about the past as long as we remember that some unmentionable things did happen in the past and remember to learn from them (however that is done, not being able to talk about them).
But enough about dear Mr Roche, who obviously never doped himself as he said so (sometime in the past, that is in the past)... Apart form obviously being on Conconi's list of "amateurs" who were used to "research a test for EPO" in the early 90's.
http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/45...h-cycling.aspx
At first I thought (silly me) that he would actually weigh in with something good, but the further you get down it's almost as if he can't say anything but: "The past is in the past. Which, being in the past, is in the past and as such it's in the past and should stay there (in the past)... Because it's in the past."
Although I tend to agree with him regarding Basso and Millar, this whole interview is more a non-discussion discussion (is that related to the non-denial denial I wonder?). But, hey, it's good to know that Pat is a good guy in case anybody is in doubt, because he's apparently doing a great job fighting doping and "rebuilding confidence in cycling" in the present (which is not in the past and so it can stay in the present until it has passed into the past) regardless of whatever he, Hein and UCI did in the past (which we don't talk about as it, you guessed it, is in the past). Also good to know it's best not to talk about the past as long as we remember that some unmentionable things did happen in the past and remember to learn from them (however that is done, not being able to talk about them).
But enough about dear Mr Roche, who obviously never doped himself as he said so (sometime in the past, that is in the past)... Apart form obviously being on Conconi's list of "amateurs" who were used to "research a test for EPO" in the early 90's.