Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

Page 1569 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re: Sky

Although Suttons comments are not published with the report for a wider context to what was selected in the report (just said to exist under 135 - Correspondence between Shane Sutton) the words Sutton gave to the committee were "what Brad was doing was unethical but not against the rules".

Suttons comments generally are about using a TUE to get a rider at 95% to 100% so I assume he means it's unethical to use a TUE to get a rider to 100% performance level even though it's within the rules. Kind of along the lines of Tim Wellens who said he would rather quit the race that get a TUE for his heat allergies. Wellens says that is not ethical in the same way as Suton, but even though within the rules does not use it to stay in the race.
 
Mar 7, 2017
1,098
0
0
Re: Sky

samhocking said:
Although Suttons comments are not published with the report for a wider context to what was selected in the report (just said to exist under 135 - Correspondence between Shane Sutton) the words Sutton gave to the committee were "what Brad was doing was unethical but not against the rules".

Suttons comments generally are about using a TUE to get a rider at 95% to 100% so I assume he means it's unethical to use a TUE to get a rider to 100% performance level even though it's within the rules. Kind of along the lines of Tim Wellens who said he would rather quit the race that get a TUE for his heat allergies. Wellens says that is not ethical in the same way as Suton, but even though within the rules does not use it to stay in the race.
Sutton's utterances contain internal contradictions from minute to minute. He's not the sharpest tool but he's ruthless. So don't be surprised if his evidence doesn't stack up under close scrutiny

But gotta love the way that every time he speaks out in Sky/BC's defence he makes things worse for them. Not forgetting the leaks. And the blackmail

The "unethical" comment was design not accident. Walsh explained it was just Sutton, Brailsfraud, Wiggo and Freeman in on the dodgy TUE strategy. If not for Fancy Bears they'd have got away with it too. Sutton wanted to make sure DCMS put the boot in
 
Re: Sky

Wiggo's Package said:
samhocking said:
Although Suttons comments are not published with the report for a wider context to what was selected in the report (just said to exist under 135 - Correspondence between Shane Sutton) the words Sutton gave to the committee were "what Brad was doing was unethical but not against the rules".

Suttons comments generally are about using a TUE to get a rider at 95% to 100% so I assume he means it's unethical to use a TUE to get a rider to 100% performance level even though it's within the rules. Kind of along the lines of Tim Wellens who said he would rather quit the race that get a TUE for his heat allergies. Wellens says that is not ethical in the same way as Suton, but even though within the rules does not use it to stay in the race.
Sutton's utterances contain internal contradictions from minute to minute. He's not the sharpest tool but he's ruthless. So don't be surprised if his evidence doesn't stack up under close scrutiny

But gotta love the way that every time he speaks out in Sky/BC's defence he makes things worse for them. Not forgetting the leaks. And the blackmail

The "unethical" comment was design not accident. Walsh explained it was just Sutton, Brailsfraud, Wiggo and Freeman in on the dodgy TUE strategy. If not for Fancy Bears they'd have got away with it too. Sutton wanted to make sure DCMS put the boot in
That's not the impression I've got. Sutton's been consistent in his comments about TUEs. He's added the unethical part, but that's what the whole debat is about, is is it ethical. Obviously it's not in a bread and water racing desire, but in reality it's within the rules. i.e. use them to get a rider to 100%. AS for getting away with it. From who? The fans?
 
Re: Sky

Wiggo's Package said:
samhocking said:
Although Suttons comments are not published with the report for a wider context to what was selected in the report (just said to exist under 135 - Correspondence between Shane Sutton) the words Sutton gave to the committee were "what Brad was doing was unethical but not against the rules".

Suttons comments generally are about using a TUE to get a rider at 95% to 100% so I assume he means it's unethical to use a TUE to get a rider to 100% performance level even though it's within the rules. Kind of along the lines of Tim Wellens who said he would rather quit the race that get a TUE for his heat allergies. Wellens says that is not ethical in the same way as Suton, but even though within the rules does not use it to stay in the race.
Sutton's utterances contain internal contradictions from minute to minute. He's not the sharpest tool but he's ruthless. So don't be surprised if his evidence doesn't stack up under close scrutiny

But gotta love the way that every time he speaks out in Sky/BC's defence he makes things worse for them. Not forgetting the leaks. And the blackmail

The "unethical" comment was design not accident. Walsh explained it was just Sutton, Brailsfraud, Wiggo and Freeman in on the dodgy TUE strategy. If not for Fancy Bears they'd have got away with it too. Sutton wanted to make sure DCMS put the boot in
So ... Russian hackers ... without motive ... find that Wiigins and Sky may have been 'unethical.'

Is that the big story?
 
Mar 7, 2017
1,098
0
0
Re: Sky

Alpe73 said:
Wiggo's Package said:
samhocking said:
Although Suttons comments are not published with the report for a wider context to what was selected in the report (just said to exist under 135 - Correspondence between Shane Sutton) the words Sutton gave to the committee were "what Brad was doing was unethical but not against the rules".

Suttons comments generally are about using a TUE to get a rider at 95% to 100% so I assume he means it's unethical to use a TUE to get a rider to 100% performance level even though it's within the rules. Kind of along the lines of Tim Wellens who said he would rather quit the race that get a TUE for his heat allergies. Wellens says that is not ethical in the same way as Suton, but even though within the rules does not use it to stay in the race.
Sutton's utterances contain internal contradictions from minute to minute. He's not the sharpest tool but he's ruthless. So don't be surprised if his evidence doesn't stack up under close scrutiny

But gotta love the way that every time he speaks out in Sky/BC's defence he makes things worse for them. Not forgetting the leaks. And the blackmail

The "unethical" comment was design not accident. Walsh explained it was just Sutton, Brailsfraud, Wiggo and Freeman in on the dodgy TUE strategy. If not for Fancy Bears they'd have got away with it too. Sutton wanted to make sure DCMS put the boot in
So ... Russian hackers ... without motive ... find that Wiigins and Sky may have been 'unethical.'

Is that the big story?
Russian hackers without motive? Other than the Russians being banned from the Olympics for state sponsored doping. An easy enough thing to forget if you try hard enough :rolleyes:

And UKAD were sent in to turn Russian anti-doping round. Yes "No bad news before Rio" UKAD! That would hack off even that nice Mr Putin :razz:
 
Mar 7, 2017
1,098
0
0
Re: Sky

samhocking said:
Wiggo's Package said:
samhocking said:
Although Suttons comments are not published with the report for a wider context to what was selected in the report (just said to exist under 135 - Correspondence between Shane Sutton) the words Sutton gave to the committee were "what Brad was doing was unethical but not against the rules".

Suttons comments generally are about using a TUE to get a rider at 95% to 100% so I assume he means it's unethical to use a TUE to get a rider to 100% performance level even though it's within the rules. Kind of along the lines of Tim Wellens who said he would rather quit the race that get a TUE for his heat allergies. Wellens says that is not ethical in the same way as Suton, but even though within the rules does not use it to stay in the race.
Sutton's utterances contain internal contradictions from minute to minute. He's not the sharpest tool but he's ruthless. So don't be surprised if his evidence doesn't stack up under close scrutiny

But gotta love the way that every time he speaks out in Sky/BC's defence he makes things worse for them. Not forgetting the leaks. And the blackmail

The "unethical" comment was design not accident. Walsh explained it was just Sutton, Brailsfraud, Wiggo and Freeman in on the dodgy TUE strategy. If not for Fancy Bears they'd have got away with it too. Sutton wanted to make sure DCMS put the boot in
That's not the impression I've got. Sutton's been consistent in his comments about TUEs. He's added the unethical part, but that's what the whole debat is about, is is it ethical. Obviously it's not in a bread and water racing desire, but in reality it's within the rules. i.e. use them to get a rider to 100%. AS for getting away with it. From who? The fans?
So Sutton's been consistent in his comments about TUEs

Apart from when he said were unethical

Thank you, I rest my case, your honour ;)
 
Re: Sky

Wiggo's Package said:
Alpe73 said:
Wiggo's Package said:
samhocking said:
Although Suttons comments are not published with the report for a wider context to what was selected in the report (just said to exist under 135 - Correspondence between Shane Sutton) the words Sutton gave to the committee were "what Brad was doing was unethical but not against the rules".

Suttons comments generally are about using a TUE to get a rider at 95% to 100% so I assume he means it's unethical to use a TUE to get a rider to 100% performance level even though it's within the rules. Kind of along the lines of Tim Wellens who said he would rather quit the race that get a TUE for his heat allergies. Wellens says that is not ethical in the same way as Suton, but even though within the rules does not use it to stay in the race.
Sutton's utterances contain internal contradictions from minute to minute. He's not the sharpest tool but he's ruthless. So don't be surprised if his evidence doesn't stack up under close scrutiny

But gotta love the way that every time he speaks out in Sky/BC's defence he makes things worse for them. Not forgetting the leaks. And the blackmail

The "unethical" comment was design not accident. Walsh explained it was just Sutton, Brailsfraud, Wiggo and Freeman in on the dodgy TUE strategy. If not for Fancy Bears they'd have got away with it too. Sutton wanted to make sure DCMS put the boot in
So ... Russian hackers ... without motive ... find that Wiigins and Sky may have been 'unethical.'

Is that the big story?
Russian hackers without motive? Other than the Russians being banned from the Olympics for state sponsored doping. An easy enough thing to forget if you try hard enough :rolleyes:

And UKAD were sent in to turn Russian anti-doping round. Yes "No bad news before Rio" UKAD! That would hack off even that nice Mr Putin :razz:
Missing the sarcasm and the point, this morning, WP. ;)
 
Mar 7, 2017
1,098
0
0
Re: Sky

Alpe73 said:
Wiggo's Package said:
Alpe73 said:
Wiggo's Package said:
samhocking said:
Although Suttons comments are not published with the report for a wider context to what was selected in the report (just said to exist under 135 - Correspondence between Shane Sutton) the words Sutton gave to the committee were "what Brad was doing was unethical but not against the rules".

Suttons comments generally are about using a TUE to get a rider at 95% to 100% so I assume he means it's unethical to use a TUE to get a rider to 100% performance level even though it's within the rules. Kind of along the lines of Tim Wellens who said he would rather quit the race that get a TUE for his heat allergies. Wellens says that is not ethical in the same way as Suton, but even though within the rules does not use it to stay in the race.
Sutton's utterances contain internal contradictions from minute to minute. He's not the sharpest tool but he's ruthless. So don't be surprised if his evidence doesn't stack up under close scrutiny

But gotta love the way that every time he speaks out in Sky/BC's defence he makes things worse for them. Not forgetting the leaks. And the blackmail

The "unethical" comment was design not accident. Walsh explained it was just Sutton, Brailsfraud, Wiggo and Freeman in on the dodgy TUE strategy. If not for Fancy Bears they'd have got away with it too. Sutton wanted to make sure DCMS put the boot in
So ... Russian hackers ... without motive ... find that Wiigins and Sky may have been 'unethical.'

Is that the big story?
Russian hackers without motive? Other than the Russians being banned from the Olympics for state sponsored doping. An easy enough thing to forget if you try hard enough :rolleyes:

And UKAD were sent in to turn Russian anti-doping round. Yes "No bad news before Rio" UKAD! That would hack off even that nice Mr Putin :razz:
Missing the sarcasm and the point, this morning, WP. ;)
Ha!

If Alpe73 v2.0 is capable of irony and humour then welcome back, dude

Btw v1.0 was not so much fun ;)
 
Re: Re:

rick james said:
macbindle said:
I disagree.

There are plenty of examples of riders who refuse TUEs even when unwell...let alone abuse them when not really Ill in order to gain an unfair advantage.
yes, Chris Froome being one
The documents released by 'Fancy Bear' confirm that Froome obtained TUEs to use the corticosteroid prednisolone in May 2013 and April 2014.

Have you forgotten how he was so very very ill at the TdR that he took a huge dose of steroids, deemed by doctors to be the sort of dose suited to a hospitalised patient, and then not only won the race but beat the reigning World TT Champion in the TT.

So no. Froome is not one of them. Far from it.
.
 
Mar 7, 2017
1,098
0
0
Re: Re:

macbindle said:
rick james said:
macbindle said:
I disagree.

There are plenty of examples of riders who refuse TUEs even when unwell...let alone abuse them when not really Ill in order to gain an unfair advantage.
yes, Chris Froome being one
The documents released by 'Fancy Bear' confirm that Froome obtained TUEs to use the corticosteroid prednisolone in May 2013 and April 2014.

Have you forgotten how he was so very very ill at the TdR that he took a huge dose of steroids, deemed by doctors to be the sort of dose suited to a hospitalised patient, and then not only won the race but beat the reigning World TT Champion in the TT.

So no. Froome is not one of them. Far from it.
.
Ha! The Dawg won the TdR by beating Contador who was on good form. Luckily Zorzoli signed off the Dawg's TUE without going to the required panel of 3 doctors. Phew! :razz:

Meanwhile those of us (not Kool Aid and the Gand obvs) who don't mainline steroids will know how hard it is to ride a bike hard for even one day let alone a week long stage race if you're properly ill. Nicole Cooke's book hit that nail on the head

And don't even mention Freeman's attempt (blocked by those Team Sky's doctors who didn't get into bed with Leinders!) to get Wiggo a dodgy TUE for the 2013 Tour of Britain. Wiggo was so ill he needed a TUE. But when deprived of it he won that race easily :lol: :lol:
 
Re: Re:

macbindle said:
rick james said:
macbindle said:
I disagree.

There are plenty of examples of riders who refuse TUEs even when unwell...let alone abuse them when not really Ill in order to gain an unfair advantage.
yes, Chris Froome being one
The documents released by 'Fancy Bear' confirm that Froome obtained TUEs to use the corticosteroid prednisolone in May 2013 and April 2014.

Have you forgotten how he was so very very ill at the TdR that he took a huge dose of steroids, deemed by doctors to be the sort of dose suited to a hospitalised patient, and then not only won the race but beat the reigning World TT Champion in the TT.

So no. Froome is not one of them. Far from it.
.
Refused one at the 2015 tour de France, a hero to some
 
Of course the only person telling us that is Froome himself. I'm not aware of any corroborating evidence to back up his claim. Are you?

Seems strange for Froome to suffer from an attack of morality in 2015 when he had no qualms about using TUEs to win the Dauphiné and Romandie.
 
Re: Re:

Wiggo's Package said:
Ha! The Dawg won the TdR by beating Contador who was on good form.
No he didn't. Contador wasn't in the race. He won the 2014 by getting in a two man break with Spilak (who won the stage) and then beating him with time trialling. Rui Costa was third.

This was very different from his 2013 win where he won by getting in a two man break with Spilak (who won the stage) and then beating him with time trialling. Rui Costa was third.

Why do you make up stuff to support your arguments? This isn't a mistake. It's just lying.
 
Re:

macbindle said:
Of course the only person telling us that is Froome himself. I'm not aware of any corroborating evidence to back up his claim. Are you?

Seems strange for Froome to suffer from an attack of morality in 2015 when he had no qualms about using TUEs to win the Dauphiné and Romandie.
2 TUE he’s had, wanting the world to crumble over 2...amazing
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
N The Clinic 10

ASK THE COMMUNITY