• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Wiggins, Clinic respect?

Page 47 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Mar 7, 2017
1,098
0
0
Visit site
brownbobby said:
Wiggo's Package said:
samhocking said:
A big stumbling block is the Sky Staff whisteblower statement to the Committee. His statement says it wasn't Triamcinolone in the package, it was indeed Fluamicil to be used as an anti-oxident recovery and so he believes needles were in the jiffy bag and therefore the no-needles recovery rule was broken. However, the whistleblower to Daily Mail & UKAD believed it to be Triamcinolone and Matt Lawton says that whisteblower came forward because of the Fancy Bears leak, not because the no-needles policy was broken. When the two main whistleblowers in all this are not on the same page, it's not encouraging anyone will get the bottom of this perhaps?

The senior Team Sky insider who gave the jiffy bag story to Matt Lawton hit the nail on the head it was triamcinolone in the package taken on a race day without a TUE and therefore a doping violation

The recent statement to the DCMS committee is a deflection tactic just Brailsford thinking he's clever the usual BS

Glad you've cleared that one up and given us the facts. Presume you've passed your concrete evidence onto the relevant authorities?

Just one question. Why would on earth would Sky, who we've already established were well versed in 'gaming' the TUE system, take such a huge risk by administering this without a TUE?

To enhance recovery. Brailsford put it best. When interviewed on THAT bus. On THAT day in 2011. Hiding in plain sight. Brazen

' “There’s nothing going on here,” he says, answering a question that hasn’t really been asked. “Absolutely nothing at all. I know that’s not good enough for some people. It’s like the no-needles policy. I think that is absolutely great but how’s it being enforced? I’ve spoken to Pat [McQuaid, UCI president] and I told him the UCI needs to get out here and enforce it. Where are they? They need to be on the buses. There are 20 teams, how hard can it be to have an observer on each bus? That’s your window of opportunity for recovery there, between the finish and the hotel, so get someone on the buses.” '

http://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/all-aboard-the-magic-bus-3974
 
Re:

Craigee said:
Why would you need a TUE for directly after a tour? Would be hard to apply for, Which is why Sky would do all the normal illegal doping as well as the allowed TUE's. Simple really.

You wouldn't need a TUE anyway directly after a tour. Cortisone is not banned OOC. I suppose that the package being delivered on the last day of the Dauphine doesn't necessarily mean it was administered on that day, could well have waited 12 hours or so and taken it perfectly legally. So why the big cover up? Because the widespread use of Cortisone is not something Sky wanted to be associated with considering the high moral ground they had taken... :confused:
 
Re: Re:

brownbobby said:
You wouldn't need a TUE anyway directly after a tour. Cortisone is not banned OOC. I suppose that the package being delivered on the last day of the Dauphine doesn't necessarily mean it was administered on that day, could well have waited 12 hours or so and taken it perfectly legally. So why the big cover up? Because the widespread use of Cortisone is not something Sky wanted to be associated with considering the high moral ground they had taken... :confused:
It was allegedly administered that day, in the back of the bus as it prepared to leave the race. Do read the original story.
 
Re: Re:

MarkvW said:
There seem to be five groupings.

(1) The idealists who approach the issue honestly with the hope that cycling can be made better by grappling with the idea of doping.
(2) The realists who really don't give a damn about doping and enjoy the sport anyway.
(3) The realists who enjoy the whole show, from scenery panorama, to racing, to antidoping drama.
(4) The denialists, who don't want to see how sausage is made.
(5) The self-interested, who know where their bread is buttered and will attack any challenge to that self-interest. Their stance on anti-doping depends entirely upon how it might affect their interests.
Important to note that Rule 5 covers both sides of the fence.
 
Re: Re:

fmk_RoI said:
MarkvW said:
There seem to be five groupings.

(1) The idealists who approach the issue honestly with the hope that cycling can be made better by grappling with the idea of doping.
(2) The realists who really don't give a damn about doping and enjoy the sport anyway.
(3) The realists who enjoy the whole show, from scenery panorama, to racing, to antidoping drama.
(4) The denialists, who don't want to see how sausage is made.
(5) The self-interested, who know where their bread is buttered and will attack any challenge to that self-interest. Their stance on anti-doping depends entirely upon how it might affect their interests.
Important to note that Rule 5 covers both sides of the fence.

the land on each side of the fence is slightly different though...those on one side may be inclined to shout louder....
 
Mar 7, 2017
1,098
0
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

brownbobby said:
Craigee said:
Why would you need a TUE for directly after a tour? Would be hard to apply for, Which is why Sky would do all the normal illegal doping as well as the allowed TUE's. Simple really.

You wouldn't need a TUE anyway directly after a tour. Cortisone is not banned OOC. I suppose that the package being delivered on the last day of the Dauphine doesn't necessarily mean it was administered on that day, could well have waited 12 hours or so and taken it perfectly legally. So why the big cover up? Because the widespread use of Cortisone is not something Sky wanted to be associated with considering the high moral ground they had taken... :confused:

Marginal gains innit

Of course Sky/Wiggo could have waited 12hrs to max out on Kenacort. But they wanted to turbo charge the recovery process asap

And calculated that with Wiggo having already been dope tested that day as the winner of the race the vampires wouldn't come calling again that day
 
samhocking said:
A big stumbling block is the Sky Staff whisteblower statement to the Committee. His statement says it wasn't Triamcinolone in the package, it was indeed Fluamicil to be used as an anti-oxident recovery and so he believes needles were in the jiffy bag and therefore the no-needles recovery rule was broken. However, the whistleblower to Daily Mail & UKAD believed it to be Triamcinolone and Matt Lawton says that whisteblower came forward because of the Fancy Bears leak, not because the no-needles policy was broken. When the two main whistleblowers in all this are not on the same page, it's not encouraging anyone will get the bottom of this perhaps?

when did he make this statement? when, compared to the day Braislford was asked and he said it was fluimucil?
 
Re: Re:

Wiggo's Package said:
brownbobby said:
Craigee said:
Why would you need a TUE for directly after a tour? Would be hard to apply for, Which is why Sky would do all the normal illegal doping as well as the allowed TUE's. Simple really.

You wouldn't need a TUE anyway directly after a tour. Cortisone is not banned OOC. I suppose that the package being delivered on the last day of the Dauphine doesn't necessarily mean it was administered on that day, could well have waited 12 hours or so and taken it perfectly legally. So why the big cover up? Because the widespread use of Cortisone is not something Sky wanted to be associated with considering the high moral ground they had taken... :confused:

Marginal gains innit

Of course Sky/Wiggo could have waited 12hrs to max out on Kenacort. But they wanted to turbo charge the recovery process asap

And calculated that with Wiggo having already been dope tested that day as the winner of the race the vampires wouldn't come calling again that day

Exactly.
 
So if Sutton is behind the "Jiffy Bag" story, who's the "Sky insider" who contacted UKAD? https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/apr/13/ukad-team-sky-breached-no-needles-allegation or
https://cyclingtips.com/news/whistle-blower-claims-team-sky-breached-no-needles-policy/

The source claims that Team Sky hired Dr. Fabio Bartalucci in 2010 because of his expertise in IV recovery, and that Dr. Richard Freeman continued the practise, but out of competition so not technically a violation of the UCI ‘no needles’ policy. However, some medical staff quit over the issue believing it was ethically wrong.

The report said the whistle-blower also told UKAD the team used Therapeutic Use Exemption certificates for both health and performance reasons.
Sutton too or a doc?

Then there's the Committee's letter
around 900 words long and written by an anonymous source who identifies him or herself as “a Sky insider”.
 
Re: Re:

brownbobby said:
Craigee said:
Why would you need a TUE for directly after a tour? Would be hard to apply for, Which is why Sky would do all the normal illegal doping as well as the allowed TUE's. Simple really.

You wouldn't need a TUE anyway directly after a tour. Cortisone is not banned OOC. I suppose that the package being delivered on the last day of the Dauphine doesn't necessarily mean it was administered on that day, could well have waited 12 hours or so and taken it perfectly legally. So why the big cover up? Because the widespread use of Cortisone is not something Sky wanted to be associated with considering the high moral ground they had taken... :confused:

How do you know it was Cortisone in the jiffy bag? I'm saying it could be anything illegal not legal.
 
Robert5091 said:
So if Sutton is behind the "Jiffy Bag" story, who's the "Sky insider" who contacted UKAD? https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/apr/13/ukad-team-sky-breached-no-needles-allegation or
https://cyclingtips.com/news/whistle-blower-claims-team-sky-breached-no-needles-policy/

The source claims that Team Sky hired Dr. Fabio Bartalucci in 2010 because of his expertise in IV recovery, and that Dr. Richard Freeman continued the practise, but out of competition so not technically a violation of the UCI ‘no needles’ policy. However, some medical staff quit over the issue believing it was ethically wrong.

The report said the whistle-blower also told UKAD the team used Therapeutic Use Exemption certificates for both health and performance reasons.
Sutton too or a doc?
You have confused UKAD and DCMS.
 
He saying if it's Fluimucil in the bag it would also contain needles and B vitamins

Freeman and Brailsford say its Fluimucil that's for a nebulizer and there's nothing else in the package, because a Doctor in possession of needles at a race faces a 5 year prison sentence

That would explain why Wiggo says he never sees the bag, riders is also subject to the needles charge
 
Re:

70kmph said:
because a Doctor in possession of needles at a race faces a 5 year prison sentence
This is quite clearly nonsense. 5 years is the maximum penalty for sports doping. For that it would have to be running a massive Fuentes style scheme.

Injecting vitamin B isn't even a doping offence - it would be an infringement of the UCI's no needles policy, not a breach of the WADA code.
 
Re: Re:

Parker said:
70kmph said:
because a Doctor in possession of needles at a race faces a 5 year prison sentence
This is quite clearly nonsense. 5 years is the maximum penalty for sports doping. For that it would have to be running a massive Fuentes style scheme.

Injecting vitamin B isn't even a doping offence - it would be an infringement of the UCI's no needles policy, not a breach of the WADA code.

Under the UCI rules the Doctor has to inform the UCI about the injection

A first offence of the new rule can result in a suspension from eight days to six months and/or a fine. If a violation occurs at a race, the whole team of the licence holder involved may be excluded from the race. Just the possession of objects used or fit for an injection is presumed to constitute evidence of a violation of the regulations.
 
fmk_RoI said:
Robert5091 said:
So if Sutton is behind the "Jiffy Bag" story, who's the "Sky insider" who contacted UKAD? https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/apr/13/ukad-team-sky-breached-no-needles-allegation or
https://cyclingtips.com/news/whistle-blower-claims-team-sky-breached-no-needles-policy/

The source claims that Team Sky hired Dr. Fabio Bartalucci in 2010 because of his expertise in IV recovery, and that Dr. Richard Freeman continued the practise, but out of competition so not technically a violation of the UCI ‘no needles’ policy. However, some medical staff quit over the issue believing it was ethically wrong.

The report said the whistle-blower also told UKAD the team used Therapeutic Use Exemption certificates for both health and performance reasons.
Sutton too or a doc?
You have confused UKAD and DCMS.

Both UKAD & DCMS had a whistleblower contact them, was my point. The same person maybe?
 
Re:

70kmph said:

Simon Cope unfortunately is just an unwitting porn in this

:lol:

Thanks for the link, this is interesting as is

Steve Peters was fully aware of every thing that was going on regarding the medical team at that time and interestingly for the London Olympics he was on the medical committee that approved TUE's .

Hope his inner chimp helped him do this
 
Re: Re:

fmk_RoI said:
brownbobby said:
You wouldn't need a TUE anyway directly after a tour. Cortisone is not banned OOC. I suppose that the package being delivered on the last day of the Dauphine doesn't necessarily mean it was administered on that day, could well have waited 12 hours or so and taken it perfectly legally. So why the big cover up? Because the widespread use of Cortisone is not something Sky wanted to be associated with considering the high moral ground they had taken... :confused:
It was allegedly administered that day, in the back of the bus as it prepared to leave the race. Do read the original story.

Yes, allegedly. Thankyou for confirming that we don't know when it was administered. Do consider all aspects of the story before attempting to belittle and patronise people for their opinions and theories on said story.
 
Mar 7, 2017
1,098
0
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

brownbobby said:
fmk_RoI said:
brownbobby said:
You wouldn't need a TUE anyway directly after a tour. Cortisone is not banned OOC. I suppose that the package being delivered on the last day of the Dauphine doesn't necessarily mean it was administered on that day, could well have waited 12 hours or so and taken it perfectly legally. So why the big cover up? Because the widespread use of Cortisone is not something Sky wanted to be associated with considering the high moral ground they had taken... :confused:
It was allegedly administered that day, in the back of the bus as it prepared to leave the race. Do read the original story.

Yes, allegedly. Thankyou for confirming that we don't know when it was administered. Do consider all aspects of the story before attempting to belittle and patronise people for their opinions and theories on said story.

Brailsford's attempts to deflect Matt Lawton don't make any sense unless something seriously dodgy went on that day

He started with the "Cope travelled to see Emma Pooley, the bus wasn't there after the race". Lies plain and simple, easily disproved

Moved on to "I can dish the dirt on another team if you pull this story, if you publish it will bring the team down". Pure desparation

Why would Brailsford say those things if he had nothing to hide...?
 

TRENDING THREADS