Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[rick james]

Re: Re:

“This does not constitute a violation of the World Anti-Doping Agency code, but it does cross the ethical line”


Folk sweating gravy over an imaginary line....no violation, time to move on

unlike Froome's soon-to-be established violation

time to stick around

Come on, it’s just a wee extra puff or 16...not quite the early 2000s but it keeps the hens clucking

 

[Robert5091]

Re: Re:

Wonder what the Murdochs are thinking now ...

Why does that matter? The Murdochs aren’t really a force for good so I doubt they’ll care

They care about their brand name (=bucks). In the middle of the bidding war for 61% of Sky, they don't need this.

 

[Salvarani]

Re: Sky

Ban Froome and this whole team. Enough is enough.

 

[TourOfSardinia]

Re:

Wiggins broke no rules, so why should the TdF win be taken from him?

A Reasoned Decision by the powers that be

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re:

Wiggins broke no rules, so why should the TdF win be taken from him?

If he lied about a non-existing illness to receive a TUE to abuse a normally banned substance. He broke the rules.
I am just speculating.

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

Wiggins broke no rules, so why should the TdF win be taken from him?

If he lied about a non-existing illness to receive a TUE to abuse a normally banned substance. He broke the rules.
I am just speculating.

Yep, it's pretty clear from the report that they think he did break the doping rules. Although they can not actually say it in those terms because the evidence for that is based on putting 2+2 together, rather than a 100% cast iron smoking gun. And there will never be 100% certainty in these kind of circumstances without the rider (or maybe the doctor) actually saying that it was intentional doping. So this is pretty much as damning as you can get.

So even if the TdF title can not technically be removed, Sky and Wiggins can be thoroughly discredited on the back of this report. This is absolutely the most damning verdict that could have been given by the parliamentary committee. They essentially called Brailsford a liar and a fraud, and Wiggins a cheat.

 

[Jagartrott]

I wish we could talk about the main persons involved here as we should: Sir David Brailsford and Sir Bradley Wiggins. For they are such outstanding citizens and deserve our deepest respect for upholding British standards.

 

[TourOfSardinia]

Re:

I wish we could talk about the main persons involved here as we should: Sir David Brailsford and Sir Bradley Wiggins. For they are such outstanding citizens and deserve our deepest respect for upholding British standards.

Such pedigree has long been recognised - take Sir Richard Rich:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Rich,_1st_Baron_Rich#Legacy

Since the mid-sixteenth century Rich has had a highly negative reputation for immorality, financial dishonesty, double dealing, perjury and treachery that is seldom matched in all of English history.

SDB is a minor player.

 

[The Hitch]

Re: Sky

Definately an asterix next to the 2012 tour now.

Cadel's start of a new era 2011 tour win looks a lot more dodgy now that the anglophone heroes Ryder and brad don't look quite as clean as JV and co claimed.

 

[Der Effe]

Re:

He looks like he walked straight out of a Wes Anderson movie. What a champ.

 

[ruamruam]

Re: Re:

Wiggins broke no rules, so why should the TdF win be taken from him?

If he lied about a non-existing illness to receive a TUE to abuse a normally banned substance. He broke the rules.
I am just speculating.

Yep, it's pretty clear from the report that they think he did break the doping rules. Although they can not actually say it in those terms because the evidence for that is based on putting 2+2 together, rather than a 100% cast iron smoking gun. And there will never be 100% certainty in these kind of circumstances without the rider (or maybe the doctor) actually saying that it was intentional doping. So this is pretty much as damning as you can get.

So even if the TdF title can not technically be removed, Sky and Wiggins can be thoroughly discredited on the back of this report. This is absolutely the most damning verdict that could have been given by the parliamentary committee. They essentially called Brailsford a liar and a fraud, and Wiggins a cheat.

If the Tour was taken off him it goes to Froome. Now that is a joke

 

[pastronef]

Re: Re:

Wiggins broke no rules, so why should the TdF win be taken from him?

If he lied about a non-existing illness to receive a TUE to abuse a normally banned substance. He broke the rules.
I am just speculating.

Yep, it's pretty clear from the report that they think he did break the doping rules. Although they can not actually say it in those terms because the evidence for that is based on putting 2+2 together, rather than a 100% cast iron smoking gun. And there will never be 100% certainty in these kind of circumstances without the rider (or maybe the doctor) actually saying that it was intentional doping. So this is pretty much as damning as you can get.

So even if the TdF title can not technically be removed, Sky and Wiggins can be thoroughly discredited on the back of this report. This is absolutely the most damning verdict that could have been given by the parliamentary committee. They essentially called Brailsford a liar and a fraud, and Wiggins a cheat.

If the Tour was taken off him it goes to Froome. Now that is a joke

that is where the end of it all is.

if Wiggins is stripped and the Tour given to Froome, Wiggins will talk and everything will crumble down.

 

[MatParker117]

Re: Re:

Wonder what the Murdochs are thinking now ...

Why does that matter? The Murdochs aren’t really a force for good so I doubt they’ll care

They care about their brand name (=bucks). In the middle of the bidding war for 61% of Sky, they don't need this.

It's not there problem, it's Disney's or Comcast's. Both who without this would of shut down the team for cost cutting reasons anyway.

 

[Red Rick]

Re: Sky

Definately an asterix next to the 2012 tour now.

Cadel's start of a new era 2011 tour win looks a lot more dodgy now that the anglophone heroes Ryder and brad don't look quite as clean as JV and co claimed.

I've totally lost track about who's been discredited the least right now.

Are we down to Quintana being the least dodgy of them all now?

Or is Dumoulin the new cleanest thing?

 

[pastronef]

Re: Sky

Definately an asterix next to the 2012 tour now.

Cadel's start of a new era 2011 tour win looks a lot more dodgy now that the anglophone heroes Ryder and brad don't look quite as clean as JV and co claimed.

I've totally lost track about who's been discredited the least right now.

Are we down to Quintana being the least dodgy of them all now?

Or is Dumoulin the new cleanest thing?

there you go. it is so much "just not Sky" that Sunweb can do what they want and they are ready for it.

Dumo and Sunweb will save cycling

 

[zalacain]

Re:

Wiggins broke no rules, so why should the TdF win be taken from him?

Needles?

 

[macbindle]

Re: Sky

Definately an asterix next to the 2012 tour now.

Cadel's start of a new era 2011 tour win looks a lot more dodgy now that the anglophone heroes Ryder and brad don't look quite as clean as JV and co claimed.

Except there isnt, and to think that there is displays a misunderstanding of the purpose of the DCMS select committee.

The crucial point is that the rules allowed Wiggins to do this. The point of the DCMS is, ultimately, to change the rules. That is not to exonerate Wiggins and Sky from their lack of ethics, but to point out That the current structure of the sport allows unethical behaviour to take place.

Select committees aren't about external events, they are about ensuring that the department is able to work effectively. In other words, this is all about making changes to render illegal what is currently merely unethical.

 

[The Hitch]

Re: Sky

Definately an asterix next to the 2012 tour now.

Cadel's start of a new era 2011 tour win looks a lot more dodgy now that the anglophone heroes Ryder and brad don't look quite as clean as JV and co claimed.

I've totally lost track about who's been discredited the least right now.

Are we down to Quintana being the least dodgy of them all now?

Or is Dumoulin the new cleanest thing?

there you go. it is so much "just not Sky" that Sunweb can do what they want and they are ready for it.

Dumo and Sunweb will save cycling

Come back to me when Sunweb has 5 TDFs.

Until then, they are not the same.

 

[The Hitch]

Re: Sky

Definately an asterix next to the 2012 tour now.

Cadel's start of a new era 2011 tour win looks a lot more dodgy now that the anglophone heroes Ryder and brad don't look quite as clean as JV and co claimed.

Except there isnt, and to think that there is displays a misunderstanding of the purpose of the DCMS select committee.

The crucial point is that the rules allowed Wiggins to do this. The point of the DCMS is, ultimately, to change the rules. That is not to exonerate Wiggins and Sky from their lack of ethics, but to point out That the current structure of the sport allows unethical behaviour to take place.

Select committees aren't about external events, they are about ensuring that the department is able to work effectively. In other words, this is all about making changes to render illegal what is currently merely unethical.

Whatever.
Wiggins looks like an absolute chump. The "clean cycling" myth further discredited. That's what I wanted.

 

[53*11]

Re: Sky

Definately an asterix next to the 2012 tour now.

Cadel's start of a new era 2011 tour win looks a lot more dodgy now that the anglophone heroes Ryder and brad don't look quite as clean as JV and co claimed.

Except there isnt, and to think that there is displays a misunderstanding of the purpose of the DCMS select committee.

The crucial point is that the rules allowed Wiggins to do this. The point of the DCMS is, ultimately, to change the rules. That is not to exonerate Wiggins and Sky from their lack of ethics, but to point out That the current structure of the sport allows unethical behaviour to take place.

Select committees aren't about external events, they are about ensuring that the department is able to work effectively. In other words, this is all about making changes to render illegal what is currently merely unethical.

it is exactly the opposite; sky exploited and abused the TUE system, by applying for a TUE for a banned drug to give their competitor an edge, a marginal gain if you like...

 

[53*11]

Re: Sky

Definately an asterix next to the 2012 tour now.

Cadel's start of a new era 2011 tour win looks a lot more dodgy now that the anglophone heroes Ryder and brad don't look quite as clean as JV and co claimed.

I've totally lost track about who's been discredited the least right now.

Are we down to Quintana being the least dodgy of them all now?

Or is Dumoulin the new cleanest thing?

there you go. it is so much "just not Sky" that Sunweb can do what they want and they are ready for it.

Dumo and Sunweb will save cycling

ahh yes the '' every other team is doing the same or even worse'' reply, except that it is sky that is the only team dominating the tour for the past 8 years, strange that, no? maybe the other teams are using the wrong PEDs?

 

[macbindle]

Definately an asterix next to the 2012 tour now.

Cadel's start of a new era 2011 tour win looks a lot more dodgy now that the anglophone heroes Ryder and brad don't look quite as clean as JV and co claimed.

Except there isnt, and to think that there is displays a misunderstanding of the purpose of the DCMS select committee.

The crucial point is that the rules allowed Wiggins to do this. The point of the DCMS is, ultimately, to change the rules. That is not to exonerate Wiggins and Sky from their lack of ethics, but to point out That the current structure of the sport allows unethical behaviour to take place.

Select committees aren't about external events, they are about ensuring that the department is able to work effectively. In other words, this is all about making changes to render illegal what is currently merely unethical.

it is exactly the opposite; sky exploited and abused the TUE system, by applying for a TUE for a banned drug to give their competitor an edge, a marginal gain if you like...

Whether you like it or not the rules allowed him to do this. That is not a defence of Wiggins, it's stating a fact. Which is why Wiggins has not committed a doping offence.

Clearly DCMS would like it to be an offence in future and you and I would agree.

What the reports says about Team Sky ethics is another thing entirely...They don't have any...but as it stands that isnt against the rules either.

 

[Alexandre B.]

Maybe Sky will join MPCC now, or are they too in love with their corticosteroids?

 

[53*11]

Re:

Definately an asterix next to the 2012 tour now.

Cadel's start of a new era 2011 tour win looks a lot more dodgy now that the anglophone heroes Ryder and brad don't look quite as clean as JV and co claimed.

Except there isnt, and to think that there is displays a misunderstanding of the purpose of the DCMS select committee.

The crucial point is that the rules allowed Wiggins to do this. The point of the DCMS is, ultimately, to change the rules. That is not to exonerate Wiggins and Sky from their lack of ethics, but to point out That the current structure of the sport allows unethical behaviour to take place.

Select committees aren't about external events, they are about ensuring that the department is able to work effectively. In other words, this is all about making changes to render illegal what is currently merely unethical.

it is exactly the opposite; sky exploited and abused the TUE system, by applying for a TUE for a banned drug to give their competitor an edge, a marginal gain if you like...

Whether you like it or not the rules allowed him to do this. That is not a defence of Wiggins, it's stating a fact. Which is why Wiggins has not committed a doping offence.

Clearly DCMS would like it to be an offence in future and you and I would agree.

What the reports says about Team Sky ethics is another thing entirely...They don't have any...but as it stands that isnt against the rules either.

we read the rules differently then! my reading of the rules is that you must have a genuine medical need, verified and signed off by your, ahem, team doctor, in order to apply for and receive a TUE for a drug that would confer an advantage over a rider that cannot use that ordinarily banned drug. to me, that is breaking the rules, the spirit and intent of the rules too. it is clear the committee concluded that skys abuse of the TUE system was unethical, disingenuous and dishonest. if all teams are allowed do this then it becomes a complete doping free for all

 

[hrotha]

"The rules allow this".

I mean, it's called "Therapeutic Use Exemption", not "PED Buffet Pass".