Vaughters (whatever you think of the man, I think his recent story about his own career is pretty much accurate) said that 1998 brought hope to all non-dopers as well. It was the start of the day, but the morning never followed.The Hitch said:What you say is true in that the uci behaved wrong. They could have taken an anti doping stance. But i don't see why this was a huge opportunity. In hindsight they wouldn't have been able to stop dopers dominating cycling for another 8or 9 years at the least.
So huge opportunity to do what? To show they are anti doping? It was an opportunity but they could.do that at anytime with a different example, didn't have to be right then.
Interestingly, Vaughters is pretty complimentary towards Sky and their "marginal gains". I've no idea what to make of that, especially as he also agreed Leinders is pretty shady, but that doesn't seem to change his judgment. Perhaps that's what disappoints me most about him. For all his advocating clean cycling, he seems to have an own agenda as well, in which he forgets things he should be addressing.Benotti69 said:I think Pierre Ballester and Jeremy Whittle are up there alongside Kimmage and Walsh.
But i agree, for all the praise Kimmage gives to Garmin, it is strange to hear Vaughter's avoid returning it.
But there are lots of things about JV that dont add up.