Forum menu
nah, you people need to stop whining
The triamcinolone was pretty much all for Brailsford, as it turns out. I'm guessing the "erroneous" testosterone too; I mean, look at his bald head. Proof enough for me.
I've been saying since the autumn that Brailsford would be gone before the TdeF, wish I'd got odds on it. He's staggered from one car crash to another, and Froome didn't exactly come out in his corner when he was interviewed at the training camp earlier this year.
And as for the original question of a witchhunt I think that, like Armstrong, a lot of journalists have had a lot of suspicion and lots of off-the-record stuff but haven't been able to say anything for fears of a libel claim, but as this has all come out in the CMS hearings (which hold parliamentary privilege) they can report on the content of the hearings without fear, as they aren't the ones making the allegations.
The triamcinolone was pretty much all for Brailsford, as it turns out. I'm guessing the "erroneous" testosterone too; I mean, look at his bald head. Proof enough for me
He should have got a job with giant alpecin then, look at how luxuriant kittel is.
Having in a previous life been royally screwed by the press (Sunday Times) as a relatively junior member of staff I was sent on a media handling course (horse, stable, door, bolt....) - the first thing you are told is; get your ducks in a row - deal with the bad news comprehensively and early and move on and DON'T TELL FIBS because you will get found out. FFS Brailsford, Cope & Freeman need to be run out of town now. It smells like doping, it sounds like doping - IT IS DOPING.
De Jongh added that he was surprised that no paperwork existed with regards to the package from 2011. Team Sky doctors were supposed to follow a protocol that involved uploading medical notes to a shared Dropbox server. However, according to the team, Freeman rarely did this, despite reminders. UKAD revealed last week that Freeman’s laptop was stolen while on holiday in 2014. They are currently working with Interpol to confirm if a police report was made.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/de-jongh-i-cant-see-brailsford-lasting-at-team-sky/
Makes a fair point about 'marginal gains' details that was so commonly touted vs the lack of much detail in the medical records revealed recently.
Personally, never thought the marginal gains thing was much more than marketing of focus and detail.
Hoisted by their own petard IMO.
Spend years making fuss about being clean and doing it right.
Now spend years finding out that the public expectation of 'clean' is different from their expectation of clean.
Now press are on to it all will come out eventually, and even if it is withing rules, I don't think press or public will believe them, especially due to lack of detail and records.
A sorry state of affairs.
is about right.Hoisted by their own petard
An excellent piece from Dec 2016 by Irish Peloton (Cillian Kelly)
http://www.stickybottle.com/blogs/opinion-team-skys-reputation-shredded-by-brailsford-failure/
The press articles describing how the other Sky team doctors blocked the applications for TUEs by Richard Freeman, seem to indicate that if there was organised doping in Sky, only a select few of the support staff were involved, which would make sense given that the more people involved, the more likely it is that the conspiracy would be uncovered.
I always thought that it was unlikely that the BC track cyclists were doping, especially not collectively as a team rather than an individual, because the money involved for most track riders is relatively so low compared to pro road cycling, both in terms of what they were paid by BC as a salary and also in terms of what they might be able to earn after their racing career was over, with the exception of a few high profile riders like Chris Hoy and Victoria Pendleton.
If there were organised doping in the track team, I would have expected the prospect of a big payout from a tabloid newspaper to have resulted in a rider blowing the whistle by now, and instead the only whistle blowing we have seen was Jess Varnish's allegations of sexism.
If the track team is clean, and if the suspicions about Sky and Brailsford are confirmed, then those track riders and BC support staff stand to be amongst the biggest losers and victims of the Sky debacle. At the very least their successes in the Olympics will be tainted by suspicions of doping.
Wiggins and Brailsford built their careers on the back of success on the track funded by UK Sport and BC, so it would be particularly galling if they are guilty of doping in pro road racing, and damage BC and the track team as a result.
The 'erroneous' delivery of testosterone patches is strongly suggestive of organised doping, rather than just gaming the TUE system. If it were to turn out that Freeman was helping Wiggins to dope, then as with Armstrong, it is likely that many of Wiggins' past victories would be annulled, so the other riders in the 2016 Olympic pursuit team could lose their gold medals as a result, as Usain Bolt and his fellow relay team members similarly lost their gold medals because one of the team was found to have been doping.
I was completely with them until the missing medical administration records.
Even the shonkiest, poorly run facilities keep immaculate MAR sheets.
It's the most basic of basics, top of page 1.
I just can't get past that.
I always thought that it was unlikely that the BC track cyclists were doping, especially not collectively as a team rather than an individual, because the money involved for most track riders is relatively so low compared to pro road cycling...
by far the biggest earner in that equation is British Cycling, who take millions in Lottery funding via UK Sport on the basis of success (no medals = no money, see badminton etc). I'm not saying the track squad doped, but if they did the financial driver (with the deepest pockets) would be for it be organised by the team as all their staff salaries depended on success rather than individual riders.
Really don't know how anything good is going to come out of this. SDB will probably have to fall on his own sword/petard. Gawd knows what Wiggins is going to do. Sky cycling team could easily collapse if Sky pull the plug on money if they look like they are getting their fingers burnt.
SDB will be gone before the Tour. Murdoch will have the team on notice and have an exit strategy around 'mission accomplished' if there's a hint of a further scandal. Wiggins will continue to live off the Sky millions he banked, his endorsements and the adoration of his unwavering fanbois. Dunno if you're on twitter or follow anyone 'relevant' (eg. cycling journos) but whenever there's a post about this subject there are more indignant defences of Wiggins (how dare we besmirch a National Treasure?!) than there are condemnations.
"Sir Dave Brailsford: Team Sky riders '100% back' boss"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/39185863
I am genuinely beginning to wonder if there's any way back for Sky.
SDB will be gone before the Tour.
I'm coming round to this idea now.
And as for Wiggo, he chose not to explain himself so he's tarnished for good now.
I expect he'll just drift away from cycling and hope it all blows over with the wider public.
The thing with the testosterone patches is bizzare. Yeah, like that's happened to me loads of times. Just turned up they did. Bloody Amazon...
Not sure what to make of it all really, but it seems pretty clear that there are some very murky waters. Which in some ways is not a big surprise, and I can accept that some teams will be taking advantage of the system in the same way that tax avoidance goes on in big business. But yeah...it's getting murkier.
And for a team that claimed to be so squeaky clean...
One thing that concerns me is that if this really does blow up, it could be genuinely damaging to cycling in UK. Sky pulls out and we no longer have presence on the road. I can live with that. But funding will start getting pulled. GB track teams will suffer. Talented new riders will suffer from less support. It could potentially be a really bad thing, and I think many other countries have already gone through it and seen support for cycling diminish.
So as Sky are tarnished - does that mean the Kenyan is clean?
Or is he also involved in this ...or is his medication also TUE?
I think if you've ever watched Sky then you need to supply a sample.
One thing that concerns me is that if this really does blow up, it could be genuinely damaging to cycling in UK. Sky pulls out and we no longer have presence on the road. I can live with that. But funding will start getting pulled. GB track teams will suffer. Talented new riders will suffer from less support. It could potentially be a really bad thing, and I think many other countries have already gone through it and seen support for cycling diminish.
I agree with this to an extent, but I think team sky and road presence must be more important than GB track presence? Certainly in terms of participation of the general public.
I wonder how HSBC are feeling after become BC headline sponsor at the start of the year?
I wonder how HSBC are feeling after become BC headline sponsor at the start of the year?
They've had a few of their own controversies recently, so they may be grateful someone else is taking a bit of heat.
It has become a sorry tale, but as things stand there's no actual evidence that any Sky rider has taken any PID in an illegal manner. Until any appear's everything can be brushed aside as poor record keeping, administrative errors ect, ect. Maybe that's true because dogs do sometimes eat homework !! But I sure as hell don't know. Tend to agree there'll be a sacrifice probably Brailsford but if nothing more concrete comes out even he might be able to ride it out.
It's easy
"What was in the bag, Sir David"
"It was X"
Anything other than that is bolloxs. end of. It almost now doesn't matter what was in in the bloody bag, he was screwed when he used 1500 words in a interview to say nothing at all about what was in the bag (clearly he knew all too well). Rightly or wrongly he's screwed now.
Btw the Kenyan has [s]refused[/s] declined to tweet his support for SDB when her was invited to by the team.
I don't think that Brailsford will get to ride it out unless Murdoch agrees to it
"I don't think that Brailsford will get to ride it out unless Murdoch agrees "
This is true.
It's easy"What was in the bag, Sir David"
"It was X"
Perhaps Dr Richard Freeman might actually answer some questions. Effectively he's throwing the entire team of more than 100 people under the bus by refusing to speak up. If he did something unethical he should fess up and explain whether it happened with or without the knowledge of the Sky management team.
He's the one who knows whether his TUEs were ethical. He knows what was in the bag. He knows why there was so much Kenacort ordered and what happened to it. He knows whether he ordered those testosterone patches or not. And he knows whether his lack of record keeping was clear to the management and why he doesn't appear to have kept detailed medical records in breach of GMC rules.
If the management was aware or orchestrated that stuff, it's pretty bad no, but if it's a case of a doctor gone rogue or simply incompetent, then he should face up anyway. You have to think that if he did openly order testosterone from team Sky/GB's regular pharmaceutical supplier he was either incredibly stupid or wanted to get caught. Or it was genuinely a screw-up by the supplier, was it CRC? They've sent me random stuff in the past...
The media wants to hammer Brailsford and the team because it suits their 'how the mighty have fallen' agenda, but the doc seems to be getting off scot free, which is odd, because it's almost as if this whole things with the anonymous leak about the Jiffy bag was set up to properly drop him in it, by someone with an axe to grind with him.
Totally agree with above, Some of the behaviour of Dr Freeman is what's interesting.
the other team docs removed his access to TUE portal because of concerns.
Also yoiu've got to consider that he used a highly potent steroid to treat hayfever and asthma. I can imagine how that conversation went: "we can treat wiggos asthma/allergies with an anthistamine and salbutamol (like most people have) or we can use triamcinolone which happens to have the unfortunate side effect of making him stronger and leaner, all on TUE. so it's legal."
Whether it's ethical to use something quite so potent to treat the condition that wiggins had is up for debate, but the actions of the other doctors must be some indicator that freeman's behaviour was not in the spirit of the rest of the medical team.
I wonder how much of this brailsford was aware of and agreed to, i can imagine him muttering "marginal gains, marginal gains" and turning a blind eye.
of course all this is conjecture but my belief is that they used the TUE system to gain a performance improvement. Whilst not illegal it doesn't sit very well with the whiter than white image.
Also yoiu've got to consider that he used a highly potent steroid to treat hayfever and asthma. I can imagine how that conversation went: "we can treat wiggos asthma/allergies with an anthistamine and salbutamol (like most people have) or we can use triamcinolone which happens to have the unfortunate side effect of making him stronger and leaner, all on TUE. so it's legal."
Combined with the fact that until the Fancy Bears outing there was no mention of Wiggins even needing a TUE nor was there of his 'chronic' hayfever..
The whole thing stinks, whether its playing it up to the rule line or indeed crossing it as may be the case. At least when Ulrich and Lance were on the gear it made for interesting racing - to find out Sky are on the sauce after watching the borefest that has been the last few Tours just adds insult to injury.
As an aside, the Mrs came to watch me race at the weekend. Stood in the car park faffing about, she made the bold statement 'its interesting how many of these blokes have asthma isn't it'....which I thought was quite telling. Between us we must have seen 10 blokes chuffing away on an inhaler...and this is for a 4th Cat race..
of course all this is conjecture but my belief is that they used the TUE system to gain a performance improvement. Whilst not illegal it doesn't sit very well with the whiter than white image.
The nub of that is who knew about it. If medical confidentiality meant that Freeman didn't share that information then theoretically, the only other person to know might be Wiggins himself and the other team doctors.
What is interesting on that front, is that the treatment was apparently endorsed by an external ENT consultant called Simon Hargreaves in Bolton - see this [url= https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/sep/30/bradley-wiggins-full-story-asthma-allergies-tues ]Guardian[/url] piece. Freeman used to be the club doc at Bolton Wanderers btw. Hargreaves barely gets a mention in the mainstream media since then, but he's effectively enabled the TUE, yet again, no-one has asked him for his opinion as far as I can see.
"Sir Dave Brailsford: Team Sky riders '100% back' boss"
matt Slater did an amusing tweet about it, something like "18 Sky riders spontaneously tweet their support on day 157 of the UKAD investigation".
So as Sky are tarnished - does that mean the Kenyan is clean?
"Performance-based suspicion" (which I don't subscribe to) says no, he's not clean. His lack of backing SDB at the team camp, and again now, could suggest that either he's clean, or that anything he is doing is without the team's knowledge or involvement, or that he's so arrogant he thinks that somehow he won't be dragged down by them.
The media wants to hammer Brailsford and the team because it suits their 'how the mighty have fallen' agenda
Slightly disagree. SDB is the man credited with all the success of BC and Sky, do we really think anything the Docs have done was without his instruction or consent? And he's the one who's specifically been proven to have lied to press and public:
The bag being for Pooley,
Wiggins not being at the Dauphine stage finish,
and we're also supposed to believe he wasn't aware corticosteroids could be performance-enhancing when he was such good friends with David Millar that he was with him when he was arrested, and every student of the sport knows it's the drug LA got a back-dated TUE for to cover his one positive test.
but if it's a case of a doctor gone rogue or simply incompetent,
I wonder how much of this brailsford was aware of and agreed to, i can imagine him muttering "marginal gains, marginal gains" and turning a blind eye
SDB has admitted he knew about the massive stocks of corticosteroid because he's now saying Freeman injected his poorly knee with the stuff. Unless he pinned SDB down that's hardly a rogue doctor. That's a team doctor administering a drug by injection to a team manager with apparently no record of having done that, offered as an explanation as to why they had 60-70 vials of the stuff.
The thing with the testosterone patches is bizarre
it's like a series of schoolkid excuses-
Freeman sends in a sicknote
Cope had his laptop stolen
the patches were delivered accidently
the dog ate my homework
a big boy did it and ran away
Between us we must have seen 10 blokes chuffing away on an inhaler...and this is for a 4th Cat race..
Slight difference to my racing the Eastern Winter Series as a yoof, where half the Fun class would have a ciggie at the end.
And my TA recruitment platoon too, come to that. No two mile run was complete without one.
SDB has admitted he knew about the massive stocks of corticosteroid because he's now saying Freeman injected his poorly knee with the stuff.
What does medical ethics say about that? May be OK, I don't know. Seems a bit casual to borrow a bit of team-issue dope and have it injected by the team doctor?
What does medical ethics say about that? May be OK, I don't know. Seems a bit casual to borrow a bit of team-issue dope and have it injected by the team doctor?
I'm guessing that as a practicing doctor he can prescribe appropriately for anyone on the team, why wouldn't he be able to? It's not like me treating someone as lay-person. Presumably it'd be different if he just gave people drugs for conditions they didn't have, but as long as it was a genuine treatment for a real condition, you'd think it would be legitimate.
The thing with the localised injection into the joint, apparently, is that it stays localised unlike the application used for the TUE stuff which is a full body experience, so it's not performance enhancing in that context.
It seems slightly mad that they had so much of the stuff ordered, but being injected with something doesn't necessarily mean you know how much of it is in your store room. I well remember the happy day when Dr Harold Shipman gave me a rabies jab, I had no idea how much anti-rabies vaccine he had in stock, just that he wasn't very good at injections... probably needed more practice.
There's a lot of assumptions about what people 'must have known', but would you really expect Dave Brailsford to be aware of the stock levels of the medical store? That's why it's so bemusing that Freeman hasn't said a thing as per my earlier post. If anyone knows what was happening on the medical side, it was him, but he seems happy for everyone else to take the flak while he says nothing.
I'm guessing that as a practicing doctor he can prescribe appropriately for anyone on the team, why wouldn't he be able to
this revelation has raised that extra question - where is the written record/prescription? Given SDB has told the press about it they can't claim patient confidentiality, so clearly there will be a written record of that prescription then?
would you really expect Dave Brailsford to be aware of the stock levels of the medical store?
SDB and Sky have made us expect that, with his supposed attention to detail and their obsession with marginal gains. They take riders' personal pillows to races, and talked about having individual washing machines for each riders kit to prevent cross-infection, but then don't keep medical records and administer drugs to whoever wants them?
Ok, so team manager, team rider, if that's the same thing for the team doctor then fair enough. Wondered if him acting on non-rider health issues crossed a line.
You'd think he'd ask though : ) 'Is that from the marginal gains stock or are we into bulk rate discounts now? Enough to go around yeah?'being injected with something doesn't necessarily mean you know how much of it is in your store room
(Can't take it all seriously anymore so resorting to daft comments, I know..)
That's why it's so bemusing that Freeman hasn't said a thing as per my earlier post. If anyone knows what was happening on the medical side, it was him, but he seems happy for everyone else to take the flak while he says nothing.
I think if he admits prescribing PEDs, then he is liable to disciplinary action by the GMC, although any sanction might not be quite as severe as being struck off. However, UKAD/the UCI would probably ban him from practising as a doctor for any Olympic sport.
So, his professional career and livelihood are at risk, and unlike Brailsford, Cope et al., he cannot simply say he didn't know what was in the jiffy bag. I think he is probably now between a rock and very hard place. If he lies to the HoC committee, then I think that would be perjury. Unless he is going to come clean and dob Brailsford and others in, his only other option would be to say he could not remember, and I don't think that the committee would accept that at this late stage of the enquiry.
If he lies to the HoC committee, then I think that would be perjury.
No, because he hasn't lied under oath apparently, it's not perjury. Apparently misleading MPs is 'contempt of the house' and means he could be fined or detained, but it's not happened since the 19th Century. He doesn't even legally have to attend if summoned to appear. The only real damage is to his reputation.
[url= https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/jul/22/phone-hacking-lying-to-select-committee ]https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/jul/22/phone-hacking-lying-to-select-committee[/url]
SDB will go, Skys top riders will move and I suspect the entire operation will fold at the end of the season.
No, because he hasn't lied under oath apparently, it's not perjury. Apparently misleading MPs is 'contempt of the house' and means he could be fined or detained, but it's not happened since the 19th Century.
Yes, I've just been reading the guide for witnesses, and as you say it is rare for them to take evidence under oath, and punishing for contempt is very rare. However, I don't think he could refuse to attend:
'When gathering evidence, almost all select committees have a power to send for “persons, papers and records”. This means that committees can insist upon the attendance of witnesses and the production of papers and other material. This formal power is rarely used.'
I suspect that the committee members may be unhappy enough with the length of time for which this has been dragging on already, and with the unsatisfactory answers provided to them so far, that they might be prepared to threaten to use some of those powers.
I think it's interesting that they have left Freeman till last. If he had been the first witness and said "I can't remember" or "I think it was flumicil", that might have been the end of matters, but now public and media interest have been ramped up and his evidence will be very closely scrutinised. I cannot see how he could get out of appearing before the committee now, and maybe that's why they have left him till last, since they feel that they would be justified now in using their powers to compel him to appear and testify if necessary.
That's a really poor article. Kimmage just parading his prejudices. Nothing new or incite full, stuff like this.
. There is loads more coming down the pipeline with this.Is that based on something you have heard, on something sources have told you, or your instincts?
It is my instinct. It is just reading what is happening. It is just looking at the unravelling of it. Logically.
Sky have just published this (8 pages)
[url= https://app.box.com/s/8fiqxj1veckqjom9dhzb2erti45dx77i ]https://app.box.com/s/8fiqxj1veckqjom9dhzb2erti45dx77i[/url]
and a covering letter
Dear Mr Collins,I am enclosing a document that Team Sky will publish today that provides more context around issuesrelating to the 2011 Critérium du Dauphiné race and the steps we have taken since then to strengthenour anti-doping and medical practices. We have given all of the relevant information to UKAD already(and have sent them a copy of this document), but I hope it also provides important context for yourCommittee’s ongoing work around anti-doping.Self-evidently, the events of recent months have highlighted areas where mistakes were made byTeam Sky. Some members of staff did not comply fully with the policies and procedures that existedat that time. Regrettably, those mistakes mean that we have not been able to provide the completeset of records that we should have around the specific race relevant to UKAD’s investigation. Weaccept full responsibility for this.However, many of the subsequent assumptions and assertions about the way Team Sky operateshave been inaccurate or extended to implications that are simply untrue. There is a fundamentaldifference between process failures and wrongdoing. Our commitment to anti-doping has been a coreprinciple of Team Sky since its inception. Our mission is to race and win clean, and we have done so for8 years.UKAD’s investigation was precipitated by a very serious allegation of an anti-doping rule violation byTeam Sky at the 2011 Dauphiné. It is important to reiterate that, to my understanding, UKAD’sextensive investigation has found nothing whatsoever to support this allegation, which we believe tobe false.2011 was only our second year of racing and we have continuously improved our policies andprocedures since then. As this document sets out, we have taken a number of significant steps tostrengthen our anti-doping and medical governance, and we will continue to do so in the future. While I obviously respect the fact that people will have their view on issues related to thisinvestigation, I do believe that some of the comments made about Team Sky have been unreasonableand incorrect. In the interest of balance, I would like to take this opportunity to say that I have the utmostadmiration and respect for the riders and staff at the team. They are an extraordinarily dedicated andprofessional group of individuals who have always sought to do things the right way and to win clean.It’s why they joined Team Sky.I fully appreciate that, for understandable reasons, your recent hearings regarding cycling and anti-doping have focused on the events surrounding the Dauphiné 2011 and the lessons to be learned. Aspart of your work I am sure you will also want to look at current policies and practices in the sport, andI hope that this document will be useful in supporting that work.Yours sincerely,
Sir David Brailsford
Principal, Team Sky
(Terrible line and word spacing due to cut and paste)
🙄We accept full responsibility
Freeman gets the blame, everything else is continuous improvement.