Sounds more like "Excuses, excuses, to me...." particularly given that the team was recently found to have kept incomplete medical records for its riders according to the UK Anti-Doping Agency when they investigated a potential but unsubstantiated breach by another of their riders, Bradley Wiggins, several years earlier....
Now I only mention all of this as I've been watching the Vuelta a Andalucía and saw the media scrum envelope Chris Froome as he attempted to defend his right to participate in the race. I mean sure whilst he is permitted to race, it does seem odd to me that a rider should have the opportunity to participate in, "win" or otherwise alter the manner in which an event unfolds, when there is a prospect of the "win" subsequently being retracted.
At that rate, there is no reason not to keep delaying the outcome of the "final" decision as long as is possible. I mean, okay so he was stripped of his results, but can anyone tell me who was awarded any of the Tour de France titles taken from Lance Armstrong?
Heck, at this stage, and he is seemingly entitled to do so, Chris Froome is talking about competing in the Giro d'Italia and Tour de France even if the investigation into his adverse drugs test is unresolved.
To me, that's just continues to keep road racing in a bad light and as a result regardless of the outcome of either the inquest or any races in which he participates, I cannot help but feel professional cycling will never be 100% free of performance enhancing drugs