McQuaid begins laying the groundwork for double-talk

October 17, 2006

“I am going to pick [the favorite] but I wouldn’t be surprised if [the underdog] won” Growing up, I always remember a sportscaster always saying this when he was about to give his opinion on an upcoming game. Then if there was an upset, he claimed that he knew it was coming. That’s why he pointed that fact out to the audience. After a while, I realized he always said that. Therefore, he was never wrong.

In today’s Cyclingnews, Pat McQuaid has “clarified” his position on Operation Puerto and Floyd Landis today by saying that knowing weather Floyd is guilty or not is not as important as the Operation Puerto incident.

This seems to begin to pave the way for Pat to go either way depending on how Floyd’s case goes in arbitration. He now is taking a neutral approach to Floyd’s case. Very interesting.

Pat also went further to “clarify” his position on Operation Puerto by saying:

“We received the first dossier of 44 pages from the Spanish police the Thursday before the Tour departed. With this material we drafted a list of ten cyclists that were to participate in the Tour, and because of their involvement in the Spanish investigation they were excluded from their teams.

“In a second instance we received another 500 pages; we studied them and concluded that there were three types of cyclists: Those involved in a very serious manner, those who were partially implicated and those who were realistically not involved.”

Three types of cyclists? Who is on what list? What list is Ivan Basso on? What ever happened to blocking any rider involved in Operation Puerto?

I guess Pat is trying to open a back door out of a showdown he can’t win. He might be trying to find a way out of cycling’s worst case scenario. If Ivan pulls up to a start line, he can say that Ivan was on the “not realistically involved.” list.

Wow Pat, thanks for clarifying.

Note: Interesting choice of stock photo of McQuaid.