Last month was the initial occasion to bestow the WADAwatch award, the...
That inaugural winner was a journalist, James Christie, who (we hope) is still writing for the Globe and Mail of Canada, who overworked his article on Dick Pound, who has greater ambitions than talents for taking on the Presidency of the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
ARE IN ORDER
"... he had been the victim of a blackmail attempt by Landis' lawyer, Will Geoghegan."
NB: Simple fact–checking reveals the truth behind this egregious error, comprehensible to even bloggers and other fans of cycling: Geoghegan was Landis' Business Manager, and a long–time friend, whose idiocies, while unpardonable, are not the fruit of his big LA sport lawyers. (WADAwatch admits having no idea how to pronounce that name: 'jeff-again'?)
- "... The incident revealed to the world the unethical underbelly of the sport and the sad tactics some will use against the truth."
NB: The reader cannot discern which 'incident' opened the “unethical underbelly” that makes author Killion salivate: is she discussing the Landis hearing itself? Or would she be directly referring to the Geoghegan/Lemond phone-call? Some astute readers tend to think that the USADA case against Landis, which was described approximately by lawyer Richard Young as being 'about hard science', showed how far it was from that by reliance on virtual hearsay testimony from former racer Lemond.
How could she impute this peripheral incident, as a comment denigrating an entire sport?
NB: If the reader is tempted to believe that Lemond's 'livelihood' is to travel around the world testifying about hearsay, and what he wants to convince the world that he 'knows' about its current rampant problems with doping, then it would be easy to be duped into believing that Armstrong even thinks about Greg Lemond...
Anne Killion! You're OUTTA the BALLPARK!
Ms Killion's auto-reply to the WADAwatch email requesting her correction as to the Geoghegan/lawyer comment, indicated she couldn't reply but assured that she read "every email"... is it worth it to send this to her?
Who's to be the next WADAwatch TSJ award winning journalist?
The opinions expressed by WADAwatch are strictly formed with the purpose of inciting WADA to adhere to its Fundamental Rationale, achieve its goals and fulfil the aspirations of its Signatories, in achieving the highest possible level of objective, neutral science in sport-doping control.
Watching WADA, and the Press it feeds,
© 2008 ZENmud productions