Dear SDB
No wrong-doing
=\=
the high moral ground
you once pouted.
Moderators: Eshnar, King Boonen, Red Rick, Pricey_sky
Wiggo's Package wrote:53*11 wrote:Wiggo's Package wrote:Brailsfraud interviewed just now on, ahem, Sky Sports News:
"What we're talking about is how many times he used his puffer. You're allowed to use it 16 times in 24 hours. The question is did he use it more. The rules aren't about the levels in the urine as has been widely reported. The rules are about how many times you use the puffer. You can't falsely accuse someone of wrong doing. That's the worst case scenario if someone has done nothing wrong. That's the whole basis of our society"
lolol, so brailsfraud doe snot consider the salbutamol urine levels (at twice the limit) to be a problem, thats an in interesting defence. if he was right of course CF could rock up to the uci lab, do his test, take 16 puffs on his iunhaler and then test at 2000ng; except they cant prove this because it is not possible. the '' The question is did he use it more.'' line is interesting , are they going to claim that CF himself decided to use ~100 puffs to reach 2000ng? in any case he still gets a ban as he exceeded the urine concentration allowed, twice over.
It's a remarkable statement in many ways. Just playing to the fanboys on the in-house TV channel. But remarkable all the same
The bit where he says the rules aren't about the levels in the urine is an interesting spin. Total BS of course. Takes some front to put that idea out there though
The suggestion that Froome being found guilty would be an affront to society really takes the BS biscuit. Is he taking a high moral line? Sorry Dave, that ship sailed a while ago, mate!
ontheroad wrote:Just listened to him talking about Froome and Lappartient. Could any man be any more smug, arrogant and condesending. Power, fame and money corrupts and DB obviously believes that he is infallible. Maybe it's because the heat has been turned away from him slightly and onto Froome himself. Every time I see the title of this thread popping up I have to smile. Cycling genius? You're having a laugh.
TourOfSardinia wrote:What's the spin on this?
Up to this point Brailsford has been paid as consultant to parent company not an employee of Team Sky
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/othersports/article-5424283/Sir-Dave-Brailsford-closes-consultancy-business.html
Wiggo's Package wrote:
Presumably Brailsfraud's company was based off-shore so he could dodge the inconvenient business of paying income tax
Another example of Braislfraud and Team Sky setting an exemplary ethical example![]()
Not clear why the arrangement has now changed and he's had to become a humble employee. Maybe the tax dodge was challenged by HMRC
Parker wrote:Wiggo's Package wrote:
Presumably Brailsfraud's company was based off-shore so he could dodge the inconvenient business of paying income tax
Another example of Braislfraud and Team Sky setting an exemplary ethical example![]()
Not clear why the arrangement has now changed and he's had to become a humble employee. Maybe the tax dodge was challenged by HMRC
Have you had a look where the company is based or are you just guessing?
(Hint: An industrial estate in Cardiff isn't 'off-shore')
It was co-owned by his wife/partner. My guess is they're splitting up.
Users browsing this forum: meat puppet and 12 guests
Back to top