Mea Culpa?

So, Marion Jones is clean.

Good for her.

But still bad for Floyd.

Last June, Jones' "A" sample from the U.S. track and field championships came back positive for the endurance-booster EPO. This past week, her "B" sample came negative.

Case closed. Rush to judgment, writes LATimes columnist Bill Plaschke: "I have since tested positive for that deadly journalistic drug known as 'haste.' "

Plaschke also wrote "that if Jones' 'B' sample refuted her 'A' sample, I would give fallen cycling hero Floyd Landis a ride down the Harbor Freeway on my handlebars. I am saying, does anybody know if the 110 has a bike lane?"

So, if Marion Jones is innocent (in THIS instance), what about Bad Boy Floyd, who got a quick positive on his "B" test following the postive "A" test?

"There are many reasons the samples might not have matched, including the fact that EPO disintegrates in the specimen," adds Plaschke, who is one of the best sports columnists in the business.

So why did Jones get three months of grace (if you can call what she's been through "grace") and Floyd's sample got the bum's rush?

Why do the testing authorities release the results of the "A" sample before the potentially damning results of the "B" sample are known?

Why was the timing of the process different for Landis than it was for Jones? What if Floyd had been given the same three months of grace that Jone's procedure received. And what does that say about the process in general?

Plaschke doesn's address that.

But you can bet we'll be hearing the recently quiet Landis camp about this.

More on the subject:
Jim Litke: Is There Gaping Hole in Anti-Doping Net?
Velow News: The Landis story doesn't spell the end for American cycling