Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[justifieddoubter]

Re:

This is worth a read again

http://www.stickybottle.com/uncategorized/opinion-has-team-sky-kept-the-promises-it-made-on-doping/

It really shows Sky have been lying through their teeth.

"Brailsford says about examining this data for recruitment purposes: 'All the best bike riders, the clean ones, you see steady progression; you can graph it. The ones whose performances go up in a spike usually test positive. There are no secrets. It’s basic stuff; intelligence gathering.'"

Froomey?

 

[RownhamHill]

Re:

His World Record was 7 june.

It's flat out ridiculous he needs a nuclear bomb to treat pollen one year and then doesn't need it when he rides the World Record.

And no, it's ridiulously idiotic to even suggest that riding indoors makes all the difference. As a hayfever patient I wish it was that easy. Even if I stay at home all day, as soon as my children enter the house it's all hell breaking loose due to pollen in their hair/clothes.

Couldn't you change 'treat pollen' in that first sentence to something like 'reach peak performance' and the question would make just as much sense, and be equally salient?

EDIT: whoops, obviously should be in that second sentence!

 

[B_Ugli]

Re: Sky

Whilst I don't have a great deal of time for Pat McQuaid and his motives are questionable I have to agree with him on this:

Finally, when asked about the situation regarding Wiggins, McQuaid pointed the finger at the former Tour de France winner’s previous team, Team Sky, rather than the rider.

“It would look like it’s more Sky and their ethical policy. Their attitude is that marginal gains are anything that’s possible as long as it’s in the rules. TUEs are in the rules. When you’re trying to preach the ethics and this, that and the other, and you’re seeming to be bending the rule, it’s a bit hypocritical to be honest with you.”

The massive grey area just within the rules is the big problem in all of this and what the public perceive as clean (subjective) vs what the teams consider clean (objective).

The whole thing is perception - its pretty black and white to joe public but pretty grey to pro sportsmen.

What is clean and what is not? What is allowed and what is not? What is perceived to be clean?

Clean is a very subjective term within the general population in the context of sport. Most normal people I would wager would term clean to mean athletes having access to the same dietary products they buy from their local supermarket together with energy drinks and the like.

However ‘clean’ teams can occupy that massive grey area between energy drinks on the one hand and EPO/Grown Hormones on the other hand. Within this grey area is a myriad of supplements, vitamins, therapies, undetectable treatments, detectable treatments within the rules, detectable treatments within the rules for which there is allowed amount (such as caffeine), and many other treatments that you, I, and probably the authorities aren’t aware of.

Clean by the letter of the law but in the publics perception? Certainly not.

 

[Franklin]

Re: Re:

Couldn't you change 'treat pollen' in that first sentence to something like 'reach peak performance' and the question would make just as much sense, and be equally salient?

Not as much as you desperately hope for. Whereas pollen allergy affect a track and GT rider pretty much the same way (namely very acute), weight loss is much more important for the GT man than for the track rider. And sadly for your argument, this drug is about pollen allergies and weightloss.

It's a very nice attempt at defence, but it doesn't work at all.

To drive this one home; I'm much more affected by pollen allergy than any pro rider (yes, I'm very, very certain). yet medication like this never come into the discussion. There's a reason medical professionals react shocked about the choice of medication. And that's just another problematic part... why pick this drug? It's like using morphine because you have a headache... there's no normal doctor who would "okay" such a prescription.

The defence that this is different because he's a professional athlete doesn't work either, as the same reasoning remains: Experts say this is absolutely the wrong, even dangerous, way to tackle pollen allergy.

And once again we need to look at the lies. The lies about not allowing Tues on your riders, the no needle policy.

So we have a drug that is pointed out by dopers as being standard protocol for PED use, yet isn't standard (not remotely!) for pollen allergy. We also have a wall of lies around it.

It's extremely hard to believe that this wasn't about PED usage disguised as a TUE.

This is not being paranoid. This is looking at the facts and drawing the most likely conclusion. There's no more to it really. He can keep his win for all I care, but this affair should make it clear for every person with a brain what happened with Wiggo.

 

[RownhamHill]

Re: Re:

Couldn't you change 'treat pollen' in that first sentence to something like 'reach peak performance' and the question would make just as much sense, and be equally salient?

Not as much as you desperately hope for. Whereas pollen allergy affect a track and GT rider pretty much the same way (namely very acute), weight loss is much more important for the GT man than for the track rider. And sadly for your argument, this drug is about pollen allergies and weightloss.

It's a very nice attempt at defence, but it doesn't work at all.

To drive this one home; I'm much more affected by pollen allergy than any pro rider (yes, I'm very, very certain). yet medication like this never come into the discussion. There's a reason medical professionals react shocked about the choice of medication. And that's just another problematic part... why pick this drug? It's like using morphine because you have a headache... there's no normal doctor who would "okay" such a prescription.

The defence that this is different because he's a professional athlete doesn't work either, as the same reasoning remains: Experts say this is absolutely the wrong, even dangerous, way to tackle pollen allergy.

And once again we need to look at the lies. The lies about not allowing Tues on your riders, the no needle policy.

So we have a drug that is pointed out by dopers as being standard protocol for PED use, yet isn't standard (not remotely!) for pollen allergy. We also have a wall of lies around it.

It's extremely hard to believe that this wasn't about PED usage disguised as a TUE.

This is not being paranoid. This is looking at the facts and drawing the most likely conclusion. There's no more to it really. He can keep his win for all I care, but this affair should make it clear for every person with a brain what happened with Wiggo.

Easy on the 'desperate hopes' - was just a question that sprung to my mind when I read your post, no more, no more less! I'm not defending anyone for anything, and I certainly haven't made any arguments about anything!

Anyway.

What you seem to be saying is that the TUE was taken simply for the purposes of weight-loss, which stopped being relevant once Wiggins quit grand tours. Which makes sense. Thanks for the answer.

 

[MmeDesgrange]

No wonder British Cycling is desperate to be able to reinstate Shane Sutton, the man whose mantra is 'it's not ethical, but it's legal'

 

[Brullnux]

The moment SKY throw Wiggins under the bus, is the moment that they fall apart. I hope wiggo does the right thing and stands up for himself.

 

[MmeDesgrange]

Re:

The moment SKY throw Wiggins under the bus, is the moment that they fall apart. I hope wiggo does the right thing and stands up for himself.

I have popcorn on standby - but will he risk the coveted knighthood?

 

[ontheroad]

Wiggins left to fight his own battle it seems whilst Sky are in hiding and running away from the problem. Dave the coward as team principal evidently considers himself answerable to no-one but himself. Meanwhile not one journalist have I seen criticise him for going missing.

 

[BullsFan22]

Re:

Wiggins left to fight his own battle it seems whilst Sky are in hiding and running away from the problem. Dave the coward as team principal evidently considers himself answerable to no-one but himself. Meanwhile not one journalist have I seen criticise him for going missing.

You won't hear or read many British journalists being too 'critical' of Sky as a team or indeed individuals like Wiggins. Dan Benson, as I am sure most on the Clinic are aware by now, wrote a nice piece earlier this week regarding Wiggins. It didn't go all out, but it certainly made sense and it touched upon a number of points that we have discussed here in the Clinic (whether or not someone is lambasting or defending Sky and Wiggins is beside the point). Of course, if someone writes an article here at CN or the Guardian, the BBC, Telegraph, Sunday Times, etc. and it doesn't have everything that we here in the Clinic think it should, it doesn't mean it was a bad article. I do think that, in that regard, we are in our Clinic bubble. Those journalists can't just go in and try to dissemble everything and question everyone from the director to the team doctor to the rider to the riders pets. I am sure that even those highly critical (say Kimmage or someone else) need to take a few steps and make sure that they have all their papers and notes in order before they start questioning and being in 'attack mode.' Now, do I think that British journalists and the companies/newspapers/channels/stations they work have been quiet on issues regarding British athletes/teams/doctors/personnel? Absolutely. They haven't had problems whatsoever digging into the Russians, Kenyans, Jamaicans, Chinese and others, but British athletes? Not as fast. Hopefully those tendencies change. I am sure if they dig deep enough, ask as many people as are necessary to get the right information and try to get both sides (or many sides) of the issue, then they'll be able to come to viable conclusions. Are a some of them not doing that? I think so. Are all of them? I hope not. In all fairness to the Brits, they are hardly the only ones not questioning their own athletes.

 

[PremierAndrew]

Tbf, the most read article on the BBC in the last 24 hrs is: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37456623

Wiggins is getting a lot more attention from British media than would have been expected considering that he's not actually tested positive/stripped of any of his results etc

 

[ontheroad]

Re: Re:

Wiggins left to fight his own battle it seems whilst Sky are in hiding and running away from the problem. Dave the coward as team principal evidently considers himself answerable to no-one but himself. Meanwhile not one journalist have I seen criticise him for going missing.

You won't hear or read many British journalists being too 'critical' of Sky as a team or indeed individuals like Wiggins. Dan Benson, as I am sure most on the Clinic are aware by now, wrote a nice piece earlier this week regarding Wiggins. It didn't go all out, but it certainly made sense and it touched upon a number of points that we have discussed here in the Clinic (whether or not someone is lambasting or defending Sky and Wiggins is beside the point). Of course, if someone writes an article here at CN or the Guardian, the BBC, Telegraph, Sunday Times, etc. and it doesn't have everything that we here in the Clinic think it should, it doesn't mean it was a bad article. I do think that, in that regard, we are in our Clinic bubble. Those journalists can't just go in and try to dissemble everything and question everyone from the director to the team doctor to the rider to the riders pets. I am sure that even those highly critical (say Kimmage or someone else) need to take a few steps and make sure that they have all their papers and notes in order before they start questioning and being in 'attack mode.' Now, do I think that British journalists and the companies/newspapers/channels/stations they work have been quiet on issues regarding British athletes/teams/doctors/personnel? Absolutely. They haven't had problems whatsoever digging into the Russians, Kenyans, Jamaicans, Chinese and others, but British athletes? Not as fast. Hopefully those tendencies change. I am sure if they dig deep enough, ask as many people as are necessary to get the right information and try to get both sides (or many sides) of the issue, then they'll be able to come to viable conclusions. Are a some of them not doing that? I think so. Are all of them? I hope not. In all fairness to the Brits, they are hardly the only ones not questioning their own athletes.

Fair comment, I do understand the limitations of how far they can go. I guess my point was that Wiggins himself has borne the brunt of the criticism and flak since the story broke, when the real people who should be answering the questions are those who sanctioned and facilitated the corticosteroid approval. As Steffen said yesterday the athlete himself could be lower down the food chain when it comes to the administration of the drug. Instead it looks like Wiggins has been left to fend for himself while the support network around him at sky remain silent on the matter.

 

[The Hitch]

Re: Sky

Whilst I don't have a great deal of time for Pat McQuaid and his motives are questionable I have to agree with him on this:

Finally, when asked about the situation regarding Wiggins, McQuaid pointed the finger at the former Tour de France winner’s previous team, Team Sky, rather than the rider.

“It would look like it’s more Sky and their ethical policy. Their attitude is that marginal gains are anything that’s possible as long as it’s in the rules. TUEs are in the rules. When you’re trying to preach the ethics and this, that and the other, and you’re seeming to be bending the rule, it’s a bit hypocritical to be honest with you.”

The massive grey area just within the rules is the big problem in all of this and what the public perceive as clean (subjective) vs what the teams consider clean (objective).

The whole thing is perception - its pretty black and white to joe public but pretty grey to pro sportsmen.

What is clean and what is not? What is allowed and what is not? What is perceived to be clean?

Clean is a very subjective term within the general population in the context of sport. Most normal people I would wager would term clean to mean athletes having access to the same dietary products they buy from their local supermarket together with energy drinks and the like.

However ‘clean’ teams can occupy that massive grey area between energy drinks on the one hand and EPO/Grown Hormones on the other hand. Within this grey area is a myriad of supplements, vitamins, therapies, undetectable treatments, detectable treatments within the rules, detectable treatments within the rules for which there is allowed amount (such as caffeine), and many other treatments that you, I, and probably the authorities aren’t aware of.

Clean by the letter of the law but in the publics perception? Certainly not.

You think a serial liar and fraud like Wiggins would stick only to legal doping?

 

[The Hitch]

Re: Re:

Wiggins left to fight his own battle it seems whilst Sky are in hiding and running away from the problem. Dave the coward as team principal evidently considers himself answerable to no-one but himself. Meanwhile not one journalist have I seen criticise him for going missing.

You won't hear or read many British journalists being too 'critical' of Sky as a team or indeed individuals like Wiggins. Dan Benson, as I am sure most on the Clinic are aware by now, wrote a nice piece earlier this week regarding Wiggins. It didn't go all out, but it certainly made sense and it touched upon a number of points that we have discussed here in the Clinic (whether or not someone is lambasting or defending Sky and Wiggins is beside the point). Of course, if someone writes an article here at CN or the Guardian, the BBC, Telegraph, Sunday Times, etc. and it doesn't have everything that we here in the Clinic think it should, it doesn't mean it was a bad article. I do think that, in that regard, we are in our Clinic bubble. Those journalists can't just go in and try to dissemble everything and question everyone from the director to the team doctor to the rider to the riders pets. I am sure that even those highly critical (say Kimmage or someone else) need to take a few steps and make sure that they have all their papers and notes in order before they start questioning and being in 'attack mode.' Now, do I think that British journalists and the companies/newspapers/channels/stations they work have been quiet on issues regarding British athletes/teams/doctors/personnel? Absolutely. They haven't had problems whatsoever digging into the Russians, Kenyans, Jamaicans, Chinese and others, but British athletes? Not as fast. Hopefully those tendencies change. I am sure if they dig deep enough, ask as many people as are necessary to get the right information and try to get both sides (or many sides) of the issue, then they'll be able to come to viable conclusions. Are a some of them not doing that? I think so. Are all of them? I hope not. In all fairness to the Brits, they are hardly the only ones not questioning their own athletes.

Fair comment, I do understand the limitations of how far they can go. I guess my point was that Wiggins himself has borne the brunt of the criticism and flak since the story broke, when the real people who should be answering the questions are those who sanctioned and facilitated the corticosteroid approval. As Steffen said yesterday the athlete himself could be lower down the food chain when it comes to the administration of the drug. Instead it looks like Wiggins has been left to fend for himself while the support network around him at sky remain silent on the matter.

Nah. Wiggins got all the credit and adulation for "winning the tour clean". He deserves the other side of it now.

 

[ontheroad]

Re:

Wiggins left to fight his own battle it seems whilst Sky are in hiding and running away from the problem.

can't blame them..............an illegal hack...........discloses personal confidential info.......

no rule breaking found.....................while riders treatments are rather dodgy...there is not

a lot to answer..............

Mark L

Convenient excuse to hide behind. It's not exactly a very personal medical condition is an allergy to pollen so that is rubbish considering the allegations that have been laid at Sky and Wiggins. A complete red herring.

Even if it wasn't there are still answers that Brailsford has to answer such as who from within the team made the decision to apply for the TUE? Did he approve and sanction the application and was it to try and simply normalise the riders health or could he not see (given the strength of the PED) how it may have actually given him an unfair advantage. How does this tie in with the zero tolerance policy previously advocated?

A 'spokesman' for Sky issued the follwoing statement in the last few days.


A spokesman for Team Sky said: "TUEs for Team Sky riders have been granted by the appropriate authorities and in complete accordance with the rules.

"This is a complex area given the obvious issues around medical confidentiality. There is a legitimate debate across sport on where best to draw the line on transparency.

"It is very rare that a rider needs a TUE and we have robust internal processes in place that we are confident in and which we constantly review.

"Team Sky's approach to anti-doping and our commitment to clean competition are well known."

What are these internal processes and how do they work, explain how they worked in this case? So it's not simply good enough to say that they haven't questions to answer due to medical confidentiality, in fact its rubbish.


Then there are the following quotes from Brailsford to try and reconcile:


“Why does [a TUE] create alarm bells? Because they’ve been abused in the past. We know [Lance] Armstrong tested positive [at the 1999 Tour, and that] they got a TUE that was backdated. That sort of scenario leads people to be very suspicious.


"If you're a cheat, you're a cheat, you're not half a cheat," Brailsford said in an interview with Cycling News

"You wouldn't say, 'I'll cheat here but I'm not going to cheat over there; I'll cheat on a Monday but not on a Tuesday.'


Instead all we get is silence which only creates a bigger doubt about exactly what they are hiding.

 

[The Hitch]

I haven't been on the internet that much in the last week. Anyone know how our little brother Sky apologist forums (bike radar and velorooms) have been taking this?

 

[Benotti69]

ouch!

Steven de jongh ‏@stevendejongh 39m ago

If you have a zero tolerance policy, you better stick to it from the start. It failed straight from that point.

I bet that is as much as De Jongh will spit in the soup.

Not looking good for Sky. A rider on their team took serious medication before big tours. The manager, the Master of Detail, the guy who oversaw huge Olympic success on track and now on the road has gone missing.

Cycling never changes.

 

[argel]

Re:

Tbf, the most read article on the BBC in the last 24 hrs is: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37456623

Wiggins is getting a lot more attention from British media than would have been expected considering that he's not actually tested positive/stripped of any of his results etc

I made this point during the tour and was dismissed out of hand - there's plenty of incentive for the BBC in particular to dig deeper into this and they've shown the inclination to do so, asking uncomfortable questions now. Their headlines are openly scpetical.

Disappointed with Wiggins obviously. A lot of my friends are dismissing it and I've had to say that even though I thought he was less likely. it appears he was at best abusing the TUE rules to gain a competitive advantage.

 

[Benotti69]

If Sky/Wiggins were lying about TUEs and needle injections, it aint a giant leap of faith to think he was taking other PEDs to enhance his performance.

 

[Freddythefrog]

Re:

I haven't been on the internet that much in the last week. Anyone know how our little brother Sky apologist forums (bike radar and velorooms) have been taking this?

Last night one guy said he was putting on his Wiggins jersey and going out for a ride and going to try and not think of the witch-hunt brigade and their awful treatment of his hero. What did those people do with those yellow wrist bands ? The last view of them as the trash can lid was closed just had to be difficult. hell of a metaphoric action for them.

Anyway, thinking of far nicer things, Edward Pickering and the team over at Procycling, ever ones to sit on the gravy train and milk the punters for every cent, have today launched this month's magazine with the issue given over to analysing just how much Cycling in GB will never be the same after Sir Bradley Wiggins.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/latest-issue-of-procycling-out-now-1/?utm_content=bufferf53a5&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

You just can't make this stuff up - look at that cover. Is there an interview in there with Sir David where he explains the effect of fluffing pillows on climbing times or how you too can buy rounder wheels like the ones Sky use for just £3,000 per wheel set?

 

[Puckfiend]

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Coming to a milk cartoon near you soon!

 

[PremierAndrew]

Re:

If Sky/Wiggins were lying about TUEs and needle injections, it aint a giant leap of faith to think he was taking other PEDs to enhance his performance.

I mean, he had no TUEs for the 2011 Vuelta, and didnt have any 'legal' injections in 2009 either

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

Re:

If Sky/Wiggins were lying about TUEs and needle injections, it aint a giant leap of faith to think he was taking other PEDs to enhance his performance.

I once lied about not going to school. I probably also lied when I said I didn't kill my neighbor. I really love your sense of logic,<edited by mods>

 

[Benotti69]

JV still getting his digs in

Jonathan Vaughters ‏@Vaughters

Thing is about saying "no rules were broken" concerning TUE, is that statement only true if stated reason u garnered TUE is 100% truthful.

 

[Brullnux]

Re: Re:

Tbf, the most read article on the BBC in the last 24 hrs is: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37456623

Wiggins is getting a lot more attention from British media than would have been expected considering that he's not actually tested positive/stripped of any of his results etc

I made this point during the tour and was dismissed out of hand - there's plenty of incentive for the BBC in particular to dig deeper into this and they've shown the inclination to do so, asking uncomfortable questions now. Their headlines are openly scpetical.

Disappointed with Wiggins obviously. A lot of my friends are dismissing it and I've had to say that even though I thought he was less likely. it appears he was at best abusing the TUE rules to gain a competitive advantage.

Don't be disappointed in Wiggins, cyclists (or athletes for that matter) rarely have the nous to organise what they should take, only the very best know. It's usually the team that decides for them. So be disappointed with the poster team for clean cycling, Sky.