CMS Doping in sport revelations/discussion

[samhocking]

Same as it was 4 years ago, given there's an ongoing UKAD investigation still. I don't think there's much that can be done until that completes along with MPTS.

 

[MartinGT]

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.

The bit where JTL is saying that Wiggins name is being dragged through it then in the same breathe saying the dirty Dr was just for Wiggins.

 

[samhocking]

JTL is just repeating the Tramadol line from years ago. Saying zero tolerance is a joke and not having a single example why. The Testogel story is him taking it at face value suggesting two speeds in the medical team.

The bigger story that might come out, is as Wiggins already said in 2018. The Daily Mail ran the jiffygate Story but they were actually wanting to run a real story on Sutton's doping. Sutton sold them Jiffygate as a lie to get Daily Mail to not run the story, UKAD followed his lie by investigating it, not the story Daily Mail were going to run. DCMS, as O'Rourke said were given all this information on Sutton's past (UKAD were investigating him & that's what Daily Mail are talking about where Sutton asked Brailsford for help as he was under investigation for his own doping) and it never got into the DCMS report. Politically it's damaging to UKAD, DCMS & Daily Mail should this come out, but it's why even Testogate makes no sense. GMC & UKAD simply can't go there too deeply to resolve it, if they do, they expose Suttons jiffygate lie and everyone looks rather foolish for believing Sutton.

 

[MartinGT]

Why would the Fail publish about Sutton doping? Why is that worthy of their news? Like JTL said there was plenty of others on sky with a shady past still working for them. Yates didn't get booted off sky like the others but that's because he didn't admit to doping did he?

 

[samhocking]

Why would the Fail publish about Sutton doping? Why is that worthy of their news? Like JTL said there was plenty of others on sky with a shady past still working for them. Yates didn't get booted off sky like the others but that's because he didn't admit to doping did he?

Because Sutton did a deal to give them a bigger story than his own doping/bullying etc by saying what was in the jiffybag that wasn't ever in there. Why do you think nobody can confirm it was Triamcinolone? Because it never was, Sutton made it up. Deals are how journalism sometimes works, especially papers like Daily Mail who pay you well what they want to hear. The problem is - again as Wiggins said in 2018, you really should have multiple witnesses. Daily Mail didn't. They messed up. Lawton is on the record saying he had no reason to think Sutton wasn't telling him the truth. He probably didn't, Sutton lied to everyone and told UKAD exactly the same story and who were investigating that too and as nobody was supporting him or employing him in either BC or Sky, what's he got to lose? It's locked in a legal document not to be published unless it's obtained somehow. Freeman tried to get it using Section 35A, GMC/MPTS refused him it. Given they must know jiffygate is a lie, it's hardly surprising, they would all look fools.

 

[MartinGT]

Why doesn't Wiggins sue them then?

 

[samhocking]

With what? He already said he doesn't know what was in the jiffybag, he never saw it. He can't prove something didn't exist afterall and the whistleblower was anonymous, so how can he prove defamation? The law in the UK is you have to do it within 12 months of publication otherwise it's not possible and I doubt his legal team had the evidence on Sutton'ss affidavit until Lee Clayton quit Daily Mail & Lawton left soon after. We don't know what happened when it went before the Court, it could have been resolved out of court in the end with CA's signed all round. I think once Statute passes, the story could slowly come out, it really depends what happens with Freeman's tribunal's and if there will be another investigation or not after UKAD complete I guess.

 

[MartinGT]

So we just believe Wigan and not Sutton?

 

[topcat]

So we just believe Wigan and not Sutton?

I admire your patience, Martin

 

[fmk_RoI]

Why doesn't Wiggins sue them then?

One year time limit ran out yonks ago. But we're still supposed to pretend to believe Wiggins is suing Lawton, but has to wait for the MPTS and UKAD to end before starting. Cause, like, you know, alternate realities.

 

[samhocking]

The Court statement came out in 2018 fmk, that probably was within 12 months. We don't know the result of that or how far it got. Wiggins precise words on the entire thing was 'the last word hasn't been told on that'. Clearly he will not be saying anything until the investigations end. They haven't yet ended. No lawyer is going to advise you discuss Sutton and Lawton in UK, that's why he only told it in Belgium. Even that interview, all UK publications copying it, omitted the part about Court, Sutton & Lawton's story remember.

 

[samhocking]

So we just believe Wigan and not Sutton?

Everything he's said still stands doesn't it? Everything he said came out in Freeman's tribunal too. Remember he said it all in light of the investigation saying it would take 2 months to resolve. We're now in year 3, still everyone not able to speak until UKAD completes.

 

[fmk_RoI]

The Freeman Show is back on and now they're trying to decide if the good doctor's licence to practice is impaired. The GMC says yes it is:

"The key issue for this tribunal to determine is whether Dr Freeman's repeated misconduct renders him currently unfit to practise or whether he is currently unfit to practise for public policy reasons. All the circumstances, the GMC submit, should now find Dr Freeman's fitness to practise is currently impaired because of the seriousness of misconduct, repetition of misconduct and lack of insight into his misconduct."

Rather than simply saying no his licence to practice is not impaired, Freeman's QC decided to add to the suspense by refusing to play:

"Regrettably from our perspective, your stage one determination precludes us from running the case we would have run today. As you know, we disagree vehemently with your findings. Dr Freeman will have a right of appeal and, if he chooses to exercise that and is successful, we will at that point make more meaningful submissions."

 

[Parker]

The thing is that the doping angle is a distraction as far as GMC are concerned. They are more interested in the bad record keeping and the dishonesty. The doping charge probably would have made no difference to the punishment.

 

[samhocking]

I think with some scope in the final decision in April/May for him to put as case forward with evidence of how he has amended his working practice such as good references from his current NHS employer etc and GMC themselves asking him to return to practice on the Covid effort, he might have got a suspension, but he will be erased I think with them deciding he ordered the testogel to dope an athlete. Any appeal is going to come down to money and if he can be bothered I think. So far it's all paid for out of his Medical indemnity, liability and medical union/insurances like any doctors, but an appeal goes to the High Court and so needs funding. He's a qualified osteopath anyway looking at his CV, so he doesn't require a GP licence to do that and still earn a living into retirement, but it depends on many factors, especially in light of Damian Collins, Clive Efford & Wiggins wanting an investigation into who the rider is meant to be.

 

[samhocking]

The Freeman Show is back on and now they're trying to decide if the good doctor's licence to practice is impaired. The GMC says yes it is:Rather than simply saying no his licence to practice is not impaired, Freeman's QC decided to add to the suspense by refusing to play:

Of course it precludes it as O'Rourke said fmk, we already know GMC denied O'Rourke Section 35A. Freeman's entire defence was based on that document being obtained at stage 1 - the facts stage. GMC knew that, that's why they denied it, because their own case would collapse if it materialised! The defence's ability to access rights of medical act is rather conveniently decided by the prosecution, so High Court appeal is the only route forward, that's obvious lol!

 

[fmk_RoI]

Philippa York is saying the buck stops with Dave Brailsford:

For someone famously involved in every aspect of his teams - who lived 24/7, 365 days a year flat-out chasing every detail and brought the concept of ‘marginal gains’ to British cycling - to be somehow unaware of what Freeman was doing seems to go beyond misfortune and into carelessness.

 

[samhocking]

She clearly missed the part where GMC said British Cycling & Team Sky never knew anything about it because Freeman worked undercover with sleepers unknown to both organisations and Peter said Brailsford was never informed either! I assume that's why GMC never summoned Brailsford in the first place, although I would assume UKAD had already passed their questioning of Brailsford to GMC anyway?

 

[fmk_RoI]

Also from York's piece:

Going by the refusal of Fit4sport to provide historical records to British Cycling of medications supplied to Manchester velodrome, it doesn’t look like a rogue operator, but then this story is only just beginning.

 

[fmk_RoI]

Going down:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1372520900122316801

View: https://twitter.com/Lawton_Times/status/1372520900122316801

 

[TourOfSardinia]

Nice narrative on the last decade of British Cycling and Team Sky/Ineos
and where the buck stops - here

Dave Brailsford needs to take responsibility over Freeman case

Philippa York says questions remain for the man at the top

www.cyclingnews.com

 

[fmk_RoI]

Nice narrative on the last decade of British Cycling and Team Sky/Ineos
and where the buck stops - here

Dave Brailsford needs to take responsibility over Freeman case

Philippa York says questions remain for the man at the top

www.cyclingnews.com

Double posted.

 

[samhocking]

Now untangle that mess UKAD haha!

 

[samhocking]

Weird how this was all reported 2 hours ago in BMJ & Medscape, but Lawton only just tweeting it as if it's live. Maybe they've only got a transcription later?

 

[samhocking]

Also from York's piece:

Think she's misinterpreted that. They refused British Cycling's request, because UKAD had asked them not to I believe.