Who is we? You obviously have an axe to grind vis-a-vis Radcliffe, maybe you are sleeping with Yegorova - who knows? I would like to credit Yegorova with a little more maturity than to be intimidated by anything Radcliffe may have implied in her stance from Edmonton. As another posted pointed out, why would Yegorova assume that it was directed at her, unless she had something to feel guilty about.
Few, if any, of us suspect Radcliffe because she has been a consistently developing runner for MANY years, beginning as a world champion in Cross as a Junior, and running 4th at Worlds the same year (3000m in 8.51 I believe). Whereas Yegorova came on the scene quite recently, and all of a sudden is running world class performances. Many of us who are interested in the sport become suspicious when this occurs.
You may be right that Yegorova's results were within the realms of the norm, but that doesn't alter the perception that there was a "smoking gun" surrounding the EPO test, which had nothing to do with Radcliffe - she didn't release the findings to the public! Given the number of positive tests recently (Saidi Sief,Mourhit, and now Boulami - not to mention Baumann, Slaney, etc. who have claimed innocence) suspicions will surround many elite runners, but particularly those whose career has been quick to develop - seemingly out of nowhere, or at least about whom little is known.
If you think that the sport is better off without Radcliffe, then you are in quite a minority in that thinking. I for one couldn't care less about Yegorova, but Radcliffe is enhancing the sport, particlarly in the Marathon, and has captured the admiration of many afficionados, moreso because of her identification as the "nearly" girl (constantly missing out on medals) of earlier years. Her time has come and most people believe that she has earned it, I can't say the same about Yegorova.