CMS Doping in sport revelations/discussion

Page 54 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
S

samhocking

Mar 13, 2013
4,857
903
17,680
The fallout of this is brilliant. The press are completely at a loss as to what's going on and just plucking anything and claiming anything that could relate. The best is Nick Harris's in Daily Mail claiming an exclusive on a 8 year old story on Julich and Froome, already told!
 
S

samhocking

Mar 13, 2013
4,857
903
17,680
Red Rick said:
The hilarity of having anti doping cases and not naming the riders involved.
Click to expand...
In fairness, it's not an anti-doping tribunal, it's a fitness to practice tribunal and GMC did begin by saying there won't be any riders, only they intend to make the allegation the order was intended for a rider.
 
G

gillan1969

Aug 12, 2009
2,814
110
11,680
samhocking said:
In fairness, it's not an anti-doping tribunal, it's a fitness to practice tribunal and GMC did begin by saying there won't be any riders, only they intend to make the allegation the order was intended for a rider.
Click to expand...

in fairness it is...we know that anti doping agenices and sports governing bodies are less likely to investigate and hold people to account regarding PEDS than journos, MPs, the police and now the GMC. Not traditional anti-doping but its all we're going to get....

remind me...were there any sky riders whose form made a sudden improvment in 2011? that might help us join some dots :tearsofjoy::tearsofjoy:
 
S

samhocking

Mar 13, 2013
4,857
903
17,680
Unfortunately 'sudden improvement' although good-enough to speculate on Froome without having evidence, it's not going to cut it at CAS when they appeal.
 
Armchair Cyclist

Armchair Cyclist

Moderator
Mar 22, 2010
15,242
11,243
28,180
fmk_RoI said:
William Fotheringham has never been known to ask hard questions. Now he's seeking to be a sheep in wolf's clothing. Knowingly, he opens his latest Guardian piece by telling us that, "to quote Monty Python’s Flying Circus, no one expects the Spanish Inquisition." He then withers on and on and on before coming to the meat and two veg of a piece titled "Freeman now has nothing to lose in a lurching, revealing narrative"Unfortunately for the doyenne - and sometime darling - of British cycling reporting (for a very particular type of British cycling fan), Freeman has broken cover. And it doesn't look like Fotheringham's Mystic Meg moment is going to go anywhere: "'I know you will say I've lied, changed my story and I cannot be trusted. But I am not a doping doctor': Dr Richard Freeman, the medic at the heart of scandal in British Cycling's medal factory talks for first time since shocking verdict", say the rather unwieldy Daily Mail headline of his first post-verdict interview.
Click to expand...
And talking, as you were, of meat and two veg, you seem to have deprived Fotheringham of his.
 
fmk_RoI

fmk_RoI

Sep 16, 2010
7,617
1,053
20,680
Wiggins speaks:
"The whole think stinks to high heaven. It’s been ten years now but it wants looking into further. Yes he’s been found guilty and it falls on his head but who else’s head does it fall on? Now, can we look into it a bit further and ask what exactly happened? Someone must know?"
Click to expand...
 
P

Parker

Mar 4, 2011
3,346
451
14,580
gillan1969 said:
in fairness it is...we know that anti doping agenices and sports governing bodies are less likely to investigate and hold people to account regarding PEDS than journos, MPs, the police and now the GMC. Not traditional anti-doping but its all we're going to get....
Click to expand...


And despite all these investigations and enquiries nobody has yet to so much as suggest a specific act of doping.
 
fmk_RoI

fmk_RoI

Sep 16, 2010
7,617
1,053
20,680
Salazar and Freeman. Innocent victims of a system that can convict coaches and doctors without giving us an athlete to vilify.
 
G

gillan1969

Aug 12, 2009
2,814
110
11,680
samhocking said:
It's a perfect storm really.

O'Rourke on her first day of opening statements says she wants Lawton as a witness, and claims an Affidavit held by Daily Mail is full of lies and she wants to put that to Sutton because his DCMS statements are not compatible with it.

Daily Mail, Lawton & Sutton refuse to cooperate with O'Rourke's requests. They are untouchable in the legal sense anyway due to the legal affidavit and Sutton's anonymity in the story it protects them from defamation claims, but O'Rourke at least gets their refusal in public and Sutton knowing she knows it exists and will ask him about it.

Sutton arrives and implodes within a couple of questions and goes back to Spain before having to face the affidavit questioning. GMC conveniently only ever called him as a volunteer witness, he's a free witness, GMC do at least get his word the order isn't for him and why he's there for GMC anyway.

O'Rourke having reached a dead end with Lawton & Daily Mail now calls GMC to obtain the Affidavit using Section 35A of the medical act because it contains a number of lies important to this tribunal. GMC refuse her request. Given Sutton has just walked out, Lawton refused to cooperate and Daily Mail are just ignoring her, she now gets into the public that GMC too are refusing her requests and so it becomes rather obvious GMC don't want to know, don't want the panel to discover Suttons lies far more significant than Freeman's lies to UKAD about the Fit4Sport email etc. They already have Sutton's statement the order isn't for him and so already expect to use Sutton's word as the truth, without hard evidence Freeman ever doped a rider.

So, in the anti-doping sense the outcome is unsatisfactory for everyone. Even DCMS are now calling for another investigation and unless they get Lawton & Daily Mail involved, what do they hope to achieve that hasn't not been achieved already? Freeman continues saying it was for Sutton. Sutton says it isn't. Will DCMS call Lawton & Daily Mail? How can they? They'll end up un-telling their own DCMS Report that Sky were doping with the jiffybag which basically believed the jiffybag story happened as signed in the affidavit.
Click to expand...
Parker said:
And despite all these investigations and enquiries nobody has yet to so much as suggest a specific act of doping.
Click to expand...
lols...you sound like an armstrong fan circa 2009...good luck with that
 
fmk_RoI

fmk_RoI

Sep 16, 2010
7,617
1,053
20,680
With both Sutton and Wiggins trotting out the lone wolf / non-cyclist line, you have to wonder if that's the message of the day being put out on the post-Sky WhatsApp group.
 
S

Sciatic

Mar 4, 2011
8,435
11,159
23,180
Parker said:
And despite all these investigations and enquiries nobody has yet to so much as suggest a specific act of doping.
Click to expand...
Gillian’s statement about investigations and inquiries was a statement about the legal (fraud), criminal, or journalistic inquiries that historically HAVE turned up specific acts of doping, and they are charges or athlete admissions that stick. You really don’t recall some of those?
 
S

samhocking

Mar 13, 2013
4,857
903
17,680
He's also trotting out he wants this investigated as are MPs, Journalists & fans. There's only one way it's going to get resolved.
 
fmk_RoI

fmk_RoI

Sep 16, 2010
7,617
1,053
20,680
JTL says Alan Farrell was a front to distract people from what Freeman was doing:
"My take was that they went to great lengths so they had a doctor called Alan Farrell there. Nice guy. He was a bit wet behind the ears and naïve. He didn’t know cycling and wasn’t one of the Geert Leinders of this world but he was naïve to it all.


And Tiernan-Locke claims: "In my mind he was put there as a bit of a front so they could say that they had a guy with no history of cycling and that they were clean. Freeman, especially the neo-pros, they didn’t have much to do with him. He was occasionally at races but he was mainly with Bradley Wiggins. We had Allan and another guy called Richard Usher. They were the two doctors that came on the racing programme that I was on and Freeman was very much someone I didn’t really deal with.


"It does make me think that there were two speeds within that team. You would have had the guys doing the Tour and then what you see with the Testogel and what was ordered but I didn’t see anything."
Click to expand...
 
fmk_RoI

fmk_RoI

Sep 16, 2010
7,617
1,053
20,680
Remember when we were being told Bradley Wiggins could call for a judicial review of the DCMS report?

And remember when were being told that Bradley Wiggins would sue Matt Lawton in order to get to the bottom of the Jiffy-Bag story?

Funny how Bradley Wiggins never actually used those powers he had. And that now he wants us to believe he really wants others to follow UKAD, UK Sport, the DCMS, the GMC and the MPTS, and investigate this matter further.

As with his judicial review and his lawsuit against Lawton, actions are not needed when it's words that sell the story.
 
Y

yaco

Jun 20, 2015
15,366
6,032
28,180
Have to wonder about Sutton trying to throw Froome 'under the bus' and by definition Team Sky - Think he is diverting attention from the British Track Cycling Program which is closer to Sutton's heart - They seem to avoid scrutiny.
 
S

samhocking

Mar 13, 2013
4,857
903
17,680
There's slowly some small clues being left in the various coverage re. Sutton, especially this weekend that directly relates to Wiggins choice words 'There’s something else going on and someone knows something'. There's also quite a lot of reason for the authorities involved so far to not want to investigate. Could get extremely political.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom