gillan1969 said:
indeed...his tax should match his income. So, when a bloke pays 10k per annum in income tax we can assume his income is x amount and under 40k. If however we then see a ferrari, see him in posh restaurants and with other such luxury items...we can sort of guess he is...eh...fiddling his tax
so when we don't get Froomes pre 2011 VO2 results (or any other figures)....we can sort of guess he is....eh...doping
Sky could clear this one up easily....release the data
I didn't want to pursue the line of reasoning as it seemed incredibly flawed to begin with. But for starters, it would not be an account under a false name. It would have to be an account under a false
identity - ie you can't just say, "Hi, I'm John Smith can I open an account please?" You have to provide evidence of who you are, usually a certain number of points worth, including photo ID.
The problem with this is: a pro cyclist is not going to be pretending to be someone else when he gives his urine sample, finishes a race or trains on his power meter enabled bike. The data is going to be his, and he's not going to be hiding it under a false identity or something ...
As for the analogy of someone working in the Revenue office protecting you, well no, we can't prove that either. With the whole UCI head Cookson -- Team Sky performance supplements supplier (Cookson's son) -- Team Sky riders links, it's a valid analogy, but again, start with the facts we do have, which is all the data to date.