Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

Page 1562 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re: Sky

Parker said:
gillan1969 said:
i think we all know its Sutton
Which would get back to my original point. Why is public money being spent on a study (as the Mail report implied) on finding out if a third rate Australian pro took drugs thirty years ago? If they find out he did, so what? Who cares? A convicted doper is currently running Britain's top sports team*. Today his team beat a team lead by someone described as being 'practically certain' to have taken EPO in the 90s. The public don't care about ancient history.


(*Manchester City)

Remind me again how the omerta works.
 
Aug 26, 2014
2,148
0
0
Re: Sky

Parker said:
Electress said:
Yes, it is. The Committee is concerned with the whether more is required to regulate sport, or whether teams (whether publically or privately funded) have adequate governance without it.
Then why haven't they asked for evidence from Davide Lappartient, Christian Prudhomme or Francesca Rossi? They're not going to change the governance of the sport my changing the driver of Sky's second car.

Bear in mind here that these MPs probably couldn't name more than three non-British current riders
Team Sky shared facilities, and staff with British Cycling, the licence is held by a holding company registered in the UK. Hence are subject to UK regulation. The committee has no jurisdiction over foreign-owned / registered / based cycling organisations. I'd have thought this was self-evident?
 
Aug 26, 2014
2,148
0
0
Re: Sky

gillan1969 said:
Parker said:
gillan1969 said:
methinks you sound slightly worried..if there is 'nothing to see here' there will be...eh...nothing to see
Not really. I'm just wondering why public money is being spent on finding out if some non-British riders doped a couple of decades ago. Sutton or Knaven doping wouldn't surprise me at all. I also don't see it as important.
probably relevant for two reasons
a) credibility of witnesses...looks like they may have lied about one thing and so can the rest of their testimony be trusted?
b) if they doped they may be more likely to not have a problem working within a team that doesn't have a problem with doping?
Exactly. Team claims to have a ZTP. Team found not to adhere to it. Prompts questions of (i) integrity (ii) trust (iii) competence. All of which would suggest that maybe more oversight is needed to ensure sure teams are not allowing, enabling or facilitating doping?

There's also the point that someone who had doped in the past demonstrably had the access to dope, the inclination to cheat, and sufficient knowledge to get away with it, at least for a period. I'd have thought that was quite material, if you're concerned whether the sport has sufficient safeguards to prevent a doping culture.
 
Aug 26, 2014
2,148
0
0
Re: Re:

macbindle said:
Parker said:
rei_da_montanha said:
So a year and half later and they've got nothing more than the Russians gave them.

Errr.....No. They have loads more.

Essentially the DCMS have weighed up all the evidence and said that Wiggins use of Triamcinolone was for performance enhancement and not for treatment of asthma.
From what I've read so far in various reports, they have also not limited their findings to just one doctor and just one rider. Explicit reference to 'a source' who claims that 'a small group' of key support riders were 'all using corticosteroids OOC to lean down...'. Matt Lawton reports, in the Mail. His quotes.
 
Re: Re:

macbindle said:
Essentially the DCMS have weighed up all the evidence and said that Wiggins use of Triamcinolone was for performance enhancement and not for treatment of asthma.
People with no expertise (or importance) have given an opinion on a matter that has been in public domain for a year and a half.
 
Re: Re:

Electress said:
From what I've read so far in various reports, they have also not limited their findings to just one doctor and just one rider. Explicit reference to 'a source' who claims that 'a small group' of key support riders were 'all using corticosteroids OOC to lean down...'. Matt Lawton reports, in the Mail. His quotes.
Something that doesn't appear in any published evidence. And I'm sure something Collins won't repeat outside his Parliamentary privilege.
 
Re: Re:

Parker said:
macbindle said:
Essentially the DCMS have weighed up all the evidence and said that Wiggins use of Triamcinolone was for performance enhancement and not for treatment of asthma.
People with no expertise (or importance) have given an opinion on a matter that has been in public domain for a year and a half.
An opinion based on hours of testimony from expert witnesses.

To be honest, I haven't got time for your desperate denialism.
 
Re: Re:

Electress said:
macbindle said:
Parker said:
rei_da_montanha said:
So a year and half later and they've got nothing more than the Russians gave them.

Errr.....No. They have loads more.

Essentially the DCMS have weighed up all the evidence and said that Wiggins use of Triamcinolone was for performance enhancement and not for treatment of asthma.
From what I've read so far in various reports, they have also not limited their findings to just one doctor and just one rider. Explicit reference to 'a source' who claims that 'a small group' of key support riders were 'all using corticosteroids OOC to lean down...'. Matt Lawton reports, in the Mail. His quotes.
The quote about key support riders needs to be substantiated, if they were using corticosteroids with a TUE then UCI/WADA would know, if not we need 'the source' to provide more detail / evidence.
 
There is no chance of Wiggins losing his title. It's not at all about that. It's about the integrity of Team Sky and their perversion of the rules in the post-Armstrong era.

A key paragraph in the document is the one about what "clean" means.
 
Aug 26, 2014
2,148
0
0
Re: Re:

bigcog said:
Electress said:
macbindle said:
Parker said:
rei_da_montanha said:
So a year and half later and they've got nothing more than the Russians gave them.

Errr.....No. They have loads more.

Essentially the DCMS have weighed up all the evidence and said that Wiggins use of Triamcinolone was for performance enhancement and not for treatment of asthma.
From what I've read so far in various reports, they have also not limited their findings to just one doctor and just one rider. Explicit reference to 'a source' who claims that 'a small group' of key support riders were 'all using corticosteroids OOC to lean down...'. Matt Lawton reports, in the Mail. His quotes.
The quote about key support riders needs to be substantiated, if they were using corticosteroids with a TUE then UCI/WADA would know, if not we need 'the source' to provide more detail / evidence.
Well, it's para. 98 of the report, but clearly evidence given on the basis of confidentiality.
 
Aug 26, 2014
2,148
0
0
Re:

macbindle said:
There is no chance of Wiggins losing his title. It's not at all about that. It's about the integrity of Team Sky and their perversion of the rules in the post-Armstrong era.

A key paragraph in the document is the one about what "clean" means.
I've never thought it would lead to anyone losing titles, etc. tbh. But I am surprised it's quite this condemnatory. I thought they'd be a lot more weasel words.
 
Given the nature of the actual proceedings and the way in which they unpicked Brailsford's web of subterfuge I'm not at all surprised. They are telling it as it is.It never looked to me like it was going to be a whitewash.
 
Aug 26, 2014
2,148
0
0
Re: Re:

Parker said:
Electress said:
Well, it's para. 98 of the report, but clearly evidence given on the basis of confidentiality.
They've published other testimony anonymously. So where is this?
Check the report ? Ask the Committee ? I guess I'm prepared to believe that the Committee didn't make it up. Whether the 'source' did, who can tell?

Maybe I'm naive, but Ockham's razor and all that.
 
Re: Sky

Freddythefrog said:
Parker said:
gillan1969 said:
i think we all know its Sutton
Which would get back to my original point. Why is public money being spent on a study (as the Mail report implied) on finding out if a third rate Australian pro took drugs thirty years ago? If they find out he did, so what? Who cares? A convicted doper is currently running Britain's top sports team*. Today his team beat a team lead by someone described as being 'practically certain' to have taken EPO in the 90s. The public don't care about ancient history.


(*Manchester City)

Remind me again how the omerta works.
Usually ... it's something like ... "know when to STFUp." Pretty basic stuff. Has its upside and downside in all walks of life ... from playground to parliament.
 
Re:

macbindle said:
There is no chance of Wiggins losing his title. It's not at all about that. It's about the integrity of Team Sky and their perversion of the rules in the post-Armstrong era.

A key paragraph in the document is the one about what "clean" means.
Are you feckin serious? You stayed up late for that???

O M G :lol: :lol: :lol:
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
N The Clinic 10

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS