Log in:  

Register

The Cookson legacy

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, Pricey_sky, Tonton, King Boonen, Valv.Piti

Re: Re:

21 Sep 2017 08:41

Robert5091 wrote:study of 10 anonymous Norwegian semi-pro continental level cyclists
So this is based on anecdotes from 10 people who don't ride for WT squads?
User avatar fmk_RoI
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,589
Joined: 16 Sep 2010 07:31

Re: Re:

21 Sep 2017 08:43

thehog wrote:
Robert5091 wrote:http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/cookson-versus-lappartient-a-race-too-close-to-call/
Perhaps the most important piece of information is that the 15 European delegates have been granted the freedom to vote individually. This could be key to victory. In 2012 the European delegates voted as a block and backed Cookson, giving him a firm foundation for victory. This time Cyclingnews understands that it is Lappartient who has strong support in Europe. However, the news that delegates can vote individually could suggest that Cookson has retained more support in Europe than originally thought.


No UK delegates to vote but sounds like BC has got this - if it goes to 23-22 will someone demand a new vote though? Could be some fun and games.


Only one more sleep to go! :cool:

Europe I believe is not voting as a block to avoid any issue of “conflict”, if LLappartient wins by one vote, Cookson will protest and the fact that Europe had to the freedom to vote individually will null that protest.
Given it's a secret ballot, just how to you imagine such an appeal actually working in the real world?
User avatar fmk_RoI
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,589
Joined: 16 Sep 2010 07:31

Re: Re:

21 Sep 2017 09:08

fmk_RoI wrote:
Robert5091 wrote:study of 10 anonymous Norwegian semi-pro continental level cyclists
So this is based on anecdotes from 10 people who don't ride for WT squads?


Described as young promising Norwegian semi-pro Continental level. As all are just called as cyclist 1, cyclist 2, etc it's hard to know exactly but a bit of research should narrow it down.
"Are you going to believe me or what you see with your own eyes?"

“It doesn’t matter what I do. People need to hear what I have to say. There’s no one else who can say what I can say. It doesn’t matter what I live.”
User avatar Robert5091
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,059
Joined: 29 Mar 2016 08:56
Location: stockholm, sweden

21 Sep 2017 09:11

The original article seems to have gone behind a paywall again, but it explains how riders can continue with broken bones etc when they're riding full of morphine like substances.
"Are you going to believe me or what you see with your own eyes?"

“It doesn’t matter what I do. People need to hear what I have to say. There’s no one else who can say what I can say. It doesn’t matter what I live.”
User avatar Robert5091
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,059
Joined: 29 Mar 2016 08:56
Location: stockholm, sweden

21 Sep 2017 09:21

BC - "1 million extra CHF to cycling federations" - vote for me!
"Are you going to believe me or what you see with your own eyes?"

“It doesn’t matter what I do. People need to hear what I have to say. There’s no one else who can say what I can say. It doesn’t matter what I live.”
User avatar Robert5091
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,059
Joined: 29 Mar 2016 08:56
Location: stockholm, sweden

21 Sep 2017 10:21

Bye bye BC!
"Are you going to believe me or what you see with your own eyes?"

“It doesn’t matter what I do. People need to hear what I have to say. There’s no one else who can say what I can say. It doesn’t matter what I live.”
User avatar Robert5091
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,059
Joined: 29 Mar 2016 08:56
Location: stockholm, sweden

Re:

21 Sep 2017 12:22

Robert5091 wrote:Norway's Public TV/Radio/news NRK have also a report on Malin Hansen Skjelstad study
https://www.nrk.no/telemark/forsket-pa-doping-blant-unge-syklister-1.13695102

Her Masters study is "Cyclists in the grey zone" and is not about illegal doping but the use of currently legal substances and TUE's. All 10 cyclists said they were against doping, but were using stuff in the "grey zone."


No surprises as this because athletes will use any aid to assist performance - It lead's to a philosophical question as to whether the grey zone is doping - And I separate TUE's from this question.
yaco
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,030
Joined: 20 Jun 2015 17:57

Re:

21 Sep 2017 12:38

Robert5091 wrote:Bye bye BC!



Landslide!!!!! No more selfies! :cool:
User avatar thehog
Veteran
 
Posts: 21,101
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 20:00

21 Sep 2017 13:20

Get those MPCC rules in there! Bye bye Tramadol etc
"Are you going to believe me or what you see with your own eyes?"

“It doesn’t matter what I do. People need to hear what I have to say. There’s no one else who can say what I can say. It doesn’t matter what I live.”
User avatar Robert5091
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,059
Joined: 29 Mar 2016 08:56
Location: stockholm, sweden

Re:

21 Sep 2017 16:01

Robert5091 wrote:Get those MPCC rules in there! Bye bye Tramadol etc


Yes. Should have happened some time ago. Got to get a lot tougher on the OOC use of 'medicines' too.
Electress
Member
 
Posts: 1,217
Joined: 25 Aug 2014 23:40
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Re:

25 Sep 2017 13:45

Electress wrote:
Robert5091 wrote:Get those MPCC rules in there! Bye bye Tramadol etc


Yes. Should have happened some time ago. Got to get a lot tougher on the OOC use of 'medicines' too.


You get the feeling Lappartient was asked to run by teams and the federations. He appeared to be fully aware of his strong position along with the Stade 2 documentary suddenly appear 3 weeks before the election. I’d say many were concerned with the lack of Cookson’s response to the motor fraud.
User avatar thehog
Veteran
 
Posts: 21,101
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 20:00

Re: Re:

25 Sep 2017 13:51

thehog wrote:You get the feeling Lappartient was asked to run by teams and the federations.
Feds maybe, but not the teams, not the way it looked when you consider JV's exchange with him in June. French teams, mais oui, Madiot certainly supported him. But the rest? Let's see how easily they bow to things like no race radios...
User avatar fmk_RoI
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,589
Joined: 16 Sep 2010 07:31

Re: Re:

25 Sep 2017 14:20

fmk_RoI wrote:
thehog wrote:You get the feeling Lappartient was asked to run by teams and the federations.
Feds maybe, but not the teams, not the way it looked when you consider JV's exchange with him in June. French teams, mais oui, Madiot certainly supported him. But the rest? Let's see how easily they bow to things like no race radios...


As a rule of thumb, never use JV as a representation of anything... you know much better than that.
User avatar thehog
Veteran
 
Posts: 21,101
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 20:00


Re: The Cookson legacy

12 Jan 2018 18:16




DCMS had a pretty wide remit of issues to be investigated. Clearly, Bradley Jiffins was just one aspect.

I think we've seen all we are going to see. There will be no further revelations. They will just highlight the poor structural governance and probably mention that Sky's behaviour before and after the Jiffy does not look like the actions of an ethical team. Any allusion to cheating will be couched in vague terms.

In other words, Sky have got away with it.
(Warning: Posts may contain traces of irony)
User avatar macbindle
Member
 
Posts: 845
Joined: 22 Dec 2017 16:46

Re: The Cookson legacy

12 Jan 2018 18:32

macbindle wrote:



DCMS had a pretty wide remit of issues to be investigated. Clearly, Bradley Jiffins was just one aspect.

I think we've seen all we are going to see. There will be no further revelations. They will just highlight the poor structural governance and probably mention that Sky's behaviour before and after the Jiffy does not look like the actions of an ethical team. Any allusion to cheating will be couched in vague terms.

In other words, Sky have got away with it.

Great coining MacB!: Bradley Jiffins
:lol:
User avatar TourOfSardinia
Veteran
 
Posts: 7,341
Joined: 16 Feb 2010 14:25
Location: Sardinia

Re: The Cookson legacy

15 Jan 2018 02:58

macbindle wrote:



DCMS had a pretty wide remit of issues to be investigated. Clearly, Bradley Jiffins was just one aspect.

I think we've seen all we are going to see. There will be no further revelations. They will just highlight the poor structural governance and probably mention that Sky's behaviour before and after the Jiffy does not look like the actions of an ethical team. Any allusion to cheating will be couched in vague terms.

In other words, Sky have got away with it.



True but hilarious to think Cookson has been head of BC, help set up Team Sky and the UCI President and presided all over these collective shambles and then asks for Sky’s reputation to be ‘reinstated’. What a total loon.
User avatar thehog
Veteran
 
Posts: 21,101
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 20:00

Re: The Cookson legacy

15 Jan 2018 08:53

thehog wrote:
macbindle wrote:



DCMS had a pretty wide remit of issues to be investigated. Clearly, Bradley Jiffins was just one aspect.

I think we've seen all we are going to see. There will be no further revelations. They will just highlight the poor structural governance and probably mention that Sky's behaviour before and after the Jiffy does not look like the actions of an ethical team. Any allusion to cheating will be couched in vague terms.

In other words, Sky have got away with it.



True but hilarious to think Cookson has been head of BC, help set up Team Sky and the UCI President and presided all over these collective shambles and then asks for Sky’s reputation to be ‘reinstated’. What a total loon.


I've several thoughts about Cookson. Firstly, that I am amazed he could ever get to be head of BC, let alone head of UCI. How the hell did he manage it?

It's worrying on a couple of levels in so far as it reveals the paucity of talent in BC, in that he was the best they could do. In a sense that should inform the reasons behind the shambles that we watched unfold with the whole BC/Sky jiffy stuff. But I also wonder the motivations behind those who voted him in to the stewardship of the UCI. They knew they weren't voting in dynamism and drive. Maybe they wanted somebody too inept to be able to rock the boat. Of course, on a large salary, he wasn't going to say no.

I'm also minded of something a friend, who does logistics for a pro team, told me about just how difficult it is for an aspirationally clean team to spot and stop a rogue rider who covertly dopes.

I'm not referring to Sky here (I don't think they are aspirationally clean), but more the larger issue of whether an utterly inept BC could even have the wherewithal to counter a clever and underhand manager like Brailsford.

I think in some respects this has been reflected in the UKAD letter you posted here, as well as the DCMS findings.
(Warning: Posts may contain traces of irony)
User avatar macbindle
Member
 
Posts: 845
Joined: 22 Dec 2017 16:46

Re: The Cookson legacy

15 Jan 2018 15:03

macbindle wrote:I've several thoughts about Cookson. Firstly, that I am amazed he could ever get to be head of BC, let alone head of UCI. How the hell did he manage it?

It's worrying on a couple of levels in so far as it reveals the paucity of talent in BC, in that he was the best they could do.
It's a pretty well known story, at this stage. The Federation was in crisis, Lottery funding coming on tap, Manchester looking like a white elephant, a mutiny against the newly elected Tony Doyle, allegations of financial impropriety getting tossed left right and centre, questions in the House, Verbruggen expressing his concern on the BBC. In the midst of this, Cookson was a relative unknown and so untainted and so a good thing. A safe pair of hands while others managed the money side of things and others managed the performance side of things. Not for nothing was he referred to as The Wallpaper.
macbindle wrote:But I also wonder the motivations behind those who voted him in to the stewardship of the UCI. They knew they weren't voting in dynamism and drive. Maybe they wanted somebody too inept to be able to rock the boat.
Save the conspiracy theories, people hereabouts remember this, it's recent history. He wasn't Pat McQuaid. Again, it's the same as the BC story: a safe pair of hands in a crisis.
User avatar fmk_RoI
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,589
Joined: 16 Sep 2010 07:31

Re: The Cookson legacy

15 Jan 2018 15:34

macbindle wrote:
thehog wrote:
macbindle wrote:



DCMS had a pretty wide remit of issues to be investigated. Clearly, Bradley Jiffins was just one aspect.

I think we've seen all we are going to see. There will be no further revelations. They will just highlight the poor structural governance and probably mention that Sky's behaviour before and after the Jiffy does not look like the actions of an ethical team. Any allusion to cheating will be couched in vague terms.

In other words, Sky have got away with it.



True but hilarious to think Cookson has been head of BC, help set up Team Sky and the UCI President and presided all over these collective shambles and then asks for Sky’s reputation to be ‘reinstated’. What a total loon.


I've several thoughts about Cookson. Firstly, that I am amazed he could ever get to be head of BC, let alone head of UCI. How the hell did he manage it?

It's worrying on a couple of levels in so far as it reveals the paucity of talent in BC, in that he was the best they could do. In a sense that should inform the reasons behind the shambles that we watched unfold with the whole BC/Sky jiffy stuff. But I also wonder the motivations behind those who voted him in to the stewardship of the UCI. They knew they weren't voting in dynamism and drive. Maybe they wanted somebody too inept to be able to rock the boat. Of course, on a large salary, he wasn't going to say no.

I'm also minded of something a friend, who does logistics for a pro team, told me about just how difficult it is for an aspirationally clean team to spot and stop a rogue rider who covertly dopes.

I'm not referring to Sky here (I don't think they are aspirationally clean), but more the larger issue of whether an utterly inept BC could even have the wherewithal to counter a clever and underhand manager like Brailsford.

I think in some respects this has been reflected in the UKAD letter you posted here, as well as the DCMS findings.


Bobbins who used to post here with insider information suggested that Cookson was well liked because he was so clueless. Brailsford and co. could run the sham medical department, bully and demonise riders whilst Cookson went off to the management meetings to report “everything was on track and clean Cycling was being obeyed”. Brailsford’s masterstroke was getting Cookson’s son into Team Sky to do not much else this ride about in Spain with the riders and drink coffee. It was the same at the UCI, Gibbs and Barfield ran the show, taking orders from Brailsford, whilst Cookson went off to management meetings thinking he was doing something.

As this is the Cookosn legacy thread, Cookson will be remembered as nothing short of an embarrassment to the sport. To think after the Armstrong affair the sport actually went backwards.
User avatar thehog
Veteran
 
Posts: 21,101
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 20:00

PreviousNext

Return to The Clinic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ariane and 16 guests

Back to top