Tangled Metal wrote:It's not unfair. It's also not UCI sitting on it until leaked, it's the standard protocol as followed by all sports governing bodies who work to WADA rules to not make public this type of test result.
SO Sky and Froome knew in September he was guilty of a AAF, so can you explain why they did NOTHING until it was leaked and until now we have had as reasons
- dehydrated though the temperature was a relatively cool 20C and a short stage
- took some puffs before a press conference in case he coughed
- some weird liver problem where they claimed Salbultamol was stored all at once then released
Everything but saying why Sky sat on it for 3 months because lets be clear it is up to Sky and Froome to prove this finding wrong, it is not innocent before guilt, in effect he is guilty and this is the appeal.