[Closed] Have we done Team Sky 'No Doping' declaration yet?

I thought the riders who came out in support of Lance, were probably involved in his doping regime, and were getting there own defence in disguised as solidarity with a former team mate. so that's Hammond and Dowsett, Hammond isn't on the sky payroll, but will watch to see if Dowsett goes or hopes to ride it out.

I think there are a lot of cyclists out there right now hoping that they can ride the storm without links being found that reveal their own drug use.

Well according to this...

[img] [/img]

which is a bloody good read!... those responsible for setting up Team GB (and subsequently Sky) in its present incarnation, said the whole reason they concentrated on the track, and left the road cycling well alone, was that they knew, full-well that all the major teams were systemically doping. And that, as they were committed to racing clean, they'd only ever be racing for 5th or 6th place, so it just wasn't worth it.

So I suspect they'll have a pretty accurate picture of who's clean and who's been doping in the past

IF they have there fingers crossed when signing it can they get around the "policy"

Sounds like a lot of guff done purely to look like they are doing something.

Not sure how Yates can stay.

He reckons that he didnt see anything "dodgy" while he was director sportif for LA's last Tour win.

Not sure weather not "seeing" anything is the same as not "knowing" and turning a blind eye ??

I think the aim of Sky is to be a clean team, but one could be mildly cynical and wonder whether it's a coincidence that they waited until Michael Barry left until they started making people sign the pledge.

So [i]signing[/i] something will stop them doping, whereas before it was what stopping them from doping? Just the fact that it's an illegal practise in their sport? Weird.
Road racing is just a complete farce isn't it.

[i]Not sure how Yates can stay[/i]

That's a very good point, especially as he was a rider at the height of the 'doping generation'.

Plus, to be honest, when he speaks he sounds like he's on something anyway...

[i]Road racing is just a complete farce isn't it. [/i]

No, not really.

Bit of a token gesture. Lance had a 'no doping' clause in his bonus contracts and look where that got us....

I think its an important step to reassure the public, who are on side with British (Sky) riding at the moment. Glad its being done through all levels of personel. Very difficult to assess how far participation in, saw practises, awareness of availability, of team doping could stretch.
There are people (Sean Yates) who are very vulnerable. There are people who may have contact but refused and made a hasty exit (Hammond) and there will be plenty of innuendo (like I've just done) that will just feed the rumour mill.
I think people need to say what they knew about, but as importantly say how it could have been prevented.
Whilst I'm not sure about giving David Miller a position at the UCI or any other controlling body, he is articulate and thoughtful about new directions. These have to be developed so its not just hand wringing and crucifying wrong doers.
I'm also concern about how far this code will go with substance abuse as Team Sky would be in trouble if it extended to alcohol! Bye bye Geriant, bye bye Brad!

Well according to this...

I read these books by some great American cyclist, who won a whole host of races, and was clean as a nun's habit, yet I hear all these nasty whispers on the internet that maybe it wasn't all true...

"Plus, to be honest, when he speaks he sounds like he's on something anyway..."

Oh it not just me who thinks he talks in joined up. 😆

Road racing is just a complete farce isn't it.

All just a PR exercise unless there's some real comeback if a rider signs up and is later found to be in breach of that contract.

Didn't most of the peloton sign something similar soon after the Festina affair? We now know what a joke that was.

Yates is most definitely on dodgy ground. Find it hard to believe that you could be a DS in the Postal team at that time and not be aware of what was going on. "I just drove the car and called tactics..." doesn't really wash, especially when doping played a part in those tactics. Do have a degree of sympathy though as the guy's got to make a living during that time, and turning a blind eye would be understandable. Would rather he have a more credible story though.

Road racing is just a complete farce isn't it.

If you listened to the fascinating Five Live programme* on doping in cycling this week, the (very thinly-veiled)implication was that there are an awful lot of other sports that are still chock full of dopers, and that cycling is the only sport that is [i]really[/i] taking the issue seriously.

* If you didn't catch it, [url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01ngqxd/5_live_Sport_Peddlers_Cyclings_Dirty_Truth/ ]this [/url] is well worth a listen

@binners - I didn't heard the 5Live show yet but will catch up on it. I think very many sports take doping serious particularly Olympic sports. My kids swam competitively and from an early age they are monitored so any abnormal changes in their performance or test results can be picked up. I'm not saying there are sports that turn a blind eye but saying cycling is the only sport that takes it seriously is a bit strong IMO.

there are an awful lot of other sports that are still chock full of dopers, and that cycling is the only sport that is really taking the issue seriously.

I think cycling and athletics (and probably swimming) are the only sports which are making a real effort to tackle drugs, football, rugby and other team sports are still in complete denial.

there are an awful lot of other sports that are still chock full of dopers, and that cycling is the only sport that is really taking the issue seriously

This is what gets me. In practically all sports, strength and/or stamina bring an advantage and, especially at the top level, the pressure and desire to win is massive. The temptation to dope to imrpove strength and/or stamina must therefore exist just as much in other sports and, assuming that human nature is fairly constant and cyclists aren't somehow 'weaker-willed', it must go on. But when do we ever hear about it?

does this mean i wont be able to cheer them on any more as i was once a passive smoker of what might not have been kosher cigarettes

jambalaya - I think the implied accusation seemed to be being leveled at the Major League American sports, rather than athletics, swimming etc, where huge amounts of money are at stake wih TV contracts etc

The Five Live programme is truly shocking!! Just the shear extent of the endemic doping. It appears that literally [i]everyone[/i] was at it! A really interesting programme

Whilst on the face of it Sky's claims are laudable if they don't follow it through with some openness and action then they should be considered as dodgy as the rest of them.

If they all sign the pledges and carry on as if nothing happened then it will be incredibly hard to belive in what they are doing, all the way up to Brad. In particular with regards to two people.

[b]Sean Yates[/b] - He rode on Motorola at the start of the EPO era, he was Lance's mentor during the time Lance started doping and Lance personally hired him to "drive the car" at Discovery during a time Lance was high as a kite. Despite this Yates claims he never doped and never knew Lance was doping.

I'm afraid for him his word is not enough on this. If he just signs the Sky forms and Brailsford come out in support claiming he has Yates' word they have effectively swept it under the carpet and are complicit in maintaining the omerta. They either need to get rid of Yates or if he really didn't dope they need to find some way of corroberating his story.

[b]Michael Rogers[/b] - He has admitted working with Dr. Ferrari but claims he never doped. Again this doesn't seem plausible since the whole raison d'etre for Dr Ferrari was as the expert in doping. So as with Yates, for Rogers, signing the forms and moving on isn't an option; they either need to fire his ass or find some way of corroberting his story.

Of course all this could be avoided if they dropped their unrealistic "no association with past dopers" policy and adopted the Garmin approach. Then they could keep Yates and Rogers (who are clearly excellent at their jobs) as long as they were open about the past so that we could belive in the present.

football, rugby and other team sports are still in complete denial

Indeed. In light of Hamiltons revalations that he would try everying to avoid a test if he was "glowing" and would therefore fail a test, including literally hiding in his house until they went away...

... you have to question Rio Ferdinands missed test and subsequent ban.

The circumstances to that test are bizare, particularly if you view it with an assumption of an inocent man. An inocent man just wouldn't behave that way, its weird. But if you view from the perspective of a man who knows he is "glowing" then it all makes perfect sense.

Pretty standard practice nowadays No?
Most, if not all, Teams have a policy of this magnitude.
Would suggest that a lot of Teams will be bolstering thier position by producing, or indeed outwardly showing that, they have a Zero tollerance policy (in one form or another)

Can I point you towards Garmin and Vaughters..

I cannot see how this declaration changes the current status at Sky. The declaration says that if we later find you were a doper then you will leave. This is their currenct stance anyway si I think this is pure PR BS.

Regarding "everyone was at it" in 1999 after the Festina scandal. The tests performed on the 1999 samples refutes this and actually seem to show an effort by the peloton to change maybe through fear of police action). Unfortunately USPS decided not and destroyed everyone in 1999 TdF and any chance for change. It took the other teams a few years to catch up hence why 2003 everything got a lot closer.

Can I point you towards Garmin and Vaughters..

Who? This Garmin....

[img] [/img]

😉

jumble - by the sounds of it, the 99 testing regime was generally considered to be an absolute doddle to get around, by all but the most bumbling and incompetent cheat

They either need to get rid of Yates or if he really didn't dope they need to find some way of corroberating his story.

May well be standard practice now to force riders/staff to sign a declaration, but it's also the PR side of "being seen to be doing something", especially where sponsors are involved.

Probably needs something more like holding all (or substantial quantities) of prize money (edit: and/or salary) as a bond. Still clean after 7 years, get your prize money that's been held in trust. Might be difficult when teams chop and change and merge every 2 years, though.

Is every ex-pro who raced in the '90s now tainted?

Yep, or at least those that did well in the GT's

Taxi for Mr Yates!

by the sounds of it, the 99 testing regime was generally considered to be an absolute doddle to get around, by all but the most bumbling and incompetent cheat

The sports testing regime was way behind the dopers, but due to doping actually being a criminal offence if France, and the previous years police action in catching Festina, much of the peloton appeared to want to be "going clean", this is backed up by Ashendens, later tests which respectively applied new technology to old samples.

British cycling team Sky revealed Wednesday that all their riders and management will be forced to sign a pledge, swearing that they have never doped or they will be booted out of the squad.

I think the aim of Sky is to be a clean team, but one could be mildly cynical and wonder whether it's a coincidence that they waited until Michael Barry left until they started making people sign the pledge.

Barry retired (or jumped, depending on your point of view) and was off the team payroll by the time the news story broke.

He obviously knew the shitstorm that was going to blow up when all this came out so he's been pretty clever about the whole thing and besides, he claims never to have doped after 2006 so technically, Sky and Barry haven't come out of it that badly.

Yates could have looked but not seen, he could have listened and not heard, ....doubtful in the extreme..

Surely an admittance and repentance, a few hail marys and on with the show 😉

The sports testing regime was way behind the dopers, but due to doping actually being a criminal offence if France, and the previous years police action in catching Festina, much of the peloton appeared to want to be "going clean"

Maybe that's what is needed - make it a criminal offence everywhere. OK, it's just sport, but it would show that society takes it seriously and doesn't appreciate potential 'heroes' and 'role models' being created by pharma companies and dodgy doctors.

I think that this is a very bad decision by SKY.
It puts the spotlight on Yates. It is implausible that he rode during this period in teams that were systematically doping and yet never doped and never saw anyone else dope. Simply impossible.

So now SKY has achieved a situation where Yates must resign or be sacked OR team Sky's clean image looks tarnished.
Very poor decision by them

So now SKY has achieved a situation where Yates must resign or be sacked OR team Sky's clean image looks tarnished.
Very poor decision by them

Agreed. The same applies to Rogers due to his links to Ferrari.

According to today's paper we will hear more details today from sky.

It puts the spotlight on Yates. It is implausible that he rode during this period in teams that were systematically doping and yet never doped and never saw anyone else dope

Its not just about USPS/Discovery when it comes to Yates

[url= http://www.dopeology.org/incidents/Yates,-S-adverse-analytical-finding/ ]http://www.dopeology.org/incidents/Yates,-S-adverse-analytical-finding/[/url]

Wonder why SKY decided not to draw a line and say; "from this moment" Yates will be a loss, SKY pride themselves on employing the best.

Yates already arranged a move to another team maybe?

Either Sky are
a) trying to force him out (hence the announcement to force his hand)
b) know he's already got another job so win/win (maybe with a chat with Yates beforehand to warn him to consider a change in job career)
c) a bit naive and created a bit of a publicity nightmare for themselves
d) doing it on purpose to sack him and ride on the wave of publicity about how clean they are

Wiggo with 'suspicious' plaster on arm
[img] [/img]

[url= http://www.cyclismas.com/2012/10/groundhog-day-for-cycling/ ]http://www.cyclismas.com/2012/10/groundhog-day-for-cycling/[/url]

More terrible PR management by Team Sky.
Announcement that anyone not signing statement must leave.
Then Cav leaves.

That plaster won't be from an EPO injection, it'll be from a blood transfusion. Two totally unrelated things.

lol at piemonster.

More terrible PR management by Team Sky.
Announcement that anyone not signing statement must leave.
Then Cav leaves.

so incompetent I find it difficult to believe.
Announcement could have been rescheduled a few days either way irrespective of Leipheimer's sacking.
someone's out to cause mischief- wonder if Cavendish has personally forced the announcement?

Anyone looked over the 2009 Tour final standing's Wiggins finished 4th 30 odd seconds behind Armstrong that year...

Yeh,

1st Bertie Beefsteak
2nd One of the Schlecks
3rd Lancey(on the road)
4th Wiggo
5th The other Schleck

So, err, that'll be a clean tour then. Nothing at all suspicious about a track rider finishing amongst those riders after a steady credible build up of Grand Tours finishes.

Yeah the same BW that had only finished one Tour before then in 139th place...

Sky messed up when they decided at the outset not to have additional in-house anti doping measures as it was deemed too costly and inefficient. Garmin have a no-needle policy so don't even inject vitamin supplements. Have read Skys The Limit.and given British Cyclings deliberate concentrating on track due to the road problem with drugs, and their 'no doper' rule precluding millar joining, they seemed very blase about the need for an anti doping program.

If Sean Yates stays then the policy has no credibility, his pleas of ignorance certainly don't. DS at Astana?!...

Wait till all this sh17 filters down to MTB'ing XC racing!!

One guy who rides a full suss 29er in every race and is a monster from Eastern europe............+ all the rest of the eight or so riders that form the lead group in every world cup race while the rest get a proper punishment bumm1ng.

binners - Member

the (very thinly-veiled)implication was that there are an awful lot of other sports that are still chock full of dopers, and that cycling is the only sport that is really taking the issue seriously.

I know a chap who was selected for the Commonwealth games team in another sport in 2006. He quietly declined, and explained to his coach and teammates it was because he was basically filled to the back teeth with steroids. He's still competing at lower levels where they know he's not likely to get tested, and helps coach kids too, all with the full knowledge of everyone around him.

<intentionally vague, obviously>

Well the Sky cull continues - no big surprise that Yates has been given the boot. Steven de Jongh has also gone.

Who will be next?

Who will be next?

Mick Rogers.

FWIW this policy is misguided as it does nothing to help people admit their past (without being sacked) and will therefore continue the omerta.

Wiggo with 'suspicious' plaster on arm

Apparently from blood sample at doping control.

Andy

piemonster - Member
Yeh,

1st Bertie Beefsteak
2nd One of the Schlecks
3rd Lancey(on the road)
4th Wiggo
5th The other Schleck

So, err, that'll be a clean tour then. Nothing at all suspicious about a track rider finishing amongst those riders after a steady credible build up of Grand Tours finishes.

Glad somebody else has noticed this, i want Wiggins to be clean...and you'd have to imagine the IOC testing at London 2012 was stringent after the TdF too....but from track success in 2008 to grand tour 4th place in a year?....amongst a gaggle of known dopers?

The Armstrong critics were using Lance's transformation from being a good Classics rider and occasional Tour stage winner to topping the General Classification as proof of doping as it happened in such a short amount of time....applying that train of thought to Wiggins transformation makes me very uncomfortable.

Sean Yates retires from cycling.

The Armstrong critics[ WTF does this even mean?] were using Lance's transformation from being a good Classics rider and occasional Tour stage winner to topping the General Classification as proof of doping as it happened in such a short amount of time....applying that train of thought to Wiggins transformation makes me very uncomfortable.

I would also say
LA was already doing the training of a TdF athlete when he was being poor[ not finishing] in tours Wiggo was not fully focused on grand tour training an was focused on track cycling - only man to retain 4 km pursuit gold so he was already track awesome if not road awesome
Clearly wiggo changed his training regime [ LA did not] to target the Tour and he lost 6 kg in order to target the tour/climbs.
First competed in 2006 where he was 123 rd despite being basically a track athlete - 2008 world record + Gold etc

Good Vuleta results as well showing a slow progression
It was a big change for sure but I would expect him to be able to kill folk, in the hills, and he still cannot if he was actually doping tbh.
He still needs the TT to win Tours

I can see why folk might think it but I would want some actual evidence of it rather than just a general suspicion due to transformation.
I expect someone to say it [ my view] has something to do with nationality.

FWIW I would be gutted if he was a doper but I do not think he is

this covers some of it but basically his track goals hampered his tour ones and once he changed and lost weight he could stay with them up the hills
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/cycling/tour-de-france/9389285/Bradley-Wiggins-a-date-with-destiny.html

Clearly bad bad skills by Sky make's them look super guilty! YAtes you're an ass just admit it so cycling can move on. VERY VERY disappointed in TEam sky.

Doh, hadn't spotted this one when I replied to the other one:

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/sean-yates-off-sky-team?

Digger90
It was only a matter of time really... sad, very sad.

But... it's for the good of the sport, and the 'direction of travel' that Sky is taking is the right one.

Klunk - Member
are there any experienced team management types not involved to some extent in past drug usage ?

Interesting that Yates is making no admission and says it's for 'personal reasons' I'd rather he'd at least 'come clean' like Julich has. No doubt everyone else will take that as admission that was using whilst he was a Lance teammate.

If he did, I'm sure he stopped many years ago, whatever his past he's one of the "good" guys. (He says. Hopefully. Let's hope there's not 'Lance' style "Sean Yates was behind it all" revelations waiting to come out).

Sky's stance was right. Is is still right in the light of the 'Lance Revelations' or even more right??

Like Vaughters has said, 'direction of travel' should be forward, not looking backwards. Should it not matter what someone does and thinks now, not what they did in the past?

Yates is clearly not involved in anything now, if he was he's clearly left it behind and moved on. For the right reasons.

I can understand Brailsford / Sky's reasons but was this the time to say "forget the past. We're interested in now and the future?"

are there any experienced team management types not involved to some extent in past drug usage ?

there will be others

The interesting part of the McGee article that's doing the rounds is that it was the threat of real jail time that turned around French cycling after Festina and it also can be seen in the USADA interview transcripts. The sooner we have a "sporting fraud" law the better, interviews under police caution should be part of the process for any rider caught doping.

Does Yates seriously expect anyone to believe its an innocent coincidence? Team mate and coach to LA, DS for him at personal invitation with the famously clean Astana team, and friend of "motoman". Post Armageddon (get it) he's totally unemployable. And now totally lacking credibility.

Deviant +1

Given your view of LA you will forgive me if I ignore your instincts on detecting drug cheats

Brad McGee

there will be others

Great one, how many teams and how many cars need filling with guys with race experience, If more teams follow suit I might apply, been watching the tdf since the early nineties how hard can it be 😉 David Millar was probably quite looking forward to a team management role at Sky in his dotage He'll have to look elsewhere now.

but from track success in 2008 to grand tour 4th place in a year?....amongst a gaggle of known dopers?

While riding for Garmin.

If there is one team I would trust to be 100% clean, it is Garmin.

guessing that's a joke about Garmin??

Garmin are essentially poachers turned gamekeepers, so I agree with ratherbeintobago that they are pretty near the top of my list for clean.

Whilst I don't agree with Team Skys approach to former dopers you have got to admire their commitment to their policy and to racing clean.

To be credible a "no history of doping" policy has to have teeth and not just be another meaningless charter. Getting rid of Yates, even if they did make him walk before he was pushed, shows they are at least serious in trying to be open.

Holding on to Yates would not have been credible.

David Millar was probably quite looking forward to a team management role at Sky in his dotage

Millar knew he would never work for Sky as they have always had this policy, Millar was out becuase he was banned, Yates, Jullic, Barry etc were in becuase they lied and Sky trusted their word. The only change now seems to be they are doing more than just trusting peoples word.

[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/20128408 ]another one bites the dust[/url]

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

Personally I find it uncomfortable to hear all the "let move on, nothing to see, look forward not this way" train of thought.

Lessons need to be learned, not swept under the carpet. Move forward yes, but with an eye on the past.

It's certainly very interesting what's going on at Sky, I wonder whether it would be possible without the Bank of Murdoch to steam roller through the difficulties of trying to find enough people in cycling who haven't been near dope

Millar knew he would never work for Sky as they have always had this policy, Millar was out becuase he was banned.

He never mentioned that during the long conversations we had about his plans for the future 😉

Alex Dowsett has moved to Moviestar. Can't say I know much about him but the timing would seem to look rather unfortunate, especially with his previous links/comments about Armstrong

He never mentioned that during the long conversations we had about his plans for the future

It's there for all to read in his book. No need for name dropping.

Quite interesting really. He says he was in two minds whether to move to SKY or stay at Garmin but that the SKY project and the posibility of being on a British team and working with his sister really excited him. He was close with Brailsford and Braislford had seemed to sugest there may be a place for him on the team. However later Brailsford told him he couldn't join the team due to the policy of zero tolerance they were implimenting.

Seems to suggest that its not Brailsford's policy and it actually comes from higher up. Maybe SKY corporate management or British Cycling.

Either way it is obvoius that Millar has known from day 1 of the SKY team that he couldn't ride for them, even though he was interested before day 1. Maybe your conversation was before day 1.

It seems now Millar is more interested in politics than team management, given the amount of brown nosing he is doing with McQuaid.

Great one, how many teams and how many cars need filling with guys with race experience, If more teams follow suit I might apply, been watching the tdf since the early nineties how hard can it be

there will be plenty of pro's who aren't big names who didn't dope. They aren't big names essentially because they didn't dope. If McGee (who was a big name) didn't there will be others. Every single one of them should be given a job in a team/ in the car before a former doper, regardless of your rose tinted views of the various personalities the riders that managed to stay clean have already lost so much maoney and prestige to the dopers that to employ a doper in a team ahead of them adds insult to injury

Dowsett has long been rumored to be leaving sky-the timing and destination aren't ideal though!

If McGee (who was a big name)

He was a "big name" to English speakers but this is partly a function of the TV coverage. Liggett and Sherwen call out all the Australians, Brits, Americans and South Africans because their commentary is used for the TV coverage in those countries. If you watch the tour in France, Holland, Spain etc you would have a completely different perspective of who the big names are. Not demeaning McGee's career, but merely pointing out other countries will look at riders from a different perspective.

Alex Dowsett has moved to Moviestar. Can't say I know much about him but the timing would seem to look rather unfortunate, especially with his previous links/comments about Armstrong

The Dowsett/Movistar deal was done back in summer, it was common knowledge at the Worlds 6 weeks ago.

Nothing to do with his Armstrong comments at all (and he was misquoted in that as well).

It would be interesting if they had a clause in each employment contract some like this...

"If it turns out that you have doped and stayed quiet to this point, or are doping whilst working for us, we can claim XXX damages against you".

That would work wouldn't it?

That would work wouldn't it?

I am not an employment lawyer but I would be very surprised if such a clause could be enforced (with regard to conduct prior to employment)

But could it be used to force them to come clean with what they had done up to then?

Nothing to do with his Armstrong comments at all (and he was misquoted in that as well).

Got to agree with the first part but never quite understood how he was misquoted. He himself said:

I just wanted to set the record straight as some things have not been clear in my comments reported in the press today. When I was quoted saying Lance Armstrong is a legend, this was in regard to the charity work he has done, also when I said it doesn't matter, what I mean is that we are racing clean now and it is a different sport to what it was back then.

But the actual quote was:

"He is still a legend of the sport. A guy who had cancer came back and won the Tour de France,"

So he's saying he's a legend of cycling as a guy who came back from cancer to win the TdF as I read it.

As an aside, don't suppose you have any links to articles linking Andy Schleck to Operation Puerto seeing as you brought it up elsewhere?