Stripping Alberto Contador of his 2010 Tour de France victory on the supposition that he may have eaten a dodgy food supplement is like jailing Al Capone for tax evasion: Yes, Contador's accusers secured a conviction, but the verdict missed the point.
Was this justice? Strictly speaking, it was. But it didn't feel that way.
In their defense, the three judges at the Court of Arbitration for Sport - whose ruling on Monday struck another body blow at cycling - faced a devilishly difficult task.
Pretty much the only indisputable fact in this most complex and contentious of cases was that the banned performance-enhancing drug clenbuterol was found in the Spaniard's urine in infinitesimal quantities at the 2010 Tour. That, in itself, was reason enough to ban him.
But how it got there remains anyone's guess, even after a hearing process that gave new meaning to the term ''glacial.''
The legal file alone ran to 4,000 pages. Contador and his accusers - the World Anti-Doping Agency and c...