i don't have much problem with an article like that - these things are part of the reporting of the sport. i think it would be remiss not to be sceptical.
but i'd agree it's a bit like an anti-froome checklist.
but i'm sure i wrote on here years back that reference to froome's reported and 'sudden' improvement at a relatively late age would never go away now. so for me the title is good, after all, i don't think sky have really been able to explain him either.
and then you have the sky context. when froome had that improvement sky, whilst not above suspicion, were talking marginal gains, transparency and a clean team. since then, delivery of testosterone patches, attempts to cover that up, unidentified substances in a jiffy bag with an equally odd delivery protocol, a team doctor with key data stored seemingly on one laptop which conveniently went missing before it could be investigated, and their former lead rider outed as winning the tour whilst on a PED, rubbishing his own various injection claims. that's just the bits we've heard about. this from the team considered to be doing all the right things better than anyone else.
if that was a russian team, what would your objective conclusions be?
