British Doctor claims he doped 150 sports stars including Br

[Robert21]

Re: Re:

The relationship of money and power is not exotic and does not involve Illuminati in velvet robes sacrificing babies on an altar in Davos while pledging allegiance to the New World Order in Latin; it is banal, and is one of the fundamentals of our modern 'late' capitalism. Globalisation is not a mysterious process controlled by conspiratorial forces, it's a natural development of the victory of free-market ideology, and all the conspiracy nuts are profoundly implicated in it as members of a consumerist society. Either become an actual Marxist or accept your personal responsibility in the global capitalist system as opposed to shoving all the blame onto shadowy plotters, dammit!

Good stuff. Doubtless you are already on MI5's watch list.

One of these days, thought Winston with sudden deep conviction, Syme will be vaporized. He is too intelligent. He sees too clearly and speaks too plainly. The Party does not like such people. One day he will disappear. It is written in his face.

 

[sniper]

Re:

still awaiting some detail.......but notice members leap to accept info that fits

their agenda /while overlooking major flaws in the story

shame! usual members continue to make stuff up/ use this thread to

knock others

Mark L

The story thus far is that UKAD look awfully compromised, if not corrupt. The only flaws in that story are UKAD's and Sapstead's.
Good luck accusing Lord Moynihan of having an agenda.

 

[kwikki]

It is not yet clear what is going on with this story in terms of the political intervention. The intervention is about UKAD, not about Boner. I don't personally view UKAD as having the ability to maintain any sort of credible position now, but what I don't yet know is whether the governmental intervention is just a recognition of this and a throwing of Sapstead under the bus to 'end the issue', or whether the forces for change that exist in the UK (eg. Moynihan) are having an influence on a government that has an ideological hatred of actually doing anything to govern (beyond shoring up its benefactors and old boy cronies)

 

[sniper]

Re:

... boner's actvities ...

stop deflecting by making this about his last name

 

[kwikki]

I've had a bit of a dig concerning the original whistle-blower, Dan Stevens.

Turns out he was a 3rd Cat near-middle aged weekend warrior

So what have we got here? We've got a wealthy businessman trying to dope to win sh1tty amateur 3rd Cat races. Rumour is he was shopped by somebody and asked to give a sample....he refused, and was banned. He tried to shop Boner to get a reduced ban. UKAD gave him a 3 month reduction. So now this guy suddenly discovers morality and spends £60k of his own money trying to expose UKAD for not taking his self-serving information and running with it. Why would this guy do that?

So does Boner actually have a portfolio of top sports clients or is he trying to appeal to vain wealthy 3rd Cat losers who are playing a game of fantasy?

 

[sniper]

Re:

I've had a bit of a dig concerning the original whistle-blower, Dan Stevens.

Turns out he was a 3rd Cat near-middle aged weekend warrior

So what have we got here? We've got a wealthy businessman trying to dope to win sh1tty amateur 3rd Cat races. Rumour is he was shopped by somebody and asked to give a sample....he refused, and was banned. He tried to shop Boner to get a reduced ban. UKAD gave him a 3 month reduction. So now this guy suddenly discovers morality and spends £60k of his own money trying to expose UKAD for not taking his self-serving information and running with it. Why would this guy do that?

well done on the digging.
but frankly: who cares?
Why did Manzano blow the whistle, why did Floyd, why did Rasmussen, why did Jaksche, etc.
There's always an element of self-service. Doesn't make what they say any more or less true.

 

[kwikki]

Oh I believe Steven's claims, just as I believe the hidden camera footage of Boner, and yes, you are quite correct that Steven's motivation does not necessarily detract from the truth of his claims.

Why does it matter? It doesn't matter in so far as Boner's guilt is concerned, but I think whatever the back story is behind Steven's relationship with UKAD it could be interesting. Possible blackmail attempt? Who knows.

I suspect that this story is symptomatic of the drugs problem in amateur sport, and Boner is playing his part. UKAD's part remains to be revealed. They seem to have gone after a 3rd Cat amateur acting on a tip-off....but Stevens can only be considered as a pretty insignificant catch in terms of UKAD'S remit. UKAD clearly didn't want to spend time and money pursuing Boner, but of course the big question is why.

 

[Maxiton]

Re:

Max, think I edited some correction, still does not read well, alas, grammar was never my forte but wildean drollery was my schwing[phonetics]

No worries, blackcat, it wasn't you. Somebody screwed up the quoting up thread, and then it got repeated that way by a few others. You were actually responding, I think, to words I wrote, even though they had someone else's name on them. Anyway, no big deal.

 

[Maxiton]

Re: Re:

When you consider the money and exertion expended by countries on international sport it becomes apparent that success in sport is regarded by national leaders as significant influence. In modern times this goes all the way back to the 1936 Berlin Olympics, at least. Why do they attach so much importance to it? I really don't know.

Simple. 'Bread and circuses'.

A rather good article on this topic here:

The ‘Team G-B’ chant will make the faces of the world frown in unison - as the hateful ‘U-S-A’ rallying call has for years. You can pump it up as a proud resurgence of national identity or dismiss it as faux militarism or plastic fascism, but it is a real phenomenon and woe betide those involved when the medal count drops. The powers that be much prefer a populace that is wrapped in the flag rather than burning it. If it takes Mo Farah Saturday nights to achieve this, then so be it.

http://sabotagetimes.com/football/team-gb-are-the-new-east-germany

As a US citizen, I'm quite familiar with Panem et Circenses from earlier in my life. (More recently we seem to have given up on the panem part.) What we were discussing, however, is something separate from that. The two phenomena may have sport in common, but that is all. Basically I think we were talking about the projection of power, and how that finds its expression in international sport.

I once read an interesting interview with Mick Jagger, of all people, in Rolling Stone magazine. It was sometime in the 1970s. The interviewer asked him about his experience of the USA. How is it different, she wanted to know, from the UK? The biggest difference, he said, is the overt patriotism in the US - we don't have that in the UK. We have people who are proud of the UK, but they don't show it in the same way. We don't have the flag waving, the Union Jack flying from automobile aerials, the way you see the flag being used in the US. That kind of patriotism, for God, Queen, and country, died in the UK with World War I, because of what happened then, and I doubt, he said, it will ever come back.

When I saw all the flag waving in the UK during the London Olympics, on TV and the internet, I thought about this interview and wondered if Jagger wasn't being proven wrong. I still don't really know.

 

[thehog]

Re: tips

... boner's actvities ...

stop deflecting by making this about his last name

cheers!...as if?....i need tips....like a waitress......

but original point remains....why? are members jumping to conclusions re

UKAD complicity where necessary info appears to be lacking

Mark L

You mean the Doctor claimed he treated British Tour de France riders? Why would it be jumping to a conclusion that it might be Thomas Geriant?

Makes logical sense based on the information we have from the Sunday Times.

As for UKAD, they refused to follow up on the evidence supplied by the athlete. They did nothing.

It's very straightforward.

 

[thehog]

Re:

first....authenticate....how simple is that concept......................................

Mark L

That's what the Sunday Times did, authencate the story from the whistleblower by recording the doctor on tape.

It's very simple.

Or do you know have a problem with the Sunday Times? ie it's stories on "Why I believe in Chris Froome" are good? But this story not?

 

[buckle]

Re: Re:

When you consider the money and exertion expended by countries on international sport it becomes apparent that success in sport is regarded by national leaders as significant influence. In modern times this goes all the way back to the 1936 Berlin Olympics, at least. Why do they attach so much importance to it? I really don't know.

Simple. 'Bread and circuses'.

A rather good article on this topic here:

The ‘Team G-B’ chant will make the faces of the world frown in unison - as the hateful ‘U-S-A’ rallying call has for years. You can pump it up as a proud resurgence of national identity or dismiss it as faux militarism or plastic fascism, but it is a real phenomenon and woe betide those involved when the medal count drops. The powers that be much prefer a populace that is wrapped in the flag rather than burning it. If it takes Mo Farah Saturday nights to achieve this, then so be it.

http://sabotagetimes.com/football/team-gb-are-the-new-east-germany

As a US citizen, I'm quite familiar with Panem et Circenses from earlier in my life. (More recently we seem to have given up on the panem part.) What we were discussing, however, is something separate from that. The two phenomena may have sport in common, but that is all. Basically I think we were talking about the projection of power, and how that finds its expression in international sport.

I once read an interesting interview with Mick Jagger, of all people, in Rolling Stone magazine. It was sometime in the 1970s. The interviewer asked him about his experience of the USA. How is it different, she wanted to know, from the UK? The biggest difference, he said, is the overt patriotism in the US - we don't have that in the UK. We have people who are proud of the UK, but they don't show it in the same way. We don't have the flag waving, the Union Jack flying from automobile aerials, the way you see the flag being used in the US. That kind of patriotism, for God, Queen, and country, died in the UK with World War I, because of what happened then, and I doubt, he said, it will ever come back.

When I saw all the flag waving in the UK during the London Olympics, on TV and the internet, I thought about this interview and wondered if Jagger wasn't being proven wrong. I still don't really know.

The British/English (they can't make up their minds what they are?) do not love their own country but simply hate everywhere else. They detest Europeans and want to leave the EU for that reason. The whole Wiggins phenomenon was about sticking it to the French for whom they retain a peculiar animus.

 

[Robert21]

Re: Re:

I once read an interesting interview with Mick Jagger, of all people, in Rolling Stone magazine. It was sometime in the 1970s. The interviewer asked him about his experience of the USA. How is it different, she wanted to know, from the UK? The biggest difference, he said, is the overt patriotism in the US - we don't have that in the UK. We have people who are proud of the UK, but they don't show it in the same way. We don't have the flag waving, the Union Jack flying from automobile aerials, the way you see the flag being used in the US. That kind of patriotism, for God, Queen, and country, died in the UK with World War I, because of what happened then, and I doubt, he said, it will ever come back.

When I saw all the flag waving in the UK during the London Olympics, on TV and the internet, I thought about this interview and wondered if Jagger wasn't being proven wrong. I still don't really know.

It has been on it's way back for decades, a symptom of the decline of Britain, with people been encouraged to forget the crap they have been dropped in and wave a flag instead, especially when this allows them to pretend that, despite the poverty, unemployment and all the rest, Britain is still 'Great'. Hence all the harking back to the days of WW2, the mindless worship of the Royals and so on.

Appropriately enough, it was the dark days of Thatcher (still ongoing) that truly signaled the change, and I can still recall the mindless chanting of 'Let's give the Argies some bargy' in pubs as Thatcher hoisted the Union flag in the south Atlantic whilst starting the process of decimating Britain's industries, welfare state and NHS, reversing all the gains that benefited ordinary people immediately after WW2.

As Bertolt Brecht put it. ''Unhappy the land that is in need of heroes.''

 

[Robert21]

Re: Re:

The British/English (they can't make up their minds what they are?) do not love their own country but simply hate everywhere else. They detest Europeans and want to leave the EU for that reason. The whole Wiggins phenomenon was about sticking it to the French for whom they retain a peculiar animus.

Much the same was the true in the US, with Armstrong feeding on and validating anti-French. 'freedom fries' US xenophobia every time they pointed out that he was probably a doper.

A good example was in a long article about Armstrong In The Texas Monthly back in 2001 which said:

Lance is on top of the world; what could possibly motivate him anymore? Well, there's rubbing the Gallic nose into the pavement again, always a trusty pleasure.

 

[kwikki]

Re: Re:

When you consider the money and exertion expended by countries on international sport it becomes apparent that success in sport is regarded by national leaders as significant influence. In modern times this goes all the way back to the 1936 Berlin Olympics, at least. Why do they attach so much importance to it? I really don't know.

Simple. 'Bread and circuses'.

A rather good article on this topic here:

The ‘Team G-B’ chant will make the faces of the world frown in unison - as the hateful ‘U-S-A’ rallying call has for years. You can pump it up as a proud resurgence of national identity or dismiss it as faux militarism or plastic fascism, but it is a real phenomenon and woe betide those involved when the medal count drops. The powers that be much prefer a populace that is wrapped in the flag rather than burning it. If it takes Mo Farah Saturday nights to achieve this, then so be it.

http://sabotagetimes.com/football/team-gb-are-the-new-east-germany

As a US citizen, I'm quite familiar with Panem et Circenses from earlier in my life. (More recently we seem to have given up on the panem part.) What we were discussing, however, is something separate from that. The two phenomena may have sport in common, but that is all. Basically I think we were talking about the projection of power, and how that finds its expression in international sport.

I once read an interesting interview with Mick Jagger, of all people, in Rolling Stone magazine. It was sometime in the 1970s. The interviewer asked him about his experience of the USA. How is it different, she wanted to know, from the UK? The biggest difference, he said, is the overt patriotism in the US - we don't have that in the UK. We have people who are proud of the UK, but they don't show it in the same way. We don't have the flag waving, the Union Jack flying from automobile aerials, the way you see the flag being used in the US. That kind of patriotism, for God, Queen, and country, died in the UK with World War I, because of what happened then, and I doubt, he said, it will ever come back.

When I saw all the flag waving in the UK during the London Olympics, on TV and the internet, I thought about this interview and wondered if Jagger wasn't being proven wrong. I still don't really know.

The British/English (they can't make up their minds what they are?) do not love their own country but simply hate everywhere else. They detest Europeans and want to leave the EU for that reason. The whole Wiggins phenomenon was about sticking it to the French for whom they retain a peculiar animus.

You say that, but it is highly unlikely that the British will vote to leave the EU. I must admit I don't recognise your caricature of the British mentality, largely because although it may exist in some people's heads, it is far from universal. Remember UKIP won how many seats, precisely? Was it one or two seats out of the 650 available?

As for Wiggins 'sticking it to the French', can you remind us which French Tour contenders it was that he stuck it to? As far as I can see, the entire world has been sticking it to the French in their own race, since the mid 80s when the French had their last French winner.

 

[Robert21]

Re: Re:

You say that, but it is highly unlikely that the British will vote to leave the EU. I must admit I don't recognise your caricature of the British mentality, largely because although it may exist in some people's heads, it is far from universal. Remember UKIP won how many seats, precisely? Was it one or two seats out of the 650 available?

With proportional representation they would have won around 90...

 

[Cannibal72]

Re: Re:

When you consider the money and exertion expended by countries on international sport it becomes apparent that success in sport is regarded by national leaders as significant influence. In modern times this goes all the way back to the 1936 Berlin Olympics, at least. Why do they attach so much importance to it? I really don't know.

Simple. 'Bread and circuses'.

A rather good article on this topic here:

The ‘Team G-B’ chant will make the faces of the world frown in unison - as the hateful ‘U-S-A’ rallying call has for years. You can pump it up as a proud resurgence of national identity or dismiss it as faux militarism or plastic fascism, but it is a real phenomenon and woe betide those involved when the medal count drops. The powers that be much prefer a populace that is wrapped in the flag rather than burning it. If it takes Mo Farah Saturday nights to achieve this, then so be it.

http://sabotagetimes.com/football/team-gb-are-the-new-east-germany

As a US citizen, I'm quite familiar with Panem et Circenses from earlier in my life. (More recently we seem to have given up on the panem part.) What we were discussing, however, is something separate from that. The two phenomena may have sport in common, but that is all. Basically I think we were talking about the projection of power, and how that finds its expression in international sport.

I once read an interesting interview with Mick Jagger, of all people, in Rolling Stone magazine. It was sometime in the 1970s. The interviewer asked him about his experience of the USA. How is it different, she wanted to know, from the UK? The biggest difference, he said, is the overt patriotism in the US - we don't have that in the UK. We have people who are proud of the UK, but they don't show it in the same way. We don't have the flag waving, the Union Jack flying from automobile aerials, the way you see the flag being used in the US. That kind of patriotism, for God, Queen, and country, died in the UK with World War I, because of what happened then, and I doubt, he said, it will ever come back.

When I saw all the flag waving in the UK during the London Olympics, on TV and the internet, I thought about this interview and wondered if Jagger wasn't being proven wrong. I still don't really know.

The U.K. is, for the most part, profoundly mistrustful of displays of patriotism. Just like the Anglo-Australian rivalry, there's a hefty element of class involved; a senior politician was sacked last year for tweeting a picture of a house with two England flags and a white van, captioned 'welcome to Rochester'. To an American, this presumably seems banal and harmless; a mark of national identity next to a utility vehicle! But in England, that image was freighted with socioeconomic symbolism and importance. The white van and St George's cross are key parts of the iconography of a certain segment of English (word used deliberately) society; white, male, working-class, boorish, misogynistic, stereotypically from Essex, obsessed by football, reader of the Sun. Indeed Kelvin Mackenzie, editor of the Sun in the 1980s and one of the few people I've never met but nonetheless despise, once delivered a very revealing quote: his paper was pitched to 'the bloke you see in the pub, a right old fascist, wants to send the wogs back, buy his poxy council house, he's afraid of the unions, afraid of the Russians, hates the queers and the weirdos and drug dealers'. Another key element of this culture's iconography is the Second World War; it's not for nothing that arguably the most famous England football chant is 'two world wars and one world cup', directed of course at the Germans who remain the target of a ridiculous number of Sun headlines. Mackenzie's phrase 'right old fascist' is interesting; part of the symbolic connotations of the St George's Cross have changed since the 1970s, because it was hijacked by the neo-fascist movement the National Front, who had an astonishing amount of cultural relevance and incited a hell of a lot of violence. It would be stupid to describe UKIP as fascist, but it's worth noting that the photo I mentioned earlier came from the constituency Nigel Farage was trying to win (and only narrowly lost). Since the 1980s, British society has became a lot more polarised. From 1945 to 1979 the UK was built on a corporatist, consensual social settlement that gave a remarkable amount of power to trade unions and to the central government. Margaret Thatcher almost single-handedly ended that, and in the process she destroyed many, many working communities in the North of England that had a strong sense of civic pride. The people who were proud of the U.K. (in the Hugh Grant in Love Actually way) diminished with that quasi-Scandinavian social settlement: the NHS is the closest thing the UK has to a state religion, and with successive Conservative governments dismembering it, what's their left to be proud of? Everyone who doesn't identify with the 'white van man' culture is reluctant to be US-style patriotic (perhaps because the US is an idea before it is a country, whereas the British are, as JS Mill said, a people distrustful of grand ideas). I see two more significant reasons for Britain's distrust for patriotism. Firstly, the U.K. has quite simply not come to terms with the loss of its empire; I still hold that our culture's wilful blindness as to the crimes we committed is a large reason for our present lack of cohesion, as we continue to fool ourselves into thinking we're globally relevant. We are beginning a long process of decay: some deal with that by hiding from it, others by denying it- neither attitude conducive to national pride Secondly, and interlinked, the UK experienced a surge of immigration from its former colonies in the 1950s, immigrants who were never fully integrated. The rhetoric against them became so bitter that simply to be patriotic seemed a moderately racist. (Given the theoretical sporting angle to this whole thing, it's intriguing to note that Lord Tebbit, one of Thatcher's Cabinet, proposed as a key determiner of your identity whether you cheered for England or India in cricket). The period 2003-2012 was an especially bad period for patriotism in the UK; internationally, we were America's lapdog, following them eagerly into an illegal war and facilitating breaches of international law; domestically, when the recession hit, the last vestiges of manufacturing disappeared (and are disappearing).

In this context, London 2012 was unbelievable. Everyone expected it to fail dismally; the logo sucked, the mascots were shite, we were competing with China, and our sportsmen were consistently failures. But it wasn't. The national mood was astonishing from the opening ceremony on; Super Saturday was, incredibly, a day when our polarised, marginalised, alienated society finally came together as one. I attended the Paralympic swimming; it was - and I'm no patriot- an extraordinary day. (Interestingly, the private security firm epically failed to actually provide security, so the army stepped in a week before the Games began, and proceeded to act with a somewhat surprising professionalism and good humour; the army providing security...how much more uniting can you get? Don't worry though; the mood of unity and optimism evaporated by the start of 2013, and as the bad-mannered and bad-tempered fight over the future of the Stadium itself shows you, no hint of it remained in our national culture, as far as I can tell. Equally, it was a powerful force at the time (mostly for the worse). Danny Boyle's opening ceremony presented an inclusive vision of what Britain could be and what its significance is (David Bowie, mostly). But the reality is more like Trainspotting...

Edit: lots of stuff raised since I posted. I can't agree with Buckle (although it is worth noting that London got the Olympic nod ahead of heavy favourite Paris); Robert raised some very interesting points, and the Brecht quote sure fits.

 

[MatParker117]

Re: Re:

first....authenticate....how simple is that concept......................................

Mark L

That's what the Sunday Times did, authencate the story from the whistleblower by recording the doctor on tape.

It's very simple.

Or do you know have a problem with the Sunday Times? ie it's stories on "Why I believe in Chris Froome" are good? But this story not?

Without names all they can do is refer it to the GMC as he's not licenced by a sporting they are powerless to sanction him. They currently can't get a court order for his files as doping is not a crime and the athletes are protected by confidentiality.

 

[kwikki]

Re: Re:

You say that, but it is highly unlikely that the British will vote to leave the EU. I must admit I don't recognise your caricature of the British mentality, largely because although it may exist in some people's heads, it is far from universal. Remember UKIP won how many seats, precisely? Was it one or two seats out of the 650 available?

With proportional representation they would have won around 90...

That's is true, but a quite look at the graphical representation shows that they would still be minority.

 

[King Boonen]

Re: Re:

When you consider the money and exertion expended by countries on international sport it becomes apparent that success in sport is regarded by national leaders as significant influence. In modern times this goes all the way back to the 1936 Berlin Olympics, at least. Why do they attach so much importance to it? I really don't know.

Simple. 'Bread and circuses'.

A rather good article on this topic here:

The ‘Team G-B’ chant will make the faces of the world frown in unison - as the hateful ‘U-S-A’ rallying call has for years. You can pump it up as a proud resurgence of national identity or dismiss it as faux militarism or plastic fascism, but it is a real phenomenon and woe betide those involved when the medal count drops. The powers that be much prefer a populace that is wrapped in the flag rather than burning it. If it takes Mo Farah Saturday nights to achieve this, then so be it.

http://sabotagetimes.com/football/team-gb-are-the-new-east-germany

As a US citizen, I'm quite familiar with Panem et Circenses from earlier in my life. (More recently we seem to have given up on the panem part.) What we were discussing, however, is something separate from that. The two phenomena may have sport in common, but that is all. Basically I think we were talking about the projection of power, and how that finds its expression in international sport.

I once read an interesting interview with Mick Jagger, of all people, in Rolling Stone magazine. It was sometime in the 1970s. The interviewer asked him about his experience of the USA. How is it different, she wanted to know, from the UK? The biggest difference, he said, is the overt patriotism in the US - we don't have that in the UK. We have people who are proud of the UK, but they don't show it in the same way. We don't have the flag waving, the Union Jack flying from automobile aerials, the way you see the flag being used in the US. That kind of patriotism, for God, Queen, and country, died in the UK with World War I, because of what happened then, and I doubt, he said, it will ever come back.

When I saw all the flag waving in the UK during the London Olympics, on TV and the internet, I thought about this interview and wondered if Jagger wasn't being proven wrong. I still don't really know.

Taking a worldwide televised sports event as an indicator here doesn't seem very sensible. I'm pretty sure you would see the same in any country. I've only been to the US a couple of times but I certainly noticed the stars and stripes a lot more often than I do the Union Jack (and I live in Glasgow!). I also noticed it in a lot of places you'd hardly ever see the Union Jack over here: Shops, flag poles in peoples gardens, lots of cars etc.

 

[kwikki]

Re: Re:

first....authenticate....how simple is that concept......................................

Mark L

That's what the Sunday Times did, authencate the story from the whistleblower by recording the doctor on tape.

It's very simple.

But that is an oversimplification. They authenticated the whistle-blower claim that Boner was offering to administer and manage PEDS.

They did not authenticate Boner's claims about his client base.

It seems a little rash to start speculating as to who the "TdF" cyclist might be when we have no reason to believe that there actually was one beyond the words of Boner, but have some reasons to doubt Boner's claims.

It is possible to believe that Dr Boner does not have any British TdF cyclists on his books, whilst simultaneously believing that somebody else does.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

first....authenticate....how simple is that concept......................................

Mark L

That's what the Sunday Times did, authencate the story from the whistleblower by recording the doctor on tape.

It's very simple.

But that is an oversimplification. They authenticated that Boner was offering to administer and manage PEDS.

They did not authenticate Boner's claims about his client base.

It seems a little rash to start speculating as to who the "TdF" cyclist might be when we have no reason to believe that there actually was one beyond the words of Boner, but have some reasons to doubt Boner's claims.

you're now overcomplicating the matter.
there are all sorts of reasons to speculate.

UKAD and CADF should be target testing all British GT cyclists from now on. And send the samples to Cologne, not Lausanne.

It is possible to believe that Dr Boner does not have any British TdF cyclists on his books, whilst simultaneously believing that somebody else does.

What's the added value of this assumption?
One can assume anything one wants, but if one wants to clean things up the only useful assumption is to assume guilt of all parties involved here and start criminal investigations. I wanna see drugs busts, people stepping down, athletes getting popped.
It's not gonna happen, but it should.

 

[thehog]

Re: Re:

first....authenticate....how simple is that concept......................................

Mark L

That's what the Sunday Times did, authencate the story from the whistleblower by recording the doctor on tape.

It's very simple.

Or do you know have a problem with the Sunday Times? ie it's stories on "Why I believe in Chris Froome" are good? But this story not?

Without names all they can do is refer it to the GMC as he's not licenced by a sporting they are powerless to sanction him. They currently can't get a court order for his files as doping is not a crime and the athletes are protected by confidentiality.

Exactly. UKAD did nothing.

Hence why there is now a government inquiry into their conduct.

 

[blackcat]

Cameron and Clegg

yeah, i know lib dems turfed, and Bojo was never given the armchair ride...

but, in Australia on a football, australian rules football forum, we had nicknamed the Oxbridge two, 'the smoothskinned boys".

some serious antipodean wildean drollery right there.

what college were they out of at Oxford anyhow? anyone?

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

first....authenticate....how simple is that concept......................................

Mark L

That's what the Sunday Times did, authencate the story from the whistleblower by recording the doctor on tape.

It's very simple.

Or do you know have a problem with the Sunday Times? ie it's stories on "Why I believe in Chris Froome" are good? But this story not?

Without names all they can do is refer it to the GMC as he's not licenced by a sporting they are powerless to sanction him. They currently can't get a court order for his files as doping is not a crime and the athletes are protected by confidentiality.

you can repeat this another three or four times, and still it will not change the fact that UKAD did nothing.
They flagged nothing to nobody. Neither behind the scenes, nor in public.
If they are indeed completely toothless in the face of doping, which they seem to have been for years, the big question is why haven't they flagged it up, e.g. in parliament. They have enough links to politics.
As it stands, they have no raison d'etre. Wasted taxpayer money.
Objectively, Sapstead should take responsibility and resign. Although I doubt that would change much.