Is Walsh on the Sky bandwagon?

[The Hitch]

I heard on the radio just now that Walsh outed a very famous Irish rugby player as having failed a 'routine' dope test in the summer in todays ST. Haven't seen the paper so don't know the full details but I do know the player in question. Anyone seen this? And more importantly, how the hell is that player not banned?

More importantly, how the hell did a Rugby player fail a drugs test.

 

[Avoriaz]

I heard on the radio just now that Walsh outed a very famous Irish rugby player as having failed a 'routine' dope test in the summer in todays ST. Haven't seen the paper so don't know the full details but I do know the player in question. Anyone seen this? And more importantly, how the hell is that player not banned?

It's an article about Jamie Heaslip (who captained Ireland today against Scotland). The test in question was in 2006 when he first joined Leinster, and showed high levels of Testosterone. Subsequent tests showed that he has an elevated natural level.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Walsh is a huge rugby fan, a lot more than cycling I would say. He knows the TV coverage of the sport well. If it was a genuine mistake on Walsh's part do you still think the word "beloved" was needed to get your point across. If the person responded by saying the tweet without "beloved", then fair enough. The point could have been made easily without the jibe. That was mentioned for one and only intentioned purposes and Walsh took the bait. The Contador fan only came in after that when Walsh was wound up.

The "beloved" was clearly a jibe at Walsh, of course. But if he clarifies what he means (the tweeter he responds to clearly is also aware of rugby coverage, pointing out that BBC have the rights to the 6 Nations, and possibly legitimately thought Walsh mis-spoke or made a mistake in comparing the coverage from the BBC to that prepared by the French TV company, but said it in a way that was a jibe at Walsh), then he doesn't have to deal with the follow up. Something like "yes, but Sky cover other Rugby, and better than that. You knew what I meant. No need to be a jerk about it" would suffice.

 

[Benotti69]

Sky are Tramadol users

Jeremy Whittle ‏@jeremycwhittle 3h
Tramadol is in common use in the peloton, and Sky admit using it. The MPCC have asked WADA to ban it, but that hasn't happened...yet.

Jeremy Whittle ‏@jeremycwhittle 2h
Barry says Tramadol made him euphoric, legs were painless and could push harder than normal.

Jeremy Whittle ‏@jeremycwhittle 2h
...also says that some riders took Tramadol every time they raced....

Somehow Walsh missed this.

 

[martinvickers]

Sky are Tramadol users



Somehow Walsh missed this.

I doubt it. Sky's doctor did a whole interview about it. It ain't news.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/team-sky-calls-for-tramadol-ban-in-peloton

I'd say odds are high Thomas and Stannard used it, in Thomas' case, probably extensively. Problem is it ain't prohibited.

 

[Netserk]

Sky are Tramadol users



Somehow Walsh missed this.

Check the painkillers thread. It was discussed here last year.

So no news there

 

[Benotti69]

I doubt it. Sky's doctor did a whole interview about it. It ain't news.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/team-sky-calls-for-tramadol-ban-in-peloton

I'd say odds are high Thomas and Stannard used it, in Thomas' case, probably extensively. Problem is it ain't prohibited.

At least you recognised it is a problem.

 

[martinvickers]

At least you recognised it is a problem.

It's a problem for your argument, B.

For the record, I think it should be banned. But should isn't worth sh!t. Come back when it is.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

It's a problem for your argument, B.

For the record, I think it should be banned. But should isn't worth sh!t. Come back when it is.

I wonder how they can square that with a ZTP that is so harsh it outs their own staff and riders.

Sure it's not banned, but does it fit into Sky's professed 'clean' mantra?

Of course not.

More of the 'never tested positive' rhetoric coupled with a nice chunk of 'marginal gains'...

 

[Dear Wiggo]

We should sticky another "letter of the law met but spirit of the law essentially perverted" thread for all the legal but dodgy practices that get revealed.

I'd like to post a link to the track team sprinter on the BC team dropping his bike deliberately for starters.

 

[martinvickers]

I wonder how they can square that with a ZTP that is so harsh it outs their own staff and riders.

Sure it's not banned, but does it fit into Sky's professed 'clean' mantra?

Of course not.

More of the 'never tested positive' rhetoric coupled with a nice chunk of 'marginal gains'...

Sky have said, well, Brailsford certainly, that 'they'll go up to the line, but no further'.

I think the painkiller in question should be prohibited - so does Phinney. So does Sky's doctor. But the bottom line is, it's not. Not yet. and you can't simply 'wish's something illegal that isn't, no matter how much you want to.

Dodgy legal is not the same as dodgy illegal. It's just not. It's basic logic 101, folks.

 

[martinvickers]

We should sticky another "letter of the law met but spirit of the law essentially perverted" thread for all the legal but dodgy practices that get revealed.

I'd like to post a link to the track team sprinter on the BC team dropping his bike deliberately for starters.

Sorry. No. That wasn't the letter of the law. That was gamesmanship; cheating, and they got away with it. It happens, I've seen other so much the same. Much like Meares got clean away with the barge on Pendleton in race 1 of their final, when Pendleton got the DQ when it was plain as day Meares probably deserved it more. Not that I'm crying tears over pendleton, who irritates me. Just proof Life ain't always fair.

It's very simple. There's what's allowed and what's not. You don't get to change that just by virtue of dislike.

Personally, I didn't like the way they hired a German kid with a couple of months to go and shafted Ross Edgar.

Neither, frankly, am I overly happy about said German Kid outdragging Gregory Bauge from nowhere (and basically never having done it since).

Said german kid crashing his bike to get a restart is the lesser of my concerns - it's far from unheard of, and it's the UCI's stupid fault for not making the rules clearer.

Equally, a month later they completely screwed the paralympian Cun dy when he clearly had a mechanical and should have had a restart - several suggested at the time on tv that there was a certain payback for the Hindes nonsense.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Sky have said, well, Brailsford certainly, that 'they'll go up to the line, but no further'.

I think the painkiller in question should be prohibited - so does Phinney. So does Sky's doctor. But the bottom line is, it's not. Not yet. and you can't simply 'wish's something illegal that isn't, no matter how much you want to.

Dodgy legal is not the same as dodgy illegal. It's just not. It's basic logic 101, folks.

No, well not really.

It depends on its use - if used for a legitimate purpose i.e. injury then ok, but just to give someone a boost in a race it isn't.
It may not be illegal or against the rules, but its introducing a grey area when you are supposed to have a zero tolerance policy.

To add - Farrells comments are that Sky only do so for medical use, it will be interesting to see what Barry says about his time with Sky.

 

[BroDeal]

No, well not really.

It depends on its use - if used for a legitimate purpose i.e. injury then ok, but just to give someone a boost in a race it isn't.
It may not be illegal or against the rules, but its introducing a grey area when you are supposed to have a zero tolerance policy.

To add - Farrells comments are that Sky only do so for medical use, it will be interesting to see what Barry says about his time with Sky.

The article I read was very fuzzy on when Sky would use Tramadol. The Sky people kept using the word "scenario." The word was used so much it made me suspect they had a PR meeting and settled on "scenario," which would of course be left undefined, to describe Tramadol's use. They never denied they would use it in races as an ergogenic. It was very interesting that they did not rule out that scenario.

This is pretty simple. A team that would use painkillers and stimulants to boost race performance would not stop at anything else unnatural. Sky's position is risible. "We are totally clean but we load our riders with painkillers to give them an edge at the end of a race."

 

[martinvickers]

No, well not really.

It depends on its use - if used for a legitimate purpose i.e. injury then ok, but just to give someone a boost in a race it isn't.
It may not be illegal or against the rules, but its introducing a grey area when you are supposed to have a zero tolerance policy.

To add - Farrells comments are that Sky only do so for medical use, it will be interesting to see what Barry says about his time with Sky.

Its SUPPOSED to be a ZTP with regard to doping, not a ZTP as regard narcotics - it's not 'straight edge' or something.

Look, I don't like Sky that much to start with, and I'll think even less of them if this thing 'becomes' something. But the bottom line is rules matter. In both directions.

 

[martinvickers]

The article I read was very fuzzy on when Sky would use Tramadol. The Sky people kept using the word "scenario." The word was used so much it made me suspect they had a PR meeting and settled on "scenario," which would of course be left undefined, to describe Tramadol's use. They never denied they would use it in races as an ergogenic. It was very interesting that they did not rule out that scenario.

This is pretty simple. A team that would use painkillers and stimulants to boost race performance would not stop at anything else unnatural. Sky's position is risible. "We are totally clean but we load our riders with painkillers to give them an edge at the end of a race."

Well, it might, might, be risible if we had something a bit more concrete that this was Sky's position than your say so.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Its SUPPOSED to be a ZTP with regard to doping, not a ZTP as regard narcotics - it's not 'straight edge' or something.

Look, I don't like Sky that much to start with, and I'll think even less of them if this thing 'becomes' something. But the bottom line is rules matter. In both directions.

Rules do indeed matter.

And so do standards. It is up to Sky to adopt their own policy and they cannot claim to have a higher standard if they just take the default position.

 

[BroDeal]

Well, it might, might, be risible if we had something a bit more concrete that this was Sky's position than your say so.

This adds nothing to the discussion. It is a waste of a valuable twenty seconds that could be more profitably spent picking my nose.

If you have a different on quotes made by Sky personnel about Tramadol use then maybe you can add something to the thread rather than your usual sanctimonious b!tchiness.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

Gotta say that as much as it should be on the banned list, it isn't, and I'm willing to bet that Sky weren't the only users.

I guess I have that race car mentality that if the rules don't forbid it, you use the advantage. That an Opioid is not banned is mystifying, but you have to draw the line somewhere, and that's where it is now.

That being said, it is a bit dodgy to yell from the rooftops that you're pan y agua (or is it Paniagua?...) from the rooftops. Especially when your skinny d0uches take such care in slinging sh!t on other people. My greatest desire this year is to see both of them falter in a massive, spectacular fashion.

 

[martinvickers]

This adds nothing to the discussion. It is a waste of a valuable twenty seconds that could be more profitably spent picking my nose.

If you have a different on quotes made by Sky personnel about Tramadol use then maybe you can add something to the thread rather than your usual sanctimonious b!tchiness.

What it adds is a reminder that the supposed Sky position you set out was in fact, entirely unevidenced. That's germane. I couldn't give a sh!t what's up your nose.

I've already linked to Farrell's quotes. As for the rest, that's a personal attack. quelle surprise.

 

[martinvickers]

Rules do indeed matter.

And so do standards. It is up to Sky to adopt their own policy and they cannot claim to have a higher standard if they just take the default position.

An entirely fair point. But then, we really don't know they're using these 'bottles'. Not yet; and we probably won't unless the drug is banned. So let's get the drug banned.

 

[BroDeal]

What it adds is a reminder that the supposed Sky position you set out was in fact, entirely unevidenced. That's germane. I couldn't give a sh!t what's up your nose.

I've already linked to Farrell's quotes. As for the rest, that's a personal attack. quelle surprise.

Sky's fuzzy position on Tramadol use is contained in this article. Maybe you should read it before telling us what is or is not Sky's position, what is or is not germane, and whether my take on Sky's position is unevidenced. Maybe you have a better source for Sky's position.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/team-sky-calls-for-tramadol-ban-in-peloton

Perhaps if you quit being an Adolf then you could actually add something to the discussion.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

Sky's fuzzy position on Tramadol use is contained in this article. Maybe you should read it before telling us what is or is not Sky's position, or what is or is not germane.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/team-sky-calls-for-tramadol-ban-in-peloton

Perhaps if you quit being an asshole then you could actually add something to the discussion.

"as a team it has prescribed Tramadol throughout the season, but only in what it calls 'appropriate scenarios'"

Funny, Sky didn't define the operable quote. I'm sure it was used sparingly...

 

[Hugh Januss]

Its SUPPOSED to be a ZTP with regard to doping, not a ZTP as regard narcotics - it's not 'straight edge' or something.

Look, I don't like Sky that much to start with, and I'll think even less of them if this thing 'becomes' something. But the bottom line is rules matter. In both directions.

After several years of "I am not a Lance fan, but he never tested positive" I am sure that you can understand why this would not be a strong way to start your argument around here.

 

[BroDeal]

"as a team it has prescribed Tramadol throughout the season, but only in what it calls 'appropriate scenarios'"

Funny, Sky didn't define the operable quote. I'm sure it was used sparingly...

I think it is a glaring omission that their doctor rules out using it for training, referring to possible drowsiness effects, but says nothing about using it for racing.