CMS Doping in sport revelations/discussion

Page 42 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
So all this against Sutton is to try and show that Freeman is the 'innocent' man in all of this and he was pushed or whatever by Sutton?
With Freeman claiming the Testogel was for Sutton, he's key the the GMC's case. So, from the off, O'Rourke has sought to discredit Sutton using any means possible and deny him any value to the GMC. Show that he lies. Show that he's a bully. All the guff about the Mail's safe and everything else, it's all been part of the same agenda.

But ... bear in mind that in Peters's evidence, he said it was more likely that Freeman wanted the Tesotgel for himself, than that he was made order it by Sutton. So, GMC not down and out. Flimsy and all as there case in this regard is.
 
Reactions: MartinGT
With Freeman claiming the Testogel was for Sutton, he's key the the GMC's case. So, from the off, O'Rourke has sought to discredit Sutton using any means possible and deny him any value to the GMC. Show that he lies. Show that he's a bully. All the guff about the Mail's safe and everything else, it's all been part of the same agenda.

But ... bear in mind that in Peters's evidence, he said it was more likely that Freeman wanted the Tesotgel for himself, than that he was made order it by Sutton. So, GMC not down and out. Flimsy and all as there case in this regard is.
Peters also said "At no time did I see any evidence it was for a rider. That’s a ‘huge leap" though, so rather nulls GMC's charge anyway regardless. If the panel decide it was for Freeman, the charges are dropped anyway.

Peters also agreed with O’Rourke’s analysis that Sutton had a "tendency to be emotionally unstable and could lash out"

No doubt Nicole Cooke, her dad, Jess Varnish and Freeman's other witnesses will back up what Peters said too.
 
Reactions: fmk_RoI
Got to say that this QC is really making the best of this for herself. Cracking profile raise. Respect.

Still don’t quite see why BC didn’t just bung Freeman enough to go quietly rather than try to being the house down, though. I know the target is Sutton and only Sutton but the amount of muck being thrown around, day after day, is quite something.

Where does BC end up after this, Sam?
 
Pretty sure O'Rourke raised her profile far more as QC for Dr Al-Zayyat in Baby P GMC case personally as that went to High Court afterall and was a far bigger story than Sutton & Freeman. This is cycling, it's not that important.

As for BC, they're claimaints alongside GMC. It would be extremely stupid of them to attempt to pay off Freeman lol!

For Ineos & Brailsford, there's no riders involved either and Sutton is already sacked anyway and Freeman long gone over Jiffybag story which is bubbling under and about to explode again if this goes to High Court with 35A etc. Today O'Rourke says she will use Sutton signature on Team Sky's Zero Tolerance policy as evidence he lied he was never involved in doping alongside the witnesses evidence claiming he was/is a doper. Perhaps the most damaging on Brailsford, is that other ex-riders admitted their doping and were asked to leave and did so. Sutton didn't, so that could be seen as a failure by Brailsford, but as he said, he can't force staff to admit they doped and if the authorities have no evidence, what's he supposed to do.
Perhaps todays missed nugget is O'Rourke says Sutton has been intimidating Freeman throughout the tribunal via text messages, so Sutton is simply digging his own grave now and GMC no doubt knocking their head against the wall!
 
Perhaps the most damaging on Brailsford, is that other ex-riders admitted their doping and were asked to leave and did so. Sutton didn't, so that could be seen as a failure by Brailsford, but as he said, he can't force staff to admit they doped and if the authorities have no evidence, what's he supposed to do.
Although Sutton effectively left Sky at the same time as those other staff members and sent back to BC. From head coach to a'consultancy role' and never seen around the team again
 
Reactions: fmk_RoI
No, that's not what happened. Brailsford's Team Sky Zero Tolerance Policy was signed by all 80 staff and riders in November 2012. Brailsford didn't vacate the BC position until 2014 and Sutton moved into it, so 2 years later.

Ironically, it was the Deloitte report etc and allegations of a conflict of interest that meant Brailsford vacated BC, yet several have said it was this happening that sent Sutton into panic mode and things began to fall apart as it was Brailsford that kept Sutton on a leash. No Brailsford no leash and by 2016 after just 2 years Varnish happens and everything we've heard about how he ran the BC ship without Brailsford there anymore leaves him sacked and contracting for China and Varnish! 2 months after Sutton is sacked - Jiffygate happens.
 
Reactions: fmk_RoI
Pretty sure O'Rourke raised her profile far more as QC for Dr Al-Zayyat in Baby P GMC case personally as that went to High Court afterall and was a far bigger story than Sutton & Freeman. This is cycling, it's not that important.

As for BC, they're claimaints alongside GMC. It would be extremely stupid of them to attempt to pay off Freeman lol!

For Ineos & Brailsford, there's no riders involved either and Sutton is already sacked anyway and Freeman long gone over Jiffybag story which is bubbling under and about to explode again if this goes to High Court with 35A etc. Today O'Rourke says she will use Sutton signature on Team Sky's Zero Tolerance policy as evidence he lied he was never involved in doping alongside the witnesses evidence claiming he was/is a doper. Perhaps the most damaging on Brailsford, is that other ex-riders admitted their doping and were asked to leave and did so. Sutton didn't, so that could be seen as a failure by Brailsford, but as he said, he can't force staff to admit they doped and if the authorities have no evidence, what's he supposed to do.
Perhaps todays missed nugget is O'Rourke says Sutton has been intimidating Freeman throughout the tribunal via text messages, so Sutton is simply digging his own grave now and GMC no doubt knocking their head against the wall!
This seems to be the tactic. O'Rourke is far more intent on smearing Sutton than defending Freeman, which says a lot IMO. As much as I can't stand Shane Sutton, he's not the one in the wrong this time.

Interesting how the picture of Sutton has changed for some people between the Varnish cerfuffle and this - going from "blunt, straight shooting Australian with no tact just wanting the best for the UK track team" to "unstable, intimidating, alpha male bully". Couldn't see that coming... :rolleyes:
 
Oct 11, 2012
28
3
8,535
It isn't actually rocket science to work out who the current BC employee is and it is very relevant as he has a long and very successful relationship with Sutton. If anyone knows where the bodies are buried in Sutton's past it is probably him. Plus if you check Sutton's team mates from the late 80's & 90's it's like a who's who of British Cycling glitterati. I cannot conceive that if suspicions about Sutton were known by the general cycling public at that time, that the authorities didn't know.

This denial of the rumours reminds me so much of the Jimmy Savile cover up where all of the establishment knew about him but have denied it and got away with it. If my 16 year-old brother knew about Savile in 1968 and I met people who told me about him in 1979 you know the establishment knew and turned a blind eye.

My fear is this is what is happening with the Sutton accusations; many suspected, a number knew, but it suits the establishment to be in denial to protect the stance they have chosen to take against Freeman.

If it is the BC Coach/Employee I believe it is he is a man revered within the sport.
 
My fear is this is what is happening with the Sutton accusations; many suspected, a number knew, but it suits the establishment to be in denial to protect the stance they have chosen to take against Freeman.
No. What is happening is many suspect the rumours and most will believe. But apart from the most fanatical doping fans, no-one cares that someone may have taken a few pills 35 years ago. It's of no relevance to the present or even the recent past. Particularly in view of the subsequent history of cycling. Every team or federation employs a worse doper than him.

Let's remember that no-one in the 80s took doping seriously. The punishment for a positive test was usually relegation to last on the stage. In 1988 Tour Theunisse tested positive for testoterone and only got a ten minute penalty - he stayed in the race.
 
Last edited:
Oct 11, 2012
28
3
8,535
No. What is happening is many suspect the rumours and most will believe. But apart from the most fanatical doping fans, no-one cares that someone may have taken a few pills 35 years ago. It's of no relevance to the present or even the recent past. Particularly in view of the subsequent history of cycling. Every team or federation employs a worse doper than him.

Let's remember that no-one in the 80s took doping seriously. The punishment for a positive test was usually relegation to last on the stage. In 1988 Tour Theunisse tested positive for testoterone and only got a ten minute penalty - he stayed in the race.
This isn't about his doping; it is about his integrity and honesty, both of which are highly questionable.
 
Oct 11, 2012
28
3
8,535
And I don't see that what someone may or may not have done over 30 years ago has any bearing on their integrity and honesty now.
Then you're not taking account of how people are and you haven't being paying attention to the litany of complaints about Sutton's attitude and behaviour. A person's personality is generally set between the ages of 25-30; if you were an arsehole in your 30's it is highly likely you will be an arsehole the rest of your life.
 
Reactions: fmk_RoI
Then you're not taking account of how people are and you haven't being paying attention to the litany of complaints about Sutton's attitude and behaviour. A person's personality is generally set between the ages of 25-30; if you were an arsehole in your 30's it is highly likely you will be an arsehole the rest of your life.
People aren't all the same. Far from it. And most people in middle age will cringe at the memory of certain aspects of themselves in their 20s.
If there are a litany of complaints (and there are) then focus on them. If you need to go on historical digs for material it suggests desperation.
And I'm sure many will want the other BC coach outed and sacked for those events. Because anyone who took some pills in the 80s is beyond change (apart from our Lord and Saviour St Paul Kimmage of course. He doped to save souls of lesser men. Bless his magnificence)
 
Ex
This seems to be the tactic. O'Rourke is far more intent on smearing Sutton than defending Freeman, which says a lot IMO. As much as I can't stand Shane Sutton, he's not the one in the wrong this time.

Interesting how the picture of Sutton has changed for some people between the Varnish cerfuffle and this - going from "blunt, straight shooting Australian with no tact just wanting the best for the UK track team" to "unstable, intimidating, alpha male bully". Couldn't see that coming... :rolleyes:
Exhibit 1: Timberlad
 
Reactions: fmk_RoI
January 2013, Sutton steps down as Head Coach. And given 'consultancy role' to save face, but is actually a non-job.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2013/jan/18/team-sky-shane-sutton-head-coach
Yes, and Brailsford vacates BC position in 2014 and Sutton is then sideways promoted.

Wiggins was back to Track targets for 2014 off Roubaix. I think Sutton & his sideways move at BC to fill Brailsfords boots was as much about Wiggins returning to Manchester for Rio as the Zero Tolerance Policy ousting Sutton from Sky, but we'll probably never know exactly, maybe both obviously.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: fmk_RoI
Yes, and Brailsford vacates BC position in 2014 and Sutton is then sideways promoted.

Wiggins was back to Track targets for 2014 off Roubaix. I think Sutton & his sideways move at BC to fill Brailsfords boots was as much about Wiggins returning to Manchester for Rio as the Zero Tolerance Policy ousting Sutton from Sky, but we'll probably never know exactly, maybe both obviously.

Yes, there was certainly that too. Both Sutton and Yates were firmly Wiggins men rather than Froome men, so it made sense to have a shuffle regardless of what both may have done in the 80s
 
Last edited:
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
B The Clinic 2
D The Clinic 9
Invicituz The Clinic 0

ASK THE COMMUNITY