Log in:  

Register

British Sporting Administrators - what's the deal?

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

British Sporting Administrators - what's the deal?

31 Jan 2017 19:33

So, what's the deal? From Cookson, to Coe to Reedie, all finished by U.K. Sport to become chocolate teapots and in some cases cover up corruption.

What's the deal?
User avatar thehog
Veteran
 
Posts: 20,106
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 20:00

31 Jan 2017 19:36

Coes right hand Nick Davies now being exposed as a fraud as we speak.

Good times over at Dan Roan' s who is mixing it up with Damian Collins both wondering why Davies is allowed by ethics committee to continue working in the sport.

Good times.
sniper
Veteran
 
Posts: 13,505
Joined: 15 Oct 2010 23:36

31 Jan 2017 20:15

Yall talking about the State Sponsored "Marginal Gains" programs?

Maybe they "knight" the entire group. They can all be called sir and sit around sipping tea while watching the TDF?
User avatar Semper Fidelis
Veteran
 
Posts: 8,100
Joined: 07 Dec 2010 15:53
Location: New Orleans

Re:

01 Feb 2017 14:05

Semper Fidelis wrote:Yall talking about the State Sponsored "Marginal Gains" programs?

Maybe they "knight" the entire group. They can all be called sir and sit around sipping tea while watching the TDF?



It certainly appears that way! Incompetence appears to be an attribute to be successful at the job.
User avatar thehog
Veteran
 
Posts: 20,106
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 20:00

01 Feb 2017 17:04

Incompetence implies by mistake, I don't think that is the case in any of this.
Vincenzo Nibali:
"I know how to ride a bike"

Reduce your carbon footprint, ride steel.
User avatar King Boonen
Moderator
 
Posts: 6,262
Joined: 25 Jul 2012 14:38

01 Feb 2017 18:06

It's all very incestuous - Beloff a jurist and CAS Arbitrator is on the IAAF Ethics Commission and is a good friend of Tony Blair.
yaco
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,727
Joined: 20 Jun 2015 17:57

Re:

01 Feb 2017 18:54

yaco wrote:It's all very incestuous - Beloff a jurist and CAS Arbitrator is on the IAAF Ethics Commission and is a good friend of Tony Blair.


I guess that's why we'll never see the full Reason Decision on the Lizzie Armitstead 3 missed tests?
User avatar thehog
Veteran
 
Posts: 20,106
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 20:00

02 Feb 2017 10:56

Dan Roan:
Upcoming report will raise questions
[f]or UK Sport, who say they are considering helping fund Cookson's forthcoming UCI re-election campaign this year [they gave him £78,000 to help him get elected in 2013], despite co-commissioning the investigation into the culture of an organisation that he headed up for 16 years. The wisdom of using National Lottery funds to help pay for the election campaigns of British sports administrators has already been questioned. Despite their crucial role in distributing the billions of pounds that have helped bring about Britain's remarkable rise as a sporting superpower in successive Olympic and Paralympic Games, UK Sport's 'no-compromise' approach is already under serious scrutiny after cutting off funding to sports like badminton, table-tennis and wheelchair rugby, whose appeals will be heard later this month.
http://www.bbc.com/sport/cycling/38833749
sniper
Veteran
 
Posts: 13,505
Joined: 15 Oct 2010 23:36

Re:

02 Feb 2017 12:20

sniper wrote:Dan Roan:
Upcoming report will raise questions
[f]or UK Sport, who say they are considering helping fund Cookson's forthcoming UCI re-election campaign this year [they gave him £78,000 to help him get elected in 2013], despite co-commissioning the investigation into the culture of an organisation that he headed up for 16 years. The wisdom of using National Lottery funds to help pay for the election campaigns of British sports administrators has already been questioned. Despite their crucial role in distributing the billions of pounds that have helped bring about Britain's remarkable rise as a sporting superpower in successive Olympic and Paralympic Games, UK Sport's 'no-compromise' approach is already under serious scrutiny after cutting off funding to sports like badminton, table-tennis and wheelchair rugby, whose appeals will be heard later this month.
http://www.bbc.com/sport/cycling/38833749



I won't be convinced until a REAL investigation takes place.
BullsFan22
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,794
Joined: 22 Jun 2010 21:19

02 Feb 2017 13:44

The Untouchables as they say, UCI based in Switzerland, IAAF based in Monaco.

I think its embedded into British culture nowadays that if you are (a) rich, (b) powerful or (c) influential then a different set of rules apply to you than everyone else.

I was quite sceptical about select committee's but I think as this has gone on Damian Collins has rapidly realised what a bunch of slippery characters he is dealing with and adjusted his approach accordingly.

Unfortunately the Select Committee is not a courtroom and my understanding is that you cannot be found in contempt for non appearance or perjure yourself for telling lies..........shame that is.
B_Ugli
Member
 
Posts: 400
Joined: 23 Feb 2011 13:41

Re:

02 Feb 2017 14:00

B_Ugli wrote:The Untouchables as they say, UCI based in Switzerland, IAAF based in Monaco.

I think its embedded into British culture nowadays that if you are (a) rich, (b) powerful or (c) influential then a different set of rules apply to you than everyone else.

I was quite sceptical about select committee's but I think as this has gone on Damian Collins has rapidly realised what a bunch of slippery characters he is dealing with and adjusted his approach accordingly.

Unfortunately the Select Committee is not a courtroom and my understanding is that you cannot be found in contempt for non appearance or perjure yourself for telling lies..........shame that is.


indeed...but after Brailsford's and Coe' performances...we now don't need the 'adverse analytical' findings to be able to smell the rotten fish...its odour wafts from every dissembling statement they make...and they are being forced into more and more of them....

good sport some would say :)
gillan1969
Member
 
Posts: 1,008
Joined: 12 Aug 2009 12:25

Re: Re:

02 Feb 2017 16:42

thehog wrote:
yaco wrote:It's all very incestuous - Beloff a jurist and CAS Arbitrator is on the IAAF Ethics Commission and is a good friend of Tony Blair.


I guess that's why we'll never see the full Reason Decision on the Lizzie Armitstead 3 missed tests?


To be fair UKAD is much better than other NDO's at publishing reasoned decisions than other NDO's - My problem with the Lizzie Armistead case was that you should have to challenge a missing test at the time, not when you have racked up 3 missing tests.
yaco
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,727
Joined: 20 Jun 2015 17:57

Re: Re:

03 Feb 2017 23:48

yaco wrote:
thehog wrote:
yaco wrote:It's all very incestuous - Beloff a jurist and CAS Arbitrator is on the IAAF Ethics Commission and is a good friend of Tony Blair.


I guess that's why we'll never see the full Reason Decision on the Lizzie Armitstead 3 missed tests?


To be fair UKAD is much better than other NDO's at publishing reasoned decisions than other NDO's - My problem with the Lizzie Armistead case was that you should have to challenge a missing test at the time, not when you have racked up 3 missing tests.


What difference would that make to you? You'd still claim that anybody missing a single test was doping and that being cleared is just a cover up.

You can miss 3 tests in a rolling 12 month period. So why bother challenging 1 test when you have no intention of missing another one and can always appeal if you hit 3 by accident.

The casual racism on the clinic is something to behold. If you were Yes voters using such language about the english you'd have had the daily mail at your door and JK Rowling setting 6 million cultists on you.
GreasyChain
New Member
 
Posts: 33
Joined: 17 Aug 2016 21:40

04 Feb 2017 02:53

i would think it was rather hard to miss three tests by accident. You would have to be an idiot.
User avatar veganrob
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,243
Joined: 29 Aug 2010 23:15
Location: The D

Re:

04 Feb 2017 14:55

veganrob wrote:i would think it was rather hard to miss three tests by accident. You would have to be an idiot.



Or a cheat?
User avatar thehog
Veteran
 
Posts: 20,106
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 20:00

Re: Re:

04 Feb 2017 15:23

GreasyChain wrote:
yaco wrote:
thehog wrote:
yaco wrote:It's all very incestuous - Beloff a jurist and CAS Arbitrator is on the IAAF Ethics Commission and is a good friend of Tony Blair.


I guess that's why we'll never see the full Reason Decision on the Lizzie Armitstead 3 missed tests?


To be fair UKAD is much better than other NDO's at publishing reasoned decisions than other NDO's - My problem with the Lizzie Armistead case was that you should have to challenge a missing test at the time, not when you have racked up 3 missing tests.


What difference would that make to you? You'd still claim that anybody missing a single test was doping and that being cleared is just a cover up.

You can miss 3 tests in a rolling 12 month period. So why bother challenging 1 test when you have no intention of missing another one and can always appeal if you hit 3 by accident.

The casual racism on the clinic is something to behold. If you were Yes voters using such language about the english you'd have had the daily mail at your door and JK Rowling setting 6 million cultists on you.


Way to put words into my mouth - I am using Lizzie Armistead as an example because it's a recent example - It makes perfect sense that you challenge the missing test at the time - Just recently the cricketer Andre Russell of the WI ( not English ) received a 12 month suspension for missing three tests in 12 months - Beloff QC who isa member of the IAAF Ethics was discussed because he is intimately involved in the Papa Diack/Coe case but mainly because I think its a conflict of interest to be on IAAF Ethics Board and at the same time a CAS Arbitrator - My posts have nothing to do with casual racism - Its a figment of your imagination.
yaco
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,727
Joined: 20 Jun 2015 17:57

Re: Re:

09 Feb 2017 03:46

B_Ugli wrote:The Untouchables as they say, UCI based in Switzerland, IAAF based in Monaco.

I think its embedded into British culture nowadays that if you are (a) rich, (b) powerful or (c) influential then a different set of rules apply to you than everyone else.

I was quite sceptical about select committee's but I think as this has gone on Damian Collins has rapidly realised what a bunch of slippery characters he is dealing with and adjusted his approach accordingly.

Unfortunately the Select Committee is not a courtroom and my understanding is that you cannot be found in contempt for non appearance or perjure yourself for telling lies..........shame that is.


Actually... (according to this https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/jul/22/phone-hacking-lying-to-select-committee)

Imprisonment or a substantial fine could theoretically be imposed as a punishment by parliament on anyone who told lies in evidence to a select committee. Misleading MPs is deemed to amount to a "contempt of the house" in the same way that refusing to answer a summons to appear before a committee is reported to the Commons. The offender would be summoned to the bar of the house.


It turns out no-one's been imprisoned since the 19th century but it appears still to be possible.
User avatar TMP402
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,972
Joined: 13 Mar 2015 12:36

Re: Re:

09 Feb 2017 09:47

TMP402 wrote:
B_Ugli wrote:The Untouchables as they say, UCI based in Switzerland, IAAF based in Monaco.

I think its embedded into British culture nowadays that if you are (a) rich, (b) powerful or (c) influential then a different set of rules apply to you than everyone else.

I was quite sceptical about select committee's but I think as this has gone on Damian Collins has rapidly realised what a bunch of slippery characters he is dealing with and adjusted his approach accordingly.

Unfortunately the Select Committee is not a courtroom and my understanding is that you cannot be found in contempt for non appearance or perjure yourself for telling lies..........shame that is.


Actually... (according to this https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/jul/22/phone-hacking-lying-to-select-committee)

Imprisonment or a substantial fine could theoretically be imposed as a punishment by parliament on anyone who told lies in evidence to a select committee. Misleading MPs is deemed to amount to a "contempt of the house" in the same way that refusing to answer a summons to appear before a committee is reported to the Commons. The offender would be summoned to the bar of the house.


It turns out no-one's been imprisoned since the 19th century but it appears still to be possible.


Yeah, but it's a lot like the death penalty for treason until that was removed and we joined the ECHR and then acceded to the 13th Protocol (Brexit will make historians of us all!). It would never actually happen.
Vincenzo Nibali:
"I know how to ride a bike"

Reduce your carbon footprint, ride steel.
User avatar King Boonen
Moderator
 
Posts: 6,262
Joined: 25 Jul 2012 14:38

09 Feb 2017 14:38

My understanding is the Select Committee is still a Committee - A poster on another forum stated the Committee has turned into an Enquiry ? Is this true ?
yaco
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,727
Joined: 20 Jun 2015 17:57

Re:

09 Feb 2017 15:07

yaco wrote:My understanding is the Select Committee is still a Committee - A poster on another forum stated the Committee has turned into an Enquiry ? Is this true ?


An inquiry is what the select committee carries out.
Vincenzo Nibali:
"I know how to ride a bike"

Reduce your carbon footprint, ride steel.
User avatar King Boonen
Moderator
 
Posts: 6,262
Joined: 25 Jul 2012 14:38

Next

Return to The Clinic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Dr.Guess, Norks74 and 19 guests

Back to top