USADA Report redacted names reveal?

[chengher87]

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/cycling/lance-armstrongs-nemesis-set-to-name-names-9206436.html

This should have been done from the beginning. But because it was a witch hunt to take Lance down, they didn't reveal the others. I always felt uneasy about the report. Granted I never liked Lance one bit, but if their claim was to clean up the sport, why didn't they go after said redacted names? Did they not also "dope and trafficked drugs"? I assume most of the redacted names are still involved with cycling and that could be especially dangerous if they are team physicians (Gert Leinders for example).

Also, on another note. Does anyone know what happened to all those blood bags in Operacion Puerto? Were they destroyed and was there a new ruling on the fate of the blood bags?

[MattTuck]

This report was never about cleaning up the sport. It was a personal vendetta.

5 people from this forum could sit in a room for 2 hours and come up with a better solution to doping in pro cycling than what USADA and UCI have done.

[CunegoFan]

What difference will it make? All the USADA witnesses stopped doping in 2006 so the statute of limitation period has expired for everyone they dealt with. :)

Beyond the SOL what value is there in one rider saying, "Rider 14 (Horner) told me he was using EPO in 2005."? There is no corroboration.

I would much rather see the unredacted interviews of the witnesses. What was released was affidavits carefully drawn up to support USADA's allegations against Armstrong. So, for example, several witnesses fingered Armstrong as leading a conversation after the 1995 Milan San Remo to urge the team to use EPO, but those affidavits do not mention the opinion of others in the conversation. It would not have looked good that everyone agreed that there was no other option other than leaving European racing and everyone had been talking about this for two years prior to the supposed turning point.

[victoryfactory]

This report was never about cleaning up the sport. It was a personal vendetta.

5 people from this forum could sit in a room for 2 hours and come up with a better solution to doping in pro cycling than what USADA and UCI have done.

True....
It was a vendetta conducted by people who were also guilty of tolerating
the behavior and who didn't want to get caught. That balancing act caused
the lame response to doping.

VF