iorwerth wrote:
Sorry mate, have to disagree.
Quote:
Radcliffe said the results had been looked at by an independent expert and she had reports clearing her.
She told Sky News: "I had to wait to get those in place but I'm very glad I have them. They can tell me you don't have three values that crossed any threshold, not when you apply the context of whether the test followed a period of altitude training or was carried out at altitude.
End quote
You haven't read the previous line. She's talking about the reports, not the actual figures. The Sky interview was done the previous night I think. Unless Paul Kelso can be in Brussels and the studio at the same time.
So you're telling me that Sky News does an interview with Paula and then simultaneously, coincidentally obtains certain blood values from another source (IAAF or the Sunday Times) and these certain blood values (which aren't the full set) are then leaked, which conveniently and coincidentally results in Paula Radcliffe proclaiming that they prove her innocence.
Paula can't say she released them because it would contradict her stance that athletes shouldn't release blood values. And it would also leaver her with no excuse not to release the rest of the data.
If you believe they were leaked, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you. Message me for payment instructions, mate.