Forum menu
On the TUEs put people back on a level playing field argument...
Wiggins is apparently asthmatic and can't breathe as well as others / could die on a Grand Tour without asthma drugs. They just put him on a level playing field.
I'm a bit overweight with no stamina so a TUE for Bute and EPO would help put me back on a level playing field.
Just saying.
Wiggins is a decent cyclist but TUEs ought to require a competitor to refrain from competition for a prescribed length of time after taking the drugs.
New era begins tomorrow
https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/about/article/20161229-HSBC-UK-Partnership-officially-begins-0
BC sounds like a hugely successful, pressurised clique; if you're in your in, if you're out (Nicole Cooke, Jess Varnish) then prepare to be bullied.
Totally agree, though I haven't seen anything to suggest there's a similar culture at Team Sky (and it seems some posters are conflating the two).
Back to the question in the OP - it's more of a media feeding frenzy than a witch hunt IMO, with a load of sharks fighting over a half-eaten tin of sardines.
It is the blurring of the boundaries that needs to be cleared up.
In what capacity was Dave Brailsford asked to appear in front of the select commitee?
Former British Cycling employee or his role in Team Sky?
In what capacity was Dave Brailsford asked to appear in front of the select commitee?
Former British Cycling employee or his role in Team Sky?
Dave B has been on Sky News today, I am sure there will be a link somewhere later
[img] 
[/img]
As with most things, a lot of nothing, be it Strictly or Sky, stirred up buy disgusting people/journalists.
Team Sky has faced tough questions before
[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/38573615 ]Painful viewing[/url]
An exercise in over use of the hands as much as blatantly refusing to answer fairly simple questions. If you want to build public confidence this isn't the way.
That was a more hostile interview than he's probably used to, but he doesn't take criticism well does he?
I thought he might start crying at a couple of points.
Chris Froomes book The Climb gives an insight into Dave Brailsford.
"The details were never teased out. Dave's words would mean just what he chose them to mean."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/27563999
Are we supposed to be trashing Brailsford or Froome? It's so hard to keep up. Which one is this week's baddy? Or is that Wiggins?
I just think if they were really lying in a systematic way, they'd be much better at it, like, erm, Lance for example. I know everyone loves to drag him into this stuff, but he was a lot more convincing even though he was a sociopathic cheat. Maybe because he was a sociopathic cheat.
I wonder if UKAD will ever actually complete their investigation or if they're too busy leaking stuff to the press to get on with it.
It will be a real kick in the teeth for road racing if Sky and BC are found to have broken the rules.
With regards to the package, it could be that BC and Sky are being vague is to protect a riders medical history. Perhaps they needed antibiotics for an infection in a sensitive area. If that was the case then they may not have wanted that info in the public domain and the fall-out for family as the papers have a field day. It could be that it was full of dodgy banned substances in which case why not learn a lesson from the LA example and be sure that we will all find out soon enough.
I think cycling as a sport gets a bad deal in the sports doping story. Athletics must have a massive problem, there are loads of ex-dopers at the olympics and world champs and there is not a big fuss about them. Look at the size of rugby players in both codes. The average pro player is now massive compared to only 10-15 years ago. That can't only be advancements in sports science.
Cycling is the easy target for the media as a minority sport that most people now think is all about the best drug user.
I'm a bit overweight with no stamina so a TUE for Bute and EPO would help put me back on a level playing field.
Interestingly that was a scolarly view held by some researchers in the 80s that EPO would help level the heomicrit playing field and help athletes recover and maintain health therefore making for safer, fairer racing.
It's got a lot more fundamentalist since then
gastro I agree that there is far more money in other sports, so the vested interests of all concerned to cover up are far greater; if the UCI were supposed to be complicit with Armstrong, you can multiply the financial gain by 1000 for more mainstream sports and their governing bodies.
Funny how much news the Fancy Bears leak of Wiggins TUE had compared to the same leak about, say, Mo Farah's TUE use. There's as much smoke around him as Wiggins; he's trained with Salazar AND Aden (a bit like a cyclist working with both Fuentes and Ferrari), tweeted a picture of him training in a different country to the one he was actually in (which suggested he wasn't with Aden), and been less than truthful (or forgetful) in previous statements about what meds he'd had. Doesn't seem to interest the press so much.
I disagree with the patient confidentiality argument purely because that would have been the explanation offered, "sorry we can't tell you publicly due to confidentiality". They haven't been vague, they've been specific, and found to be untrue (Emma Pooley).
With regards to the package, it could be that BC and Sky are being vague is to protect a riders medical history. Perhaps they needed antibiotics for an infection in a sensitive area. If that was the case then they may not have wanted that info in the public domain and the fall-out for family as the papers have a field day.
But you could trust an ethical body like UKAD not to leak confidential information right? It's not like a photograph of Simon Cope's expenses form miraculously found its way to the Times is it, oh...
I just think if they were really lying in a systematic way, they'd be much better at it
I think it's pretty clear that Sky aren't anything like as used to this sort of press attention as they're getting, you can sense that DB is trying to be as evasive as he possibly can be in that BBC interview for instance. I think they've not had to lie in systematic way, as no-one has questioned them before, or has certainly taken their answers at face value. And now they are, Team Sky and DB in particular are obviously not being as clear as they could be
Somebody said earlier that
David Walsh is an imbecile!
....perhaps a bit cruel.
Have a listen to him talking about Lance Armstrong.
Starts at about 27:40
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b087pq8n
I don't think David Walsh is an imbecile, but he seems to have gone a little bonkers in a quite public way. He seems to operate in a small sports journalistic bubble where they're desperate to be the next David Walsh by proving that Team Sky is the new Lance Armstrong while he is discredited and hated as an apologist for Sky, who are supposed to be the new US Postal.
But what's maybe more telling is that he spend half of his Sunday Times column last week basically just saying that he once saw Ian Wright meeting an old teacher and he's a nice guy, but he thinks the Match of the Day pundit team is a bit rubbish. Ground-breaking stuff.
Perhaps David Walsh wants to be the next David Walsh?
An interesting read: http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/all-aboard-the-magic-bus-3974
Imbedded journo at the dauphine '11.
On the final Friday, talk about Uran needing a TUE ( and phoning ole dr Mario Zorzoli no less) due to difficulty breathing. Nothing about Brad though (despite him needing the package delivered to him the next day!)
And interesting comments from Brailsford re. needing anti doping personnel on the bus to stop doping [i]after[/i] the race!!!
There's nothing going on here.....
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2017/jan/13/dave-brailsford-team-sky-cycling-control
They are possibly supposed to emphasise competence and to distract from substance. On this occasion, however, they seemed to have gone out of control, as if some unseen hand had surreptitiously turned the relevant dial way past the optimum setting.
😆
Prediction: DB gone before the Tour.
On the final Friday, talk about Uran needing a TUE ( and phoning ole dr Mario Zorzoli no less) due to difficulty breathing. Nothing about Brad though (despite him needing the package delivered to him the next day!)
Why do you think none of the British media seem remotely bothered about Uran despite the reference having been there in public view since 2011?
I thought the man city case was interesting. In football it's Team responsibility for whereabouts info? Lol
I bet there are more than a few track and field and cyclists grinding their teeth at that. How does that work with wada's codes about individual responsibility?
Why do you think none of the British media seem remotely bothered about Uran despite the reference having been there in public view since 2011?
1) I don't think Uran is the first British winner of the Tour de France
2) they didn't try to hide the TUE for Uran. Or the even the (retrospective) one for Froome
3) funnily no mention of Wiggins being ill and needing medicines specially flown over for the UK but mention that doping immediately after a race needs to be policed (somewhat out of the blue by DB, but hey there's nothing going on here, no way, I don't even know why I brought that up.... 😉 ).
So the Uran TUE is okay for the same issues as Wiggins and - what sounds like quite likely - the same drugs? It doesn't seem very consistent, but you're a bit more clued up than me. Is Wiggins subject to special rules?
Who said Uran's TUE was ok? Your question was why wasn't the British media bothered about it.
Why were Sky not transparent about Wiggins but were with Uran for apparently the exact same thing?
Also, you might want to be a bit more clued up about Zorzoli too. Also Dr Leinders while your at it... 😀
HTH.
So Sky broke the rules there?
There's nothing going on here.....
I'll only accept that there's nothing going on if I hear it from Dave.
The point of that article was that it was the same race as being discussed over the medical package flown at special request for Wiggins in front of the parliamentary sub committee. And Brailsford being criticised for being less than transparent.
So why don't we wait and see what the outcome of that enquiry is and maybe you'll have an answer. Because I'm not getting to ask the questions am I?
Now, why don't you tell me what you think about sky not being transparent about Wiggins. You don't seem very keen on answering any of these questions do you? It's always questions, questions with you...
Now, why don't you tell me what you think about sky not being transparent about Wiggins. You don't seem very keen on answering any of these questions do you? It's always questions, questions with you...
I suspect you'll find the answer is medical confidentiality. Ie: if Wiggins doesn't want to disclose his medical records, the doctor isn't allowed to share them because he'd be in breach of General Medical Council guidelines and would potentially be struck off, lose his career, his reputation, his livelihood. Technically, and you probably won't believe this, it's possible that neither Brailsford, Sutton or anyone else on the management side would have known about the TUE. It sounds odd, but stranger things have happened.
You can think that's odd, but then Wiggins has a reputation for being a little eccentric and very all or nothing. Like you say, why not wait for the UKAD investigation findings?
In the context of that, the Uran thing is interesting because Freeman seemed happy to tell Lionel Birnie all about it in some detail. I don't even know if Uran spoke English at the time, some of the Colombians only speak Spanish. So technically you'd have thought Freeman shouldn't have shared those details, but I guess in the context of a race with an embedded journo, he did. Which on the surface looks wrong. That's actually why I'm surprised no-one's brought it up before.
As far as the 'questions, questions' dig. I just think it makes sense to wait for the UKAD investigation verdict rather than pre-judging things, I'm just trying to work out where you're coming from. Which we sort of seem to agree on, except that you keep digging away with your gleeful Schadenfreude. I don't get why you seem so cross about it.
In the context of that, the Uran thing is interesting because Freeman seemed happy to tell Lionel Birnie all about it in some detail. I don't even know if Uran spoke English at the time, some of the Colombians only speak Spanish. So technically you'd have thought Freeman shouldn't have shared those details, but I guess in the context of a race with an embedded journo, he did. Which on the surface looks wrong.
So, it looks like it looks like there's special rules for Wiggins after all. 😉
Or maybe the 'confidentiality' card has been overplayed? Its all a bit, well, [i]convenient[/i] for my liking.
gleeful
c'mon make your mind up! I'm way past being 'cross' about doping in cycling. Haven't you seen all my winks and smiles? I'll accept your schadenfreude comment though 😆cross
The wheels coming off the Sky Bullshit Bus is definitely a good thing (in my book).
I don't have an axe to grind here, honestI suspect you'll find the answer is medical confidentiality. Ie: if Wiggins doesn't want to disclose his medical records, the doctor isn't allowed to share them because he'd be in breach of General Medical Council guidelines and would potentially be struck off, lose his career, his reputation, his livelihood. Technically, and you probably won't believe this, it's possible that neither Brailsford, Sutton or anyone else on the management side would have known about the TUE. It sounds odd, but stranger things have happened.
... however, this has been a total disaster and coming from Sky that's suspicious as their PR machine is pretty much unparallelled. That makes me sad but if I'm honest it's not a massive surprise
I'm not sure anyone would mind if Brailsford had said "it's confidential; UCI has allowed it; wiggo wants some privacy; I actually have no idea what it was really for anyway and we don't think it contravened any no-injection policy we use because it's a one-off (err, I think, because I don't know what it was for)".
Instead we had this "master of PR" and guy who supposedly runs sky like clockwork, flailing around offering platitudes about level fields for the TUE and kack excuse after kack excuse about the mystery package.
If I was Wiggins I'd be bloody livid and I'd speak out to make sure the correct information was now provided - after all, privacy's gone, we all "know" it's for his asthma so all we've got left are details
"I was really ill in previous tours" (prove it) "and the docs suggested I shouldn't ride at that time of year and if I did my only chance was to use this overkill sledgehammer drug" (what about Giro-time, then ?)
Frankly, if they'd said "wiggo gets mild asthma but you can't win a tour with that so we're massively overtreating it to keep him 100%", I'd have swallowed it. Now I'm more falling to "we haven't cheated; we presented a case for wanting a potent steroid, UCI believed us and so we were confident that he wouldn't have asthma problems - as for the reported weight loss properties and prior doping stories ? SO what, lucky brad getting a TUE - result, hey? (and more fool the UCI)"
So Sky broke the rules there?
That would be a no, at the moment at least. And until "proof" that they did is produced this thread and every article about the issue is just hot air and talk.
Like you say, why not wait for the UKAD investigation findings?
This x1000
Dave Brailsford
At about 4:44
[i]Got no friends[/i]
Do you think he would float?
not sure, do waterwings help with asthma ? 😉
DB has turned a crisis into a disaster for sky, but he's probably livid with Wiggo for refusing to explain that TUE.
Yeah, I know he shouldn't have to discuss his confidential medical history, but once the genie is out of the bottle...
Dave Brailsford might be livid.
TUEs do raise some concerns.
Followed the link to the next 'vid' (from the above newsnight one) and its an interview with David Walsh
He thinks the whole thing stinks...
And he was definitely a sky fanboy!
[i]Nicole Cooke is the latest big name from British cycling to be asked to give evidence to the Culture, Media and Sport Committee's investigation into doping in sport.
The 2008 Olympic and World champion will appear before the panel of MPs by video link on Tuesday, January 24.[/i]
[i]"It was an answer that raised even more questions than we had before, especially now we know Simon Cope spent two days travelling to deliver it," wrote Cooke.
"Why did the top management deem it acceptable to use the publicly funded national women's team road manager, Simon Cope, in the role of a basic courier?" [/i]
[i]Ian Drake has stepped down as British Cycling's chief executive earlier than had been expected.[/i]
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/38694814