Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[Catwhoorg]

Is it possible that he only sits on TUE judgement for sports that he has no active interests ?

Shouldn't you actually try to find a little more out before throwing accusations of corruption ?

 

[sniper]

Re:

Is it possible that he only sits on TUE judgement for sports that he has no active interests ?

Shouldn't you actually try to find a little more out before throwing accusations of corruption ?

imo it's a conflict of interest to be a sky employee and at the same time perform any kind of duties for UKAD. The double affiliation causes the CoI. Not a grave one, but an obvious one, and another one.

 

[King Boonen]

Re: Re:

Google ain't bust, just couldn't find anything on the UK Sport panel as opposed to the UKADA TUE panel. Assuming Peters in a member of the latter, I still think he's too close to be reviewing even an academy or Olympic Development rider's TUE. This is the pool where 'the chosen ones' are selected 'ever so quickly' to become fully fledged members of the British Cycling team. That'll be the same team that Peters built his reputation on, the one he is still involved with (according to his bio).

this.

And regardless what he's doing, Peters iis a Sky employee doing tasks for the UKAD. It's a conflict of interest even if Peters is only cleaning the toilets there.

Why did they come to Peters to do this job anyway?
No other docs qualified enough to make TUE recommendations?

It's such a corrupt incestuous lot, Sky, BC, UKAD. This is just another, even if only minor, illustration.

I would hazard a guess that this occurs in many, many countries. I would also guess that any conflicts are well known, declared and it's likely he's not involved in the decision making process regarding any athlete he is consulting with, either directly or through their team.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

Google ain't bust, just couldn't find anything on the UK Sport panel as opposed to the UKADA TUE panel. Assuming Peters in a member of the latter, I still think he's too close to be reviewing even an academy or Olympic Development rider's TUE. This is the pool where 'the chosen ones' are selected 'ever so quickly' to become fully fledged members of the British Cycling team. That'll be the same team that Peters built his reputation on, the one he is still involved with (according to his bio).

this.

And regardless what he's doing, Peters iis a Sky employee doing tasks for the UKAD. It's a conflict of interest even if Peters is only cleaning the toilets there.

Why did they come to Peters to do this job anyway?
No other docs qualified enough to make TUE recommendations?

It's such a corrupt incestuous lot, Sky, BC, UKAD. This is just another, even if only minor, illustration.

I would hazard a guess that this occurs in many, many countries. I would also guess that any conflicts are well known, declared and it's likely he's not involved in the decision making process regarding any athlete he is consulting with, either directly or through their team.

of course, just like doping happens in many, many countries.
that's the point.
these threads are so long because British sports still have this "brits don't dope cuz we're holier than the pope" thing going that desperately needs debunking.
(cf. e.g. Salzwedel: "I wanted clean athletes for T-mobile and therefore I went to Britain")

 

[The Carrot]

Re: Re:

Google ain't bust, just couldn't find anything on the UK Sport panel as opposed to the UKADA TUE panel. Assuming Peters in a member of the latter, I still think he's too close to be reviewing even an academy or Olympic Development rider's TUE. This is the pool where 'the chosen ones' are selected 'ever so quickly' to become fully fledged members of the British Cycling team. That'll be the same team that Peters built his reputation on, the one he is still involved with (according to his bio).

this.

And regardless what he's doing, Peters iis a Sky employee doing tasks for the UKAD. It's a conflict of interest even if Peters is only cleaning the toilets there.

Why did they come to Peters to do this job anyway?
No other docs qualified enough to make TUE recommendations?

It's such a corrupt incestuous lot, Sky, BC, UKAD. This is just another, even if only minor, illustration.

I would hazard a guess that this occurs in many, many countries. I would also guess that any conflicts are well known, declared and it's likely he's not involved in the decision making process regarding any athlete he is consulting with, either directly or through their team.

You could well be right, but he is (and has been) involved with a lot of sports; cycling, football, Taekwondo, Canoeing, Snooker, England Rugby. That would therefore severely limit the amount of cases he would actually be eligible to sit in on (if Potential COIs are declared) and I'm guessing he ain't cheap.

 

[King Boonen]

Re: Re:

Google ain't bust, just couldn't find anything on the UK Sport panel as opposed to the UKADA TUE panel. Assuming Peters in a member of the latter, I still think he's too close to be reviewing even an academy or Olympic Development rider's TUE. This is the pool where 'the chosen ones' are selected 'ever so quickly' to become fully fledged members of the British Cycling team. That'll be the same team that Peters built his reputation on, the one he is still involved with (according to his bio).

this.

And regardless what he's doing, Peters iis a Sky employee doing tasks for the UKAD. It's a conflict of interest even if Peters is only cleaning the toilets there.

Why did they come to Peters to do this job anyway?
No other docs qualified enough to make TUE recommendations?

It's such a corrupt incestuous lot, Sky, BC, UKAD. This is just another, even if only minor, illustration.

I would hazard a guess that this occurs in many, many countries. I would also guess that any conflicts are well known, declared and it's likely he's not involved in the decision making process regarding any athlete he is consulting with, either directly or through their team.

of course, just like doping happens in many, many countries.
that's the point.
these threads are so long because British sports still have this "brits don't dope cuz we're holier than the pope" thing going that desperately needs debunking.
(cf. e.g. Salzwedel: "I wanted clean athletes for T-mobile and therefore I went to Britain")

I don't disagree, I've been getting very annoyed recently with athletics commentators moaning about Justin Gatlin then praising Ohuruogu in the same breath, claiming they're trying good at catching dopers in athletics and all the rubbish they spout during a lull in events at diamond league meets. They're either stupid, lying or massively hypocritical. I even had the whole miracle mile story with Ovett, Cram and Coe being lauded in a time when we know doping was rife without a hint of irony.

I just don't think this line of discussion would stand up to scrutiny if anyone bothered to dig into it, that's all.

 

[King Boonen]

Re: Re:

Google ain't bust, just couldn't find anything on the UK Sport panel as opposed to the UKADA TUE panel. Assuming Peters in a member of the latter, I still think he's too close to be reviewing even an academy or Olympic Development rider's TUE. This is the pool where 'the chosen ones' are selected 'ever so quickly' to become fully fledged members of the British Cycling team. That'll be the same team that Peters built his reputation on, the one he is still involved with (according to his bio).

this.

And regardless what he's doing, Peters iis a Sky employee doing tasks for the UKAD. It's a conflict of interest even if Peters is only cleaning the toilets there.

Why did they come to Peters to do this job anyway?
No other docs qualified enough to make TUE recommendations?

It's such a corrupt incestuous lot, Sky, BC, UKAD. This is just another, even if only minor, illustration.

I would hazard a guess that this occurs in many, many countries. I would also guess that any conflicts are well known, declared and it's likely he's not involved in the decision making process regarding any athlete he is consulting with, either directly or through their team.

You could well be right, but he is (and has been) involved with a lot of sports; cycling, football, Taekwondo, Canoeing, Snooker, England Rugby. That would therefore severely limit the amount of cases he would actually be eligible to sit in on (if Potential COIs are declared) and I'm guessing he ain't cheap.

The same happens across other industries too. It's possible he does it for expenses only, I know that's the case in the pharmaceutical industry.

 

[sniper]

i noticed Peters is also an expert witness for WADA.
not sure what to make of that.
let's say it won't hurt Sky to have this guy on the payroll.

 

[King Boonen]

Re:

i noticed Peters is also an expert witness for WADA.
not sure what to make of that.
let's say it won't hurt Sky to have this guy on the payroll.

It's the same thing again. Expert witnesses will always come from the field and have been heavily involved with many individuals, it's just the way it works and it's how they stay experts.


Of course, it's always going to be open to abuse, even with the safe-guards that are no doubt in place, so I don't disagree that it can't hurt Sky to have him involved. But he's a highly sought after individual who most likely doesn't need the Sky paycheck so I don't he'd be willing to risk his livelihood over a TUE or anything like that. He could say bye bye to cycling and still earn just as much elsewhere, I'm sure Premier League clubs pay him more.

 

[sniper]

Re: Sky

not unfair points, King Boonen.
However, "risk his living". hm.
For all we know this is Peters way of "making a living".
We don't know what Sky pays him. Nor what they pay him for. (well, officially, we know)
We don't know what he's doing at those football clubs either. For all we know it's about providing doping intelligence. It's speculation, but so is the thought that he'd be 'risking his living' by enabling fraud, when for all we know fraud is the way he got where he is right now.

Does any other WT team have a doctor who is also a WADA expert witness?

 

[King Boonen]

He could well do that, I really don't know much about him, but if he does then I'd have thought he'd target bigger sports than cycling, but it's a fair point.


I don't think WADA have a list of expert witnesses publicly available do they? At least, not in the sense of these are the guys they call for such and such. I'm sure they will have a list of experts in particular fields they use for cases, but expert witnesses are outside consultants so I'm not sure we could find a list to check and it will no doubt be ever changing. Expert witnesses are also governed by conflict of interest rules so that will come into play. I wouldn't be surprised if other teams did have doctors who had testified for WADA though.

 

[sniper]

Re:

He could well do that, I really don't know much about him, but if he does then I'd have thought he'd target bigger sports than cycling, but it's a fair point.


I don't think WADA have a list of expert witnesses publicly available do they? At least, not in the sense of these are the guys they call for such and such. I'm sure they will have a list of experts in particular fields they use for cases, but expert witnesses are outside consultants so I'm not sure we could find a list to check and it will no doubt be ever changing. Expert witnesses are also governed by conflict of interest rules so that will come into play. I wouldn't be surprised if other teams did have doctors who had testified for WADA though.

cheers, KB.

agreed, cycling not a big sport and i get your point, he could stick to soccer and not risk burning his hands on cycling.

yeah, i figured it'd be difficult to double check that WADA expert thing.

 

[King Boonen]

It's certainly interesting, might be worth looking at...

 

[BigMac]

Painful to watch Ken doll drop Nibali and Costa like stones there. He even looked to be enjoying it. I know the latter never was too good on the steep stuff, but still. They had almost the entire team coming to the last kilometers.

 

[TheSpud]

Re:

It's certainly interesting, might be worth looking at...

Wasnt one of Floyds team an expert / consultant to the doping agencies on other cases? Not quite the same but it does show people work for both sides.

 

[peloton]

Re: Sky

Couldn't find the Walsh thread, but fits here too

Voilá

 

[BYOP88]

Re: Sky

Couldn't find the Walsh thread, but fits here too

Voilá

Sky win and it's a good day for cleanER cycling. Sky lose and it's a bad day because the evil dopers have won.

 

[peloton]

I'll never forget Walsh's comment how the Vuelta podium -12 was doping, because of Spain having no real testing and how they climbed so fast. It was so funny.

Froome was 4th

 

[heart_attack_man]

Re: Sky

Couldn't find the Walsh thread, but fits here too

Voilá

This right here is why Kimmage has fk all to do with him any more. He doesn't even try and hide his "clever" ruse now.

Agree with the comment in the Walsh thread about being "embedded" with Sky again. Sheesh.

I suppose in some ways you can't blame him - so many years being vilified and disbelieved, surely he must just be viewing this as his payday.

Kudos, Kimmage, for staying true to your values. It's the true test of character, and Walsh has certainly been shown to be wanting in that department.

 

[heart_attack_man]

Re:

I'll never forget Walsh's comment how the Vuelta podium -12 was doping, because of Spain having no real testing and how they climbed so fast. It was so funny.

Froome was 4th

He was called a troll over Armstrong, but I'd repeat that with that comment on the Vuelta Podium. Trolley McTroll from Trollsborough, Trollsington. Not that I don't think the podium was doping - of course I do...

I guess it's hard when a big pay day comes, like Seven Deadly Sins was, to then go back to a normal pay day... Keep pushing the "dream" to the gullible and keep cashing the cheques.

 

[thehook]

Re: Re:

I'll never forget Walsh's comment how the Vuelta podium -12 was doping, because of Spain having no real testing and how they climbed so fast. It was so funny.

Froome was 4th

He was called a troll over Armstrong, but I'd repeat that with that comment on the Vuelta Podium. Trolley McTroll from Trollsborough, Trollsington. Not that I don't think the podium was doping - of course I do...

I guess it's hard when a big pay day comes, like Seven Deadly Sins was, to then go back to a normal pay day... Keep pushing the "dream" to the gullible and keep cashing the cheques.

So essentialy what he is doing. I s the same as everyone else whom cashed big paychecks in the Armstrong era. Thee same people he vilified.

The Ultimate Judas.

 

[BigMac]

Geraint Thomas reaches the zenith of his transformation.

 

[BYOP88]

I remember the days when he was a gruppetto rider.

 

[hfer07]

Like I wrote on the ToS stage 5 thread- I've always considered "G" a good climber, but what bothers me is the so called "SKY trade mark for shedding massive weight while increasing PTWR- in matter of MONTHS"...... Again I do actually like G a lot, but today was kind of strange to see him climbing that well among pure climbers..... ....... "Not Normal"

 

[Irondan]

Re:

Like I wrote on the ToS stage 5 thread- I've always considered "G" a good climber, but what bothers me is the so called "SKY trade mark for shedding massive weight while increasing PTWR- in matter of MONTHS"...... Again I do actually like G a lot, but today was kind of strange to see him climbing that well among pure climbers..... ....... "Not Normal"

I like G too, and did not see today's stage but I had to do a double take when I saw the results sheet a little while ago. I agree, this is not normal at all.

Climbing to almost 2700 meters with actual 'climbers' and beating all but one is not just a red flag, it's a red flag with fireworks and very loud music, with the occasional punch in the face.

I guess G went there....