Wigans goes there. Cadence!

[MatParker117]

Re: Re:

jranton - Wrong. The TUE was for a condition that either did not exist, or did not need the nuclear bomb medicine that was prescribed, and therefore the rules for having a TUE were broken.

You are conveniently confusing the the administrative TUE steps (which were likely followed) with the actual merits for the TUE. Which are caca de Vachon. Kind of like submitting the income tax return on time with 100k of income, but not disclosing that the income was from dealing drugs.

Then why didn't WADA veto?

 

[fmk_RoI]

Re: Re:

Dont see anyone pointing to Rasmussen as a bastion of credibility.

The <person> who re-Tweeted his comment that Zorzoli still worked for the UCI seemed to find him credible.

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

jranton - Wrong. The TUE was for a condition that either did not exist, or did not need the nuclear bomb medicine that was prescribed, and therefore the rules for having a TUE were broken.

You are conveniently confusing the the administrative TUE steps (which were likely followed) with the actual merits for the TUE. Which are caca de Vachon. Kind of like submitting the income tax return on time with 100k of income, but not disclosing that the income was from dealing drugs.

Then why didn't WADA veto?

Since when does WADA have credibility?

 

[fmk_RoI]

Re: Re:

jranton - Wrong. The TUE was for a condition that either did not exist, or did not need the nuclear bomb medicine that was prescribed, and therefore the rules for having a TUE were broken.

So it was a condition that either didn't exist or a condition that ... did exist? This is almost the broken kettle defence. As for whether the right treatment was offered ... well that's doctors for you. It's why asking for a second opinion gets you the result you wanted when you walked through the door.

 

[fmk_RoI]

Re: Re:

Kind of like submitting the income tax return on time with 100k of income, but not disclosing that the income was from dealing drugs.

It's a while since I did any tax work but drugs income used to be Class IV. You didn't need to disclose its source, just its existence. #Pedantry

 

[Random Direction]

Re: Re:

jranton - Wrong. The TUE was for a condition that either did not exist, or did not need the nuclear bomb medicine that was prescribed, and therefore the rules for having a TUE were broken.

You are conveniently confusing the the administrative TUE steps (which were likely followed) with the actual merits for the TUE. Which are caca de Vachon. Kind of like submitting the income tax return on time with 100k of income, but not disclosing that the income was from dealing drugs.

Then why didn't WADA veto?

Since when does WADA have credibility?

Compliance and enforcement fail - UCI probably had to highlight issues to WADA nd Zorzoli was admin tractor, judge and jury.

The system is set up to manage TUES not catch doper.

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

Dont see anyone pointing to Rasmussen as a bastion of credibility.

The moron who re-Tweeted his comment that Zorzoli still worked for the UCI seemed to find him credible.

Zorzoli stepped down from UCI in July 2015. Suspended in Jan 2015. Zorzoli signed off all TUEs until July 2014, at least, as it was then that Cookson made an announcement about the change in procedures. Zorzoli stepped down from UCI in July 2015.

Cookson made the announcement in 2014 that TUEs will have to be given by a panel of 3.

 

[Benotti69]

Kenacort ‏@vayerism 5minutes ago

Read this, from hay fever sufferers. Kenacort, nearly impossible to get hold off and rarely stocked by nhs

Wiggins took 40mg which is the absolute maximum.

It's lunacy

https://forums.netdoctor.co.uk/discussion/44394/hayfever-injection-kenalog

Apparently Kenacort is considered Toxix by the NHS.

 

[Franklin]

Re: Re:

Who lied about the TUE?

Uhm... have you been living under a rock? The big fat lie is the supposed "No TUE" policy of Sky.

Think very, very long and hard about it. Why be so extremely vocal about being against TUE's, claiming they would rather pull riders, while they prescribe a completely insane medicin to Wiggins?

The ''never broke any rules'' is going to work because the governing bodies don't have any issue with it and the vast majority of the general public don't care.

Actually, it seems that it doesn't work. The media backlash is quite, quite severe. Also, the governing bodies are flummoxed about how they can get out of this with some credibility left.

You're treating this as if it's a smoking gun. It's nothing of the sort and will blow over precisely because ''no rules were broken''. Which is fair enough really.

You really are okay with big liar#1 Dave Brailsford? That's fair enough? You also think that yet another lie about their supposed anti-doping policies is not a smoking gun? How many clear lies do you swallow with a grin on your face?

And no, this isn't "blowing over". Wiggo is facing a catastrophic image meltdown. To most people that really matters. And if he's unlucky some more will get out.

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

Who lied about the TUE?

Uhm... have you been living under a rock? The big fat lie is the supposed "No TUE" policy of Sky.

Think very, very long and hard about it. Why be so extremely vocal about being against TUE's, claiming they would rather pull riders, while they prescribe a completely insane medicin to Wiggins?

The ''never broke any rules'' is going to work because the governing bodies don't have any issue with it and the vast majority of the general public don't care.

Actually, it seems that it doesn't work. The media backlash is quite, quite severe. Also, the governing bodies are flummoxed about how they can get out of this with some credibility left.

You're treating this as if it's a smoking gun. It's nothing of the sort and will blow over precisely because ''no rules were broken''. Which is fair enough really.

You really are okay with big liar#1 Dave Brailsford? That's fair enough? You also think that yet another lie about their supposed anti-doping policies is not a smoking gun? How many clear lies do you swallow with a grin on your face?

And no, this isn't "blowing over". Wiggo is facing a catastrophic image meltdown. To most people that really matters. And if he's unlucky some more will get out.

Wiggins only hope now is something comes out about Froome.

 

[D Avoid]

Anybody any good at writing songs.

This ones titled "Dear Cadence" .

First line is easy... ence won't you come out to play

, dear Cadence, yes we're riding a whey protein milk shake,

that gives me the *** so I lose my rear brake...................



Anyway, I did in think I had it in me tonight, the protein makes me ill and knocks the stuff in out o' me.


I'd gladly supply Bradley with an Alibi and the forty thieves are still racing, having

grabbed the wins of any and all clean riders.

I actually wish he was clean, it would be a great story, and the last shall be first

and all that. Can't bring mice elf to watch the "confession". I never thought I'd find Armstrong more palatable.

 

[gooner]

Richard Moore:

In 2010, when Team Sky entered the sport, I wrote a book about their first year, Sky’s the Limit. At the end of a difficult debut season I asked Dave Brailsford, the team principal, about their commitment to clean sport.

“The commitment to being clean, to using science, and alternative methods and the best possible brains as an alternative to doping, that is imperative,” said Brailsford. “It doesn’t stop us wanting to perform. It is a clean team. But we can’t say we’ll be clean but we won’t bother about winning.”

He mentioned “the line”. I asked what he meant. “You know, where the line is – between what’s allowed and what isn’t – in cycling can sometimes be a bit blurred. But we will not go over it.”

Brailsford said he believed it was possible to win the Tour clean. “You have to. I believe the guys at that level are going right up to the line, like everyone else. I certainly don’t believe there is a clear, systematic doping programme in a team which is allowing those guys to perform that well. But I certainly think they go right up to the line.”

Team Sky have applied for 13 TUEs in their seven years, three of them for Wiggins. In doing so they have broken no rules. But the controversy around Wiggins’ triamcinolone injections should focus attention on “the line”: on where it is and to what extent it is open to interpretation. And whether, even if a legal line is not crossed, an ethical one can be breached. These are questions for Wiggins and Team Sky, but also for sport as a whole.

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/cycling/richard-moore-bradley-wiggins-controversy-highlights-blurred-line-1-4240042?

 

[cocteau_ireland]

Wiggo. Brit ledge. Steroids in the muscle;3 times always afore a g.t Busted simples. i need serious drugs to balance my chances out.

 

[42x16ss]

Re: Re:

jranton - Wrong. The TUE was for a condition that either did not exist, or did not need the nuclear bomb medicine that was prescribed, and therefore the rules for having a TUE were broken.

You are conveniently confusing the the administrative TUE steps (which were likely followed) with the actual merits for the TUE. Which are caca de Vachon. Kind of like submitting the income tax return on time with 100k of income, but not disclosing that the income was from dealing drugs.

Then why didn't WADA veto?

Good question, one which Mr Craig Reedie should probably answer...

 

[Mr.38%]

Re Rasmussen's credibility: Say, there is somebody who is taking (recreational) drugs. If I want to find out about the medical effects and dangers, I'll ask a doctor. If I want to find about about the reasons, the perceived effects and last not least the _undocumented_ effects, I'll ask an actual user.

How did they find out about micro dosing again? Scientists? Doctors? Or was it former users?

 

[Bronstein]

Re: Re:

Yup, Rasmussen is probably the least credible source you could find. It's ludicrous how people here and elsewhere hold the likes of Rasmussen up as bastions of credibility.

As for the issue of Wiggins' TUE, I don't believe anybody here who believes that Wiggins doped to win the Tour thinks that this injection was in the slightest bit significant. For one thing he had already won Paris-Nice, Romandie and Dauphine in 2012 prior to this injection, not to mention the fact there are many people who claim such a dosage would provide little to no performance benefit anyway.

Which people?

JRanton?

 

[Benotti69]

Richard Moore:

In 2010, when Team Sky entered the sport, I wrote a book about their first year, Sky’s the Limit. At the end of a difficult debut season I asked Dave Brailsford, the team principal, about their commitment to clean sport.

“The commitment to being clean, to using science, and alternative methods and the best possible brains as an alternative to doping, that is imperative,” said Brailsford. “It doesn’t stop us wanting to perform. It is a clean team. But we can’t say we’ll be clean but we won’t bother about winning.”

He mentioned “the line”. I asked what he meant. “You know, where the line is – between what’s allowed and what isn’t – in cycling can sometimes be a bit blurred. But we will not go over it.”

Brailsford said he believed it was possible to win the Tour clean. “You have to. I believe the guys at that level are going right up to the line, like everyone else. I certainly don’t believe there is a clear, systematic doping programme in a team which is allowing those guys to perform that well. But I certainly think they go right up to the line.”

Team Sky have applied for 13 TUEs in their seven years, three of them for Wiggins. In doing so they have broken no rules. But the controversy around Wiggins’ triamcinolone injections should focus attention on “the line”: on where it is and to what extent it is open to interpretation. And whether, even if a legal line is not crossed, an ethical one can be breached. These are questions for Wiggins and Team Sky, but also for sport as a whole.

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/cycling/richard-moore-bradley-wiggins-controversy-highlights-blurred-line-1-4240042?

Wiggins, Sky and Brailsford drew the line many times in the media, whether through puppet Walsh or directly in the team statements.

They said no needles. No injections. No to joining MPCC because Sky were going to be stricter etc etc.

Sky lied. When they drew a line, it was PR. How much further have the crossed the line? I'd say a long way, they have won a lot races, important races and the big one 4 times. Wiggins 2012 season on cortisone? Nope. Froome on salbutamol? No way.

Sky is your modern day USPS.

 

[MmeDesgrange]

Richard Moore:

In 2010, when Team Sky entered the sport, I wrote a book about their first year, Sky’s the Limit. At the end of a difficult debut season I asked Dave Brailsford, the team principal, about their commitment to clean sport.

“The commitment to being clean, to using science, and alternative methods and the best possible brains as an alternative to doping, that is imperative,” said Brailsford. “It doesn’t stop us wanting to perform. It is a clean team. But we can’t say we’ll be clean but we won’t bother about winning.”

He mentioned “the line”. I asked what he meant. “You know, where the line is – between what’s allowed and what isn’t – in cycling can sometimes be a bit blurred. But we will not go over it.”

Brailsford said he believed it was possible to win the Tour clean. “You have to. I believe the guys at that level are going right up to the line, like everyone else. I certainly don’t believe there is a clear, systematic doping programme in a team which is allowing those guys to perform that well. But I certainly think they go right up to the line.”

Team Sky have applied for 13 TUEs in their seven years, three of them for Wiggins. In doing so they have broken no rules. But the controversy around Wiggins’ triamcinolone injections should focus attention on “the line”: on where it is and to what extent it is open to interpretation. And whether, even if a legal line is not crossed, an ethical one can be breached. These are questions for Wiggins and Team Sky, but also for sport as a whole.

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/cycling/richard-moore-bradley-wiggins-controversy-highlights-blurred-line-1-4240042?

"the best possible brains"? Well that raised a smile #tDCS

 

[Carstenbf]

Blurred lines my behind. No medical reason to prescribe in the first place. So cheating. Even if others are doing similar stuff.

 

[Benotti69]

I said it in the Sky thread, but Wiggins is the last person who should be questioned in all this.

Reedie, Cookson (or McQuaid), Sapstead, Freeman, Farrell and then Brailsford should all be asked how did Wiggins get a TUE for such a strong drug.

 

[B_Ugli]

Re:

I said it in the Sky thread, but Wiggins is the last person who should be questioned in all this.

Reedie, Cookson (or McQuaid), Sapstead, Freeman, Farrell and then Brailsford should all be asked how did Wiggins get a TUE for such a strong drug.

According to Kimmage Farrell isn't talking - they are probably working out between them who is going to be the fall guy in all this....................

http://www.newstalk.com/Paul-Kimmage-says-his-relationship-with-David-Walsh-is-dead-its-over-its-finished

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

I said it in the Sky thread, but Wiggins is the last person who should be questioned in all this.

Reedie, Cookson (or McQuaid), Sapstead, Freeman, Farrell and then Brailsford should all be asked how did Wiggins get a TUE for such a strong drug.

According to Kimmage Farrell isn't talking - they are probably working out between them who is going to be the fall guy in all this....................

http://www.newstalk.com/Paul-Kimmage-says-his-relationship-with-David-Walsh-is-dead-its-over-its-finished

No one is talking, except Wiggins. My guess Brailsford and lawyers were dusting down confidentiality clauses or making new ones and handing over brown envelopes to the respected parties, except Wiggins.

 

[The Hitch]

Richard Moore:

In 2010, when Team Sky entered the sport, I wrote a book about their first year, Sky’s the Limit. At the end of a difficult debut season I asked Dave Brailsford, the team principal, about their commitment to clean sport.

“The commitment to being clean, to using science, and alternative methods and the best possible brains as an alternative to doping, that is imperative,” said Brailsford. “It doesn’t stop us wanting to perform. It is a clean team. But we can’t say we’ll be clean but we won’t bother about winning.”

He mentioned “the line”. I asked what he meant. “You know, where the line is – between what’s allowed and what isn’t – in cycling can sometimes be a bit blurred. But we will not go over it.”

Brailsford said he believed it was possible to win the Tour clean. “You have to. I believe the guys at that level are going right up to the line, like everyone else. I certainly don’t believe there is a clear, systematic doping programme in a team which is allowing those guys to perform that well. But I certainly think they go right up to the line.”

Team Sky have applied for 13 TUEs in their seven years, three of them for Wiggins. In doing so they have broken no rules. But the controversy around Wiggins’ triamcinolone injections should focus attention on “the line”: on where it is and to what extent it is open to interpretation. And whether, even if a legal line is not crossed, an ethical one can be breached. These are questions for Wiggins and Team Sky, but also for sport as a whole.

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/cycling/richard-moore-bradley-wiggins-controversy-highlights-blurred-line-1-4240042?

Why are you posting that in this thread?

He says absolutely nothing.

Sounds like you just want to keep your favourite frauds relevant now that they can no longer claim Sky is team god

 

[Benotti69]

Wiggins lied to Andrew Marr. He told Marr you need 3 independent doctors that scrutinise the evidence from a specialist doctor of the illness before giving authorisation for the TUE.

This is a blatant lie. Wiggin's TUEs are all prior to 2014, when there was only ONE MAN responsible for TUEs: Mario Zorzoli

 

[gillan1969]

Re:

Wiggins lied to Andrew Marr. He told Marr you need 3 independent doctors that scrutinise the evidence from a specialist doctor of the illness before giving authorisation for the TUE.

This is a blatant lie. Wiggin's TUEs are all prior to 2014, when there was only ONE MAN responsible for TUEs: Mario Zorzoli

scripted by his spinmiester..arguably not a lie as if pulled up he will explain he was talking about current procedures...but he knows Marr is unlikely to pull him up

and if he does he can just say...yup...you know like when Chris was really ill whilst winning Romandie