Dave Brailsford - cycling genius

[samhocking]

So Lawton can't say what it was because he only has 3rd party allegations what the package contained, not the evidence to fight legally then.

 

[thehog]

Re:

So Lawton can't say what it was because he only has 3rd party allegations what the package contained, not the evidence to fight legally then.

More to the point he has the evidence but breaking doctor/patient confidentiality will be the issue. He is slowly pushing Brailsford into the corner.

 

[samhocking]

If the substance is illegal and therefore not a prescription, there is no GMC issue, he just needs evidence. My guess is he has none, but who knows...

 

[hondated]

Re:

Matt Lawton was interviewed on Australian Radio today about the mystery package - Lawton clearly stated ' he knows the name of the alleged substance but for legal reasons is unable to publically release the information.' You don't have to be a rocket scientist to determine it was an illegal product or the name would have been published by Lawton.

Though it's still a case of 'he said, she said' situation - Reckon there are some similarities with the EFC 34 case from earlier this year - Blackcat can shed some further light on the similarity.

Sniper I think your reply is directed to my comments
Apologies if they aren't and I think you make some fair points because for Nicole it really must be like walking on eggshells. For me it's so frustrating as she always came across as a nice young lady with a gift for cycle racing and probably had her career ruined by less scrupulous competitors.

 

[Frankenstorm]

Re: Re:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/cycling/2016/12/29/british-cycling-warned-issues-dual-team-sky-roles-2011/

Interesting...

Funnily enough it was having read your previous post that lead me to post it...

 

[samhocking]

The Parliamentary Committee Inquiry is 'Combatting Doping in Sport' and revolves around the Sunday Times list of endurance runners blood values showing abnormal results between 2001 and 2012 and the IAAF. As Damian Collins says in the meeting he's asked Brailsford, Howden & Sutton to help better understand that inquiry, but obviously wants to get to the bottom of what was in the package. The main discussion that day was in the afternoon with Sir Craig Reedie & Olivier Niggli from WADA and there's some very interesting comments around the Wiggins TUEs and TUEs in that discussion.
Cooke's comments might spark another Deloitte-like Parliamentary Committee perhaps. It depends what they think of the 2011Deloitte report British Cycling have given them I guess?

 

[ontheroad]

Oh what a tangled web you weave, when you set out to deceive. It's obvious that the slow drip drip media pieces around the Jiffy bag story has opened up a huge can of worms for BC and Sky. Brailsford, Sutton and BC Chiefs have tried to make mugs out of a select committee of MPs chaired by Damian Collins, but they appear to have forgotten that those people aren't Joe Public who can be easily hoodwinked with waffling management speak. Is Collins satisfied with the explanations given at the first hearing? I doubt it very much. I imagine that he will await the outcome of the UKAD investigation before taking the next step though but I'd be amazed if some of Freeman, Cope or Wiggins himself aren't called into parliament for further questioning at some point. Meanwhile Cookson, as he has done previously, appears to have gone into hiding again given his role within BC at the time.

 

[TheSpud]

Re:

Matt Lawton was interviewed on Australian Radio today about the mystery package - Lawton clearly stated ' he knows the name of the alleged substance but for legal reasons is unable to publically release the information.' You don't have to be a rocket scientist to determine it was an illegal product or the name would have been published by Lawton.

Though it's still a case of 'he said, she said' situation - Reckon there are some similarities with the EFC 34 case from earlier this year - Blackcat can shed some further light on the similarity.

Hmm not necessarily. What if it was Triamcinolone? Not 'illegal' out of competition, although technically yes if he injected that day, instead of the next even if it was after the race, but I think the IC rules are really there to pick up people who have doped during the race. After all as the race winner / yellow jersey he would have been tested after the final stage. I think they could easily argue no adverse finding if he was tested later that day. Its a well known 'lean down' drug. Of course it means Sky have lied, but that isn't a massive surprise to me - I don't expect them to tell us what the are up to, I never did.

 

[Electress]

Re:

Oh what a tangled web you weave, when you set out to deceive. It's obvious that the slow drip drip media pieces around the Jiffy bag story has opened up a huge can of worms for BC and Sky. Brailsford, Sutton and BC Chiefs have tried to make mugs out of a select committee of MPs chaired by Damian Collins, but they appear to have forgotten that those people aren't Joe Public who can be easily hoodwinked with waffling management speak. Is Collins satisfied with the explanations given at the first hearing? I doubt it very much. I imagine that he will await the outcome of the UKAD investigation before taking the next step though but I'd be amazed if some of Freeman, Cope or Wiggins himself aren't called into parliament for further questioning at some point. Meanwhile Cookson, as he has done previously, appears to have gone into hiding again given his role within BC at the time.

Lawton has played a blinder by encouraging this slow-burn demise. It's so much more effective for the protagonists to be party to their own downfall. They've not just been accused of doing things, but have been manoeuvred into showing themselves for what they are. Can even the most die-hard fan believe they have any integrity or credibility?

And in doing it this way, Lawton has created a narrative and mood which encourages other voices who've been gagged or previously felt they would not be listened to. And it's all been facilitated by Sky and BC's hubris - their pride and believing their own BS. It's all delightfully Sophoclean.

Here I am – myself – you all know me, the world knows my fame: I am Sir David Brailsford.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Re: Re:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/cycling/2016/12/29/british-cycling-warned-issues-dual-team-sky-roles-2011/

Interesting, this is something I've brought up for years - the blurred lines and distinctions between who works for British Cycling and who works for Sky, and that for several years the figureheads were the same, meant any scandal is going to drag everybody in.

It also means no one that matters tests positive. There's no line between the domestic rules-enforcer (BC) and "doing what it takes" to win. The crazy story Brailsford told highlights it nicely.

It is USPS all over again. Another epic fraud. This time though, Reedie is in charge of WADA among a host of other changes made to prevent controversy that harms the IOC brand.

 

[yaco]

Re:

If the substance is illegal and therefore not a prescription, there is no GMC issue, he just needs evidence. My guess is he has none, but who knows...

The issue is whether it's second hand or third hand or fourth hand information - It's also a matter of whether the whistle-blower will make a statement to UKAD.

 

[samhocking]

I agree. Earlier up this thread I said he probably only has a third party allegation. Unless the first and second parties and the source in Sky all agree to work with the Daily Mail legally I can't see the story being able to go any further if UKADs findings don't match what Daily Mail believe to be in the package. For UKAD it's simply one of integrity and for them to be seen following correct procedure and for British Cycling, to show complete separation from Team Sky and any Dr/Patient confidentiality within the team. Also, to not be seen using public money to fund commercial team doping of course which is the big elephant.
At the moment British Cycling have sold an £8 decongestant and invoiced Sky £600 so the money's all going the other way for something any NGB doctor would have in his medical cabinet. Seems like good business and perfectly legal without any conflicts of interest. If however Freeman is selling Team Sky illegal doping products out of Manchester Velodrome and while employed by British Cycling using public money to generate personal income via Team Sky success that's entirely different, but that doesn't seam to be the angle Daily Mail are taking. The attack is on Sky and Brailsford specifically, not British Cycling as such maybe.
I don't think the close relationship is an issue in terms of public money being syphoned off to Team Sky. The evidence suggests the opposite so far in terms of the money anyway. The success has been exponential for British Cycling in all Olypmpic cycles from 2004 onward through the launch of Team Sky and thee other side of the Deloitte enquiry. Would be hard for any fresh inquiry to prove the relationship jeopardised Team GB success because public money went to Team Sky and not British Cycling, when everything is invoiced and charged back to Sky to pay for and UKSport money given to British Cycling has seen the biggest ROI off any NGB they help fund?
If UKAD finds illegal doping within British Cycling & Team Sky via Freeman, then clearly this is a whole new story to what Daily Mail's angle has been on it so far.

 

[thehog]

The word on the street is was testosterone. Seeing Wiggins dropped out of the 2011 Tour he won't be stripped of that title. He would most likely lose his Dauphine title & the British title. Clearly Wiggins would have kept using the drug through to 2012 but not sure they'll ever get to prove that. And to think all this happened right under Cookson's nose at British Cycling.

 

[sniper]

If it was kenacort that would probably give wiggins/sky/uci just about enough wriggle room to spin their way out of it and pretend all was above board thanks to the TUEs. If it was cortisone likewise they can say it was for OOC usage.
So something like testosterone would be great, because that's doping end of.

 

[heartsnotinit]

I hope UKAD are also looking at other expenses of Simon Cope and any BC staff doing courier, sorry, I mean opportunistic-package-delivery-alongside-very-long-planned-very-short-logistic trips for Sky to look for patterns (or the absence of patterns.

Is extra logistics support only needed when particular riders are riding or particular doctors are working, for example?

 

[samhocking]

Re:

If it was kenacort that would probably give wiggins/sky/uci just about enough wriggle room to spin their way out of it and pretend all was above board thanks to the TUEs. If it was cortisone likewise they can say it was for OOC usage.
So something like testosterone would be great, because that's doping end of.

I'm not so sure it would allow them to wriggle. If it was kenacort being taken on 12th June, same as the TUE on the 29th, yet Wiggins and Frteeman didn't visit Hargreaves for the RAST test until 28th June to get the TUE through UCI/WADA for injection on the 29th, that means Freeman is treating Wiggins with kenacort 'weeks' before the 'allergy justification' and supporting docs supporting their reasons for needing the TUE given just before the Tour! If that's the case, it pretty much nullifies any validity to the visit to Hargreaves other than to continue kenacort treatment under the TUE again on 29th June. This would then bring Freeman & Hargreaves into disrepute with GMC, UCI into disripute with WADA. Could get very interesting at CAS for Sky lol!

 

[sniper]

Cheers Sam, sounds like an accurate assessment.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Re:

I hope UKAD are also looking at other expenses of Simon Cope and any BC staff doing courier, sorry, I mean opportunistic-package-delivery-alongside-very-long-planned-very-short-logistic trips for Sky to look for patterns (or the absence of patterns.

Is extra logistics support only needed when particular riders are riding or particular doctors are working, for example?

FYI: UKAD has no authority to do any of those things unless BC authorizes an investigation of itself AND gives up the documentation. Why they would do any of those things would be suicide.

 

[Electress]

Re: Re:

I hope UKAD are also looking at other expenses of Simon Cope and any BC staff doing courier, sorry, I mean opportunistic-package-delivery-alongside-very-long-planned-very-short-logistic trips for Sky to look for patterns (or the absence of patterns.

Is extra logistics support only needed when particular riders are riding or particular doctors are working, for example?

FYI: UKAD has no authority to do any of those things unless BC authorizes an investigation of itself AND gives up the documentation. Why they would do any of those things would be suicide.

Surely one of the recommendations from the Select Committee could (and should) be to address evident failings with the governance of BC, in light of their current investigation and the unpublished report regarding the 'blurred lines' between them and Sky. As a Government funded institution, forcing BC to submit to an independent review should be relatively straightforward - refuse to fund further without it.

Any such investigation could legitimately look into the use of BC staff for Sky and how expenses were logged and paid for and whether compensation for time (and not just cost) was made to BC and the implications (e.g. to women's cycling) of the misuse of staff for non-BC purposes. There is, after, evidence that this wasn't being handled appropriately. Whether or not it is looking for "potentially dodgy courier services" it would quickly shed light on them by requiring relevant documents o all BC staff working for Sky and justification for their use; expenses etc.

 

[heartsnotinit]

Re: Re:

I hope UKAD are also looking at other expenses of Simon Cope and any BC staff doing courier, sorry, I mean opportunistic-package-delivery-alongside-very-long-planned-very-short-logistic trips for Sky to look for patterns (or the absence of patterns.

Is extra logistics support only needed when particular riders are riding or particular doctors are working, for example?

FYI: UKAD has no authority to do any of those things unless BC authorizes an investigation of itself AND gives up the documentation. Why they would do any of those things would be suicide.

Pity. I was hoping that if Sky and/or Cope said this was a common thing to do then they'd be encouraged to produce documentation to back up the normality of it all at the risk of not being believed, or that if the BC board really are as clueless about any possible wrongdoing as they came across to the Select Committee then they'd voluntarily open their books as a publicly funded body seeking to appear transparent and ethical under the threat of embarrassing scrutiny from their paymasters.

I recall Brailsford being asked about criminalising doping by the committee chair and thinking his answer (paraphrasing my memory of it: the additional penalties won't be a deterrent) missed a key point -- make it a serious enough offence and you get investigations with far more teeth and resources than UKAD seem to have, so the chance of being popped goes way up even if the extra penalties aren't a deterrent as Sir Dave claimed.

 

[MatParker117]

Re:

If it was kenacort that would probably give wiggins/sky/uci just about enough wriggle room to spin their way out of it and pretend all was above board thanks to the TUEs. If it was cortisone likewise they can say it was for OOC usage.
So something like testosterone would be great, because that's doping end of.

If it's Testosterone then it's smuggling a class c drug and a lot of people are looking at jail time.

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

If it was kenacort that would probably give wiggins/sky/uci just about enough wriggle room to spin their way out of it and pretend all was above board thanks to the TUEs. If it was cortisone likewise they can say it was for OOC usage.
So something like testosterone would be great, because that's doping end of.

If it's Testosterone then it's smuggling a class c drug and a lot of people are looking at jail time.

Who is going to admit what was in the jiffy bag?

They will produce back dated documents to account for fluimucil.

No one will admit to the PEDs as they will all have been paid to sign NDAs.

Brailsford and Sky have been caught lying so much it doesn't matter. Those who follow the sport know Sky are dopers.

The big wigs at Sky and Brit cycling have made small fortunes out of it all. They will walk away with their money, but not with their credibility and to many that will hurt.

I am pretty sure someone will do a Wiggins to Froome book in the manner of Walsh's LA Confidential, joining all the dots and pointing out all the lies and falsehoods spouted. It would need a moron not to join those dots and get dopers!

Then there is always the possibility of Wiggins blowing it all wide open in a drunken rage at some point in the future.

 

[Irondan]

Re: Re:

If it was kenacort that would probably give wiggins/sky/uci just about enough wriggle room to spin their way out of it and pretend all was above board thanks to the TUEs. If it was cortisone likewise they can say it was for OOC usage.
So something like testosterone would be great, because that's doping end of.

If it's Testosterone then it's smuggling a class c drug and a lot of people are looking at jail time.

Who is going to admit what was in the jiffy bag?

They will produce back dated documents to account for fluimucil.

No one will admit to the PEDs as they will all have been paid to sign NDAs.

Brailsford and Sky have been caught lying so much it doesn't matter. Those who follow the sport know Sky are dopers.

The big wigs at Sky and Brit cycling have made small fortunes out of it all. They will walk away with their money, but not with their credibility and to many that will hurt.

I am pretty sure someone will do a Wiggins to Froome book in the manner of Walsh's LA Confidential, joining all the dots and pointing out all the lies and falsehoods spouted. It would need a moron not to join those dots and get dopers!

Then there is always the possibility of Wiggins blowing it all wide open in a drunken rage at some point in the future.

^^^^This, I would like to see... :lol:

 

[Robert5091]

chairman of UKad disappointed

http://www.bbc.com/sport/cycling/38535591
Evidence given by cycling chiefs including Sir Dave Brailsford to a parliamentary select committee has been described as "extraordinary" by the chairman of UK Anti-Doping (Ukad).

David Kenworthy told the BBC that the answers presented by figures within British Cycling and Team Sky to the Commons' Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee on anti-doping - specifically about a mystery medical package delivered to Sir Bradley Wiggins - were "very disappointing".

... Kenworthy - who has been chairman of Ukad since its establishment in 2009 - said: "There's still no definite answer from anyone who was involved. I still don't know what was in there; I'm no nearer finding out than you are.

"People could remember a package that was delivered to France, they can remember who asked for it, they can remember the route it took, who delivered it, the times it arrived. The select committee has got expense sheets and travel documents.

"So everybody can remember this from five years ago, but no-one can remember what was in the package. That strikes me as being extraordinary. It is very disappointing."

(Selective Amnesia? )

 

[TourOfSardinia]

Re: chairman of UKad disappointed

(Selective Amnesia? )

Collective Amnesia