Re: Sky
Blakeslee said:
I'm not sure how anyone can continue to credibly defend Team Sky at this point. The stocks of triamcinolone would seem to explain the tremendous power output we have seen from the Sky riders with their downright skeletal physiques.
It will be interesting to see if we will see any of the riders themselves come forward or if they believe there is still enough plausible deniability left for them to hide behind. It feels like we are heading towards a tipping point similar to what happened with Lance Armstrong and the Postal Service team.
You are spot on. There came a point with Armstrong that the circumstantial evidence was so overwhelming it became hard to ignore. However with Armstrong the FBI got him by pulling his team mates before a grand jury and saying, if you don't tell the truth you will go to prison. For a while everyone thought Armstrong would go to prison until some "political intervention" saw it all pass to Travis Tygart to pursue as an Anti-Doping matter-reasoned decision etc etc.
Its worth mentioning here while I remember the massive amounts of intimidation investigators had from the Armstrong camp and his associates throughout him being investigated**. In summary much evidence was obtained under threat of criminality when the sanctions became Anti Doping in nature.
In the UK this is different and as it stands Freeman will almost certainly face the GMC and UKAD have to decide if there is enough circumstantial evidence to pursue Wiggins (now retired and who could get any sanction overturned at CAS if banned on shaky evidence).
So how does it play out? At the moment its changing daily but a lot depends on what Freeman reveals to the committee or UKAD. Lets remember in the UK these guys aren't facing a stretch in prison for lying.
The optimist in me says Freeman buckles, tells all and takes them all down with him - everyone.
The pessimist in me says he takes the heat, Wiggins forever has a cloud over him and Brailsford resigns. British Cycling/Sky restructure under new 'mismanagement' and the show goes on.
But what really bothers me is that with Alistair Campbell now being involved they are going to attempt to 'book end' the whole affair i.e. a rotten bunch of apples in an otherwise clean team who were involved only during Wiggins grand tour tenure (up until 2012). This narrative is already happening with British Cycling trotting out the old new management, lessons learned, etc etc. People buy into this kind of narrative (similar to what the UCI and Pro-Cycling have done with the Bio Passport). Yep doping is a thing of the past, its a lot cleaner now, you can tell by performances etc etc etc. A clever tactic, that was then this is now.
I don't know who can challenge this narrative? The press? The committee? UKAD?
We all know that the core bunch of GC guys (top of that tree being Froome) were super skinny and putting out obscene w/kilo hour after hour as domestiques. It doesn't take Einstein to form an option as to who that triamcinolone was for.
What makes it particularly tricky is Sapstead spoke in past tense about Freemans orders of triamcinolone. He was ordering it but when? Just up to 2012 or as recently as December 2016??
If she can clarify this one point 'book ending' it to solely the Wiggins era becomes very difficult to spin.
Deafening silence from everyone involved with cycling including Millar, Vaughters, MPCC, Sherwen and Liggett :lol:
Whatever happened to the voice of reason that was Michael Ashenden