Log in:  

Register

Dave Brailsford - cycling genius

The Clinic is the only place on Cyclingnews where you can discuss doping-related issues. Ask questions, discuss positives or improvements to procedures.

Moderators: Irondan, Eshnar, Red Rick, Valv.Piti, Tonton, Pricey_sky, King Boonen

Re: Re:

11 Jan 2017 22:45

TheSpud wrote:
thehog wrote:
deviant wrote:As a Brit I'm confused by the constant reference by posters on here to Sky/BC's alleged fraudulent use of government money....this isn't U.S. Postal where a government run institution was funding a cycling team (and subsequently doping).
The Sky team doesn't take a penny from the UK government, it's a Murdoch enterprise and Manchester/BC is lottery funded, I don't play the lottery so I don't feel defrauded, it's not compulsory to buy a ticket!
Buy a ticket and help put some money into most Olympic sports or don't, choice is the punters...i don't think some on here get that.

All talk of jail time, the government trying to recoup funds etc is fantasy by posters on here who don't understand the system of sport funding in the UK, the government actually contributes very little and most goes to schools not professional setups.
That is why little will come of this, sorry to burst some bubbles.



The point was when Sky was set up the professional team, it used resources from British Cycling which in part was tax-payer funded via grants. It was very similar to USPS which was part private and part government owned.

The issue with the Wiggins package was that Simon Cope was working for British Cycling (at the time) as the Women's Coach in a tax-payer funded position, however he was performing duties on behalf of a private enterprise in Sky and taking directions.

Prior to Sky being set up they had an external auditor in Deloitte review the new arrangements and create a demarcation between the two entities.

Whilst I appreciate your enthusiasm on the matter you may wish to educate yourself a little better.


See my post about the recharging facility - I believe this was the exact reason it was in place to show that SKY wasn't benefiting from BC / Tax Payer funding.


Perhaps stick to the facts Spud?

UK Sport and British Cycling Announce Key Findings of Deloitte Review

Key recommendations of the review include:

Creation of an operational document focused primarily on the dual British Cycling and Team Sky roles and responsibilities to ensure these are effectively monitored and managed, both from a resource and financial perspective. This document would be reviewed quarterly and would sit alongside the already comprehensive Service Level Agreement.

• Recruitment of a Finance Director by British Cycling (this role is currently being advertised).

• Continuation of the close working relationship between British Cycling and UK Sport so that any new opportunities and risks to the World Class Programme are identified, discussed and managed at an early stage


https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/about/article/bc20110316-Deloitte-Review--Findings-Announced-0

Per point 1; do you think Simon Cope, Brian Cookson from British Cycling at the time were keeping operational document focused primarily on the dual British Cycling and Team Sky roles and responsibilities to ensure these are effectively monitored and managed, both from a resource and financial perspective? Do you think there was a Service Level Agreement that Simon Cope could spend a month with Bradley Wiggins could motor pace and not coach the women's team? Or not run a team camp as Nicole Cooke had asked for?

You really do let yourself down badly with comments like "recharging facility". I sense you make this up as you go along.
User avatar thehog
Veteran
 
Posts: 20,106
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 20:00

Re: Dave Brailsford - cycling genius

11 Jan 2017 22:49

gillan1969 wrote:chris evans (Radio 2 BBC) talked about Rick Stien swanning about on tax payers money this morning...of course what he meant was licence fee payers money but the audience is generally sophisticated enough to know what he meant...as we do here when tax payers is mentioned


British Cycling is funded by tax payer money in part:

UK Sport is the nation's high-performance sports agency, responsible for investing National Lottery and government funds in and providing support to our top medal hopes in Olympic and Paralympic sport


https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/fundingpartners#sdmjDlRxLv7c3353.99

Amid such a chaotic backdrop, UK Sport – which allocates all centralised funding to Olympic sports – has announced that its £25.98million support over the next four years will be “heavily conditioned” on British Cycling demonstrating that is has an appropriate culture for an elite sport.


“There are governance issues that have been well reported,” said Rod Carr, UK Sport chairman.

“If the outcomes [of the various investigations] are such that we, as the government investment agency, need to take some action then we will do.



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/cycling/2016/12/09/british-cycling-faces-funding-withdrawal-governance-problems/
User avatar thehog
Veteran
 
Posts: 20,106
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 20:00

Re: Dave Brailsford - cycling genius

11 Jan 2017 23:18

It doesn't even matter, we know Sky paid BC several hundred quid, they didn't take several hundred quid from the tax payer or lottery through BC. At the moment we don't even know what the money actually paid for yet. That's for UKAD to investigate and why Brailsford won't say a thing, BC won't say a thing, Freeman won't say a thing or Wiggins. They've collectively played it how it should be played under investigation. As much as social media and the press hate not having the running commentary they're used to with Festina, Puerto, Armstrong etc, the ball is entirely in UKADs hands now. It's up to them now. I do feel sorry for them, because on the face of it, the investigation is based on a newspaper article without evidence. It's got to be the first time a NADO has ever based an anti-doping investigation without knowing what they are investigating lol. Things were so much easier with basic PEDS tripping you up!
samhocking
Member
 
Posts: 898
Joined: 13 Mar 2013 22:44

Re: Dave Brailsford - cycling genius

11 Jan 2017 23:39

samhocking wrote:It doesn't even matter, we know Sky paid BC several hundred quid, they didn't take several hundred quid from the tax payer or lottery through BC. At the moment we don't even know what the money actually paid for yet. That's for UKAD to investigate and why Brailsford won't say a thing, BC won't say a thing, Freeman won't say a thing or Wiggins. They've collectively played it how it should be played under investigation. As much as social media and the press hate not having the running commentary they're used to with Festina, Puerto, Armstrong etc, the ball is entirely in UKADs hands now. It's up to them now. I do feel sorry for them, because on the face of it, the investigation is based on a newspaper article without evidence. It's got to be the first time a NADO has ever based an anti-doping investigation without knowing what they are investigating lol. Things were so much easier with basic PEDS tripping you up!



Well no, Simon Cope was paid a salary to fill the role of Women's Coach for British Cycling. If he is collecting a salary to perform those duties and not performing them because he is delivering medical packages for a private entity then there is a huge issue. He was negligent in his duties and clearly taking orders from Brailsford not Cookson.
User avatar thehog
Veteran
 
Posts: 20,106
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 20:00

12 Jan 2017 00:03

Depends if you believe what Cope said when he told the press he had no active role in 2011 at BC, that's why he worked for Sky and was hoping to become second DS to Yates in 2012. It's not unusual to be kept on payroll but without an active role, but only further investigation could tell if that's the case. End of the day, most of the main Team Sky staff were also BC staff and 2012 was arguably the most productive year for British Cycling & Team Sky in 20 years, so hard to say public money was wasted during 2011 with so much success the year after?
From what we've seen so far, Cope's receipts suggest everything was being expensed back to British Cycling and then being charge to Sky as part of their SLA we already know about.
samhocking
Member
 
Posts: 898
Joined: 13 Mar 2013 22:44

Re:

12 Jan 2017 01:00

samhocking wrote:Depends if you believe what Cope said when he told the press he had no active role in 2011 at BC, that's why he worked for Sky and was hoping to become second DS to Yates in 2012. It's not unusual to be kept on payroll but without an active role, but only further investigation could tell if that's the case. End of the day, most of the main Team Sky staff were also BC staff and 2012 was arguably the most productive year for British Cycling & Team Sky in 20 years, so hard to say public money was wasted during 2011 with so much success the year after?

From what we've seen so far, Cope's receipts suggest everything was being expensed back to British Cycling and then being charge to Sky as part of their SLA we already know about.


Well it doesn't depend as Nicole Cooke has already confirmed that he wasn't performing his duties. Nice try, are you using Brailsford PR company as well?

Cope expensed his travel but not his time. That is the issue. It's really not too hard to see if you're prepared to look over your Sky coloured glasses.

The last part is an SLA is a service level agreement, it's nothing to do with payment or expenses, it has to do with providing services to a defined level.

Armstrong used the same argument that USPS made money during his doping years. Here you're attempting the same argument. There has to be demarcation, as part of the funding requires a coach for the women's team and that is what the money has to be used for and not what Brailsford has Sutton decide on a given day. It's called governance.

Do you actually know anything with respect to compliance?
User avatar thehog
Veteran
 
Posts: 20,106
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 20:00

Re: Dave Brailsford - cycling genius

12 Jan 2017 01:32

I'm saying if the SLA was for Cope to provide this level of help while employed at British Cycling, them his evidence so far supports that. If a trip to drop off doping products clearly has Dauphine written next to them, it doesn't exactly suggest either Cope is hiding under his BC title in order to somehow spend taxpayers money performing such logistics for Team Sky or not.
Cook has said he was active, Cope says he wasn't. Cooke has a newspaper column to sell, Cope had an investigation asking him what his role was in 2011. Believe Cope or Believe Cook is simply an opinion on what each have said. Without further investigation we will never know more than that.
samhocking
Member
 
Posts: 898
Joined: 13 Mar 2013 22:44

Re: Dave Brailsford - cycling genius

12 Jan 2017 07:46

samhocking wrote:I'm saying if the SLA was for Cope to provide this level of help while employed at British Cycling, them his evidence so far supports that. If a trip to drop off doping products clearly has Dauphine written next to them, it doesn't exactly suggest either Cope is hiding under his BC title in order to somehow spend taxpayers money performing such logistics for Team Sky or not.
Cook has said he was active, Cope says he wasn't. Cooke has a newspaper column to sell, Cope had an investigation asking him what his role was in 2011. Believe Cope or Believe Cook is simply an opinion on what each have said. Without further investigation we will never know more than that.


Nice bloody try at obfuscation Sam. I have work in compliance as a regulator and this seems to be a clear cut case of misallocatiom of funds in Cope ' s time being paid for by taxpayers, but used to benefit a private entity. The whole he said she said argument seems to be an attempt to create uncertainty when there is none. Interesting to me as you arguments have shifted as the evidence has shifted. Shows a higher level communication ability on your part and dedication to the case of Sky.
User avatar Random Direction
Member
 
Posts: 436
Joined: 13 May 2011 06:17
Location: North and West

Re: Dave Brailsford - cycling genius

12 Jan 2017 07:48

samhocking wrote:I'm saying if the SLA was for Cope to provide this level of help while employed at British Cycling, them his evidence so far supports that. If a trip to drop off doping products clearly has Dauphine written next to them, it doesn't exactly suggest either Cope is hiding under his BC title in order to somehow spend taxpayers money performing such logistics for Team Sky or not.
Cook has said he was active, Cope says he wasn't. Cooke has a newspaper column to sell, Cope had an investigation asking him what his role was in 2011. Believe Cope or Believe Cook is simply an opinion on what each have said. Without further investigation we will never know more than that.


you lie when you have something to hide....so we know they have something to hide

the subject matter is GT winners and PEDs and se we know they are lying about that

so...well...some can join the dots...and these are really easy dots to join...we don't need teacher
gillan1969
Member
 
Posts: 1,008
Joined: 12 Aug 2009 12:25

12 Jan 2017 08:44

thehog advised:
Whilst I appreciate your enthusiasm on the matter you may wish to educate yourself a little better.

I'm loving it!
:lol:
User avatar TourOfSardinia
Veteran
 
Posts: 6,363
Joined: 16 Feb 2010 14:25
Location: Sardinia

Re: Dave Brailsford - cycling genius

12 Jan 2017 09:38

Random Direction wrote:
samhocking wrote:I'm saying if the SLA was for Cope to provide this level of help while employed at British Cycling, them his evidence so far supports that. If a trip to drop off doping products clearly has Dauphine written next to them, it doesn't exactly suggest either Cope is hiding under his BC title in order to somehow spend taxpayers money performing such logistics for Team Sky or not.
Cook has said he was active, Cope says he wasn't. Cooke has a newspaper column to sell, Cope had an investigation asking him what his role was in 2011. Believe Cope or Believe Cook is simply an opinion on what each have said. Without further investigation we will never know more than that.


Nice bloody try at obfuscation Sam. I have work in compliance as a regulator and this seems to be a clear cut case of misallocatiom of funds in Cope ' s time being paid for by taxpayers, but used to benefit a private entity. The whole he said she said argument seems to be an attempt to create uncertainty when there is none. Interesting to me as you arguments have shifted as the evidence has shifted. Shows a higher level communication ability on your part and dedication to the case of Sky.


There is no Elite Womens coach in British Cycling, just like there isn't an Elite mens coach either. Ellingworth is the full-time Team Sky coach who then manages/coaches the BC mens Worlds road team once the main elite season ends, the same as Cope did for the elite women in 2009/10 alongside his U23 Womens Road Academy Coach title. In 2011 Cope still had the title of U23 Womens Road Academy Coach and like Ellingworth also doubled up with the role of managing the Elite womens road team, but he says his role in BC as a coach was inactive. By November 2011 he was DS at Team Exergy Women's Cycling Team.
I'm not saying it was right for Cooke to be refused the training camp she wanted, but that can't be used to suggest there was a missalocation of funds to Sky, when a) we don't even know if Cope was on the BC payroll and even if he was, b) in March 2011 he's already on Team Sky training camps and is largely with them for the whole year which suggests his role as U23 Womens Coach really was inactive and c) Cope is just one of several womens coaches at British Cycling anyway.
In 2012 Chris Newton replaced Cope in U23 Womens and Keith Lambert remained in the same role I believe,
Last edited by samhocking on 12 Jan 2017 09:54, edited 1 time in total.
samhocking
Member
 
Posts: 898
Joined: 13 Mar 2013 22:44

Re: Dave Brailsford - cycling genius

12 Jan 2017 09:47

samhocking wrote:
Random Direction wrote:
samhocking wrote:I'm saying if the SLA was for Cope to provide this level of help while employed at British Cycling, them his evidence so far supports that. If a trip to drop off doping products clearly has Dauphine written next to them, it doesn't exactly suggest either Cope is hiding under his BC title in order to somehow spend taxpayers money performing such logistics for Team Sky or not.
Cook has said he was active, Cope says he wasn't. Cooke has a newspaper column to sell, Cope had an investigation asking him what his role was in 2011. Believe Cope or Believe Cook is simply an opinion on what each have said. Without further investigation we will never know more than that.


Nice bloody try at obfuscation Sam. I have work in compliance as a regulator and this seems to be a clear cut case of misallocatiom of funds in Cope ' s time being paid for by taxpayers, but used to benefit a private entity. The whole he said she said argument seems to be an attempt to create uncertainty when there is none. Interesting to me as you arguments have shifted as the evidence has shifted. Shows a higher level communication ability on your part and dedication to the case of Sky.


There is no Elite Womens coach in British Cycling, just like there isn't an Elite mens coach either. Ellingworth is the full-time Team Sky coach who then manages/coaches the BC mens Worlds road team once the main elite season ends, the same as Cope did for the elite women in 2009/10 alongside his U23 Womens Road Academy Coach title. In 2011 Cope still had the title of U23 Womens Road Academy Coach and like Ellingworth also doubled up with the role of managing the Elite womens road team, but he says his role in BC as a coach was inactive. By November 2011 he was DS at Team Exergy Women's Cycling Team.
I'm not saying it was right for Cooke to be refused the training camp she wanted, but that can't be used to suggest there was a missalocation of funds to Sky, when a) we don't even know if Cope was on the BC payroll and even if he was, b) in March 2011 he's already on Team Sky training camps and is largely with them for the whole year which suggests his role as U23 Womens Coach really was inactive.


'suggests' and 'don't know'

the fact checking that goes on in my industry when the boss calls you in for a problem that 'might' hit the 'local' press is really quite stringent...

a whole lot more stringent, it would appear, than when the Commons Select Committee is grilling you amid the gaze of the national and international press......and lets not forget when your attention to detail is second to none :)

face test straight (re-arrange) ;)
gillan1969
Member
 
Posts: 1,008
Joined: 12 Aug 2009 12:25

12 Jan 2017 10:00

True, but you don't have your industry ombudsman on one side telling you not to say anything to your boss though do you and the press on the other asking you what you can't answer yet.
samhocking
Member
 
Posts: 898
Joined: 13 Mar 2013 22:44

12 Jan 2017 12:01

A lot of the problem here is that some posters don't get the British psyche....whereas continental Europe has been cycling mad for decades it's only a recent thing in the UK....there are also our PED laws which are virtually non existent so unless a British athlete tests positive most people really couldn't care less.
Most people I know involved in sport in the UK (at an amateur level) think the French are barmy for throwing people in jail for using PEDs, maybe it's a cultural thing but most Brits take the attitude of "it's just sport" and get on with their lives.

Sport in the UK (except maybe football where they are mostly all multi millionaires and held up as role models) is seen as a pleasant pastime and not a lot else which is why people involved in this 'scandal' aren't afraid of jail time, court appearances or being asked to answer some questions from a load of clueless MPs.

Racial/cultural stereotype coming up but there's also the fact that with Festina, Puerto etc these scandals hit countries where gossip and leaked info to the press from the police, lawyers, DRs and politicians is quite normal, therefore I think people find the silent approach of BC, Sky etc frustrating, then you have lawyers and DRs here who actually keep to their professional promise of confidentiality...in the UK unless there is compelling evidence people will exercise their right to silence and ride it out.

Rightly or wrongly that's how it is here.
deviant
Junior Member
 
Posts: 96
Joined: 18 Dec 2013 19:31

Re:

12 Jan 2017 12:47

deviant wrote:A lot of the problem here is that some posters don't get the British psyche....whereas continental Europe has been cycling mad for decades it's only a recent thing in the UK....there are also our PED laws which are virtually non existent so unless a British athlete tests positive most people really couldn't care less.
Most people I know involved in sport in the UK (at an amateur level) think the French are barmy for throwing people in jail for using PEDs, maybe it's a cultural thing but most Brits take the attitude of "it's just sport" and get on with their lives.

Sport in the UK (except maybe football where they are mostly all multi millionaires and held up as role models) is seen as a pleasant pastime and not a lot else which is why people involved in this 'scandal' aren't afraid of jail time, court appearances or being asked to answer some questions from a load of clueless MPs.

Racial/cultural stereotype coming up but there's also the fact that with Festina, Puerto etc these scandals hit countries where gossip and leaked info to the press from the police, lawyers, DRs and politicians is quite normal, therefore I think people find the silent approach of BC, Sky etc frustrating, then you have lawyers and DRs here who actually keep to their professional promise of confidentiality...in the UK unless there is compelling evidence people will exercise their right to silence and ride it out.

Rightly or wrongly that's how it is here.


I dont think so.

Millar not picked for teamsky because of his doping past.

Linford Christie for a long time an outcast from UK sport or TV appearances.

Radcliffe holding a sign up saying EPO Cheates Out is playing to her UK fans.

This idea that UK doesn't get the doping thing. Sorry if this was true then why are the Government having inquiries in Coe & Braislford?
User avatar Benotti69
Veteran
 
Posts: 18,766
Joined: 26 May 2010 09:09

Re: Re:

12 Jan 2017 13:16

Benotti69 wrote:
deviant wrote:A lot of the problem here is that some posters don't get the British psyche....whereas continental Europe has been cycling mad for decades it's only a recent thing in the UK....there are also our PED laws which are virtually non existent so unless a British athlete tests positive most people really couldn't care less.
Most people I know involved in sport in the UK (at an amateur level) think the French are barmy for throwing people in jail for using PEDs, maybe it's a cultural thing but most Brits take the attitude of "it's just sport" and get on with their lives.

Sport in the UK (except maybe football where they are mostly all multi millionaires and held up as role models) is seen as a pleasant pastime and not a lot else which is why people involved in this 'scandal' aren't afraid of jail time, court appearances or being asked to answer some questions from a load of clueless MPs.

Racial/cultural stereotype coming up but there's also the fact that with Festina, Puerto etc these scandals hit countries where gossip and leaked info to the press from the police, lawyers, DRs and politicians is quite normal, therefore I think people find the silent approach of BC, Sky etc frustrating, then you have lawyers and DRs here who actually keep to their professional promise of confidentiality...in the UK unless there is compelling evidence people will exercise their right to silence and ride it out.

Rightly or wrongly that's how it is here.


I dont think so.

Millar not picked for teamsky because of his doping past.

Linford Christie for a long time an outcast from UK sport or TV appearances.

Radcliffe holding a sign up saying EPO Cheates Out is playing to her UK fans.

This idea that UK doesn't get the doping thing. Sorry if this was true then why are the Government having inquiries in Coe & Braislford?


Because they're odious cees and the press just wants to kick them, and because politicians want to get themselves some publicity (next statements about bears and woods).
wansteadimp
Junior Member
 
Posts: 228
Joined: 20 Mar 2013 12:16

Re:

12 Jan 2017 14:32

deviant wrote:As a Brit I'm confused by the constant reference by posters on here to Sky/BC's alleged fraudulent use of government money....this isn't U.S. Postal where a government run institution was funding a cycling team (and subsequently doping).
The Sky team doesn't take a penny from the UK government, it's a Murdoch enterprise and Manchester/BC is lottery funded, I don't play the lottery so I don't feel defrauded, it's not compulsory to buy a ticket!
Buy a ticket and help put some money into most Olympic sports or don't, choice is the punters...i don't think some on here get that.

All talk of jail time, the government trying to recoup funds etc is fantasy by posters on here who don't understand the system of sport funding in the UK, the government actually contributes very little and most goes to schools not professional setups.
That is why little will come of this, sorry to burst some bubbles.


You are absolutely right - Funniest thing is a few who were critical of the Bahrain Government with their dubious human rights issue ( which is an issue in every country to varying degrees ) funding a WT Team couldn't or wouldn't accept that US Postal was funded by the Government - Even after it was pointed out the USA Government was suing Lance Armstrong - At times there is fantasy on these forums.
yaco
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,727
Joined: 20 Jun 2015 17:57

Re: Re:

12 Jan 2017 14:38

gillan1969 wrote:
yaco wrote:I am convinced some in this forum don't understand process - Kenworthy the Head of UKAD should not be seen or heard - His agency has the job to run a professional investigation, to try to find evidence as to what is contained in the mystery package, and if necessarys charge Wiggins and/or others with an Anti-Doping Violation - Kenworthy has no role making press statements and allegations in the press - One of the central tenets of NADOC's is confidentiality and privacy - I am surprised Kenworthy still has a job.


as I understand it he is close to leaving...as I also understand it he is not known for such breaches of protocol

You can only therefore, imagine how annoyed he is at DB.

DB may have pulled the wool over the faithful's eyes, he is now finding he has a slightly tougher job with a slightly more skeptical audience


Irrelevant - UKAD's role is to investigate the 'mystery package' and prosecute if necessary - Anti-Doping is supposed to be private and confidential until a decision is made - It's strange that learned voices in this forum have little or no understanding of ethics.

The UK Government like all Governments have Senate Committees that grill Heads of Government Department usually three or four times a year - This is healthy democracy.
yaco
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,727
Joined: 20 Jun 2015 17:57

Re: Re:

12 Jan 2017 14:41

gillan1969 wrote:
deviant wrote:Nope again, BC is funded by annual subs paid by amateurs like me, it gets us insurance, race entries, UCI points etc, it obviously also pays some salaries of those who administrate this organization.
If you think UK tax payer has anything to do with funding BC you're delusional....as I wrote earlier (and will repeat for the hard of thinking), you can if you choose to buy a national lottery ticket and fund sport that way but nobody is forced to do this and there's no guarantee which sport your money will go to, it could be BC or it could be UK track and field....the only involvement the government has is some influence on deciding who are the worthy causes (the gym in my village for example was built using lottery money, not tax payers money, not local council money, not regional government money but lottery money that you have a choice about)
If amateurs like me stopped paying out our annual subs to BC it would likely implode, Sky might go on as that's Murdoch's money and a different story.

Tell me Hog, did Cope (as a tax payer funded coach according to you) get a good government pension and superannuation payout when he left that job?....of course he didn't because he wasn't being paid via the UK tax system and wasn't a government employee...like everyone else at Manchester he's reliant on annual membership fees and lottery funding....this is basic stuff....plus some sponsorship obviously although this can vary from individual to individual.

The UK government doesn't have a good record on sports funding, it's pretty much non existent unlike the old East German state run sports academies, what little money the UK government does put into sport goes pretty much to grass roots stuff not mega million projects like team Sky.
The link between BC and Sky has always been there, at the start of Sky Brailsford said openly he would use methods that had worked on the track for BC and try to transfer them to Sky....this is common knowledge and still doesn't involve the use of tax payers money...the money is from British Cycling's burgeoning membership numbers, Lottery funding and Murdoch's vanity in funding Sky.

It may irk some posters that the money seems to flow between organisations but when you have someone like Geraint Thomas or Brad alternating between the track and team Sky you're going to get some crossover of money.
Thankfully sanity prevails in the UK and unlike France where sports doping is actually illegal I can go online now and order peptides, GH, EPO, steroids etc and nothing will happen to me (provided I didn't import, the meds have to come from inside the UK)....the only person breaking any laws may be the supplier unless they are a registered prescriber in which case no problem...the reason?...these PEDs have legitimate medical uses....we're not talking MDMA here.
It's the same with Brads TUE, it may be crap but it's legal crap so deal with it.

Anyway, this is great entertainment so please continue.


yup, so legal is it they can't admit to it until they are brought before a committee.....

let's face facts...we're in LA saddle cream territory here...the story seems benign...but we all know that saddle cream and asthma treatments don't turn you into a GT winner....

behind the froth of this ridiculous story lies a far more serious story for Wiggins...he caned it and got out when he could....he thought, we thought, he had got away with it...

However...........angry bears and the subsequent lies will now slowly and painfully uncover the truth

5 mins could have sorted out all this 'legal' stuff....and yet...here we are

so, as you say...it's great entertainment...long may it continue ;)


So you expect a NADO to start and finalise an investigation into a possible anti-doping violation in 5 minutes - Please ! Let the investigation take its course.
yaco
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,727
Joined: 20 Jun 2015 17:57

Re: Re:

12 Jan 2017 14:47

yaco wrote:
gillan1969 wrote:
yaco wrote:I am convinced some in this forum don't understand process - Kenworthy the Head of UKAD should not be seen or heard - His agency has the job to run a professional investigation, to try to find evidence as to what is contained in the mystery package, and if necessarys charge Wiggins and/or others with an Anti-Doping Violation - Kenworthy has no role making press statements and allegations in the press - One of the central tenets of NADOC's is confidentiality and privacy - I am surprised Kenworthy still has a job.


as I understand it he is close to leaving...as I also understand it he is not known for such breaches of protocol

You can only therefore, imagine how annoyed he is at DB.

DB may have pulled the wool over the faithful's eyes, he is now finding he has a slightly tougher job with a slightly more skeptical audience


Irrelevant - UKAD's role is to investigate the 'mystery package' and prosecute if necessary - Anti-Doping is supposed to be private and confidential until a decision is made - It's strange that learned voices in this forum have little or no understanding of ethics.

The UK Government like all Governments have Senate Committees that grill Heads of Government Department usually three or four times a year - This is healthy democracy.



There is a good understanding of ethics. What you don't understand is your governance. Prosecute belongs to criminal law, not anti-doping infractions. Terminology is important along with the supposed "confidentially" clause. Anti-doping chief are at liberty to comment on a public parliamentary committee hearing as had occurred. It has nothing to do with the Investgation mearly that they cannot get sufficient evidence from those whom they are investigating.
User avatar thehog
Veteran
 
Posts: 20,106
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 20:00

PreviousNext

Return to The Clinic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Dr.Guess, Yahoo [Bot] and 21 guests

Back to top