Froome and Wiggins TUEs

[ColinJ]

What's the needle story, not heard this one, although not followed this closely lately

Read back in today's earlier posts in this thread!

 

[ColinJ]

Original mention:

That's the problem with Sky and the UCI, there's too many grey areas.

Brad did say this in his book 'My time'

“British Cycling have always had a no-needle policy, it’s been a mainstay of theirs; so it was something I grew up with as a bike rider. In British cycling culture, at the word ‘needle’ or the sight of one, you go, ‘Oh shoot’, it’s a complete taboo...I’ve never had an injection, apart from I’ve had my vaccinations, and on occasion I’ve been put on a drip, when I’ve come down with diarrhoea or something or have been severely dehydrated.”

And then following the Russia hack/leak it was refined to "....that only referred to illegal injections". Call me picky but no needles means no needles to me, that's black and white, but when challenged Sky cry its grey not black and white.....

The bit that jumps out above is Brad saying "....and on occasion I've been put on a drip, when I've come down with diarrhoea or something (what the hell is something exactly?), or have been severely dehydrated" If Sky are using IV for recovery, that is not on occasion, that's systematic, routine I would say, and is yet another example of them saying one thing and doing something else entirely.

Then today:

I was thinking about that bit over breakfast this morning. Thanks for saving me the time of finding it. "In British cycling culture, at the word ‘needle’ or the sight of one, you go, ‘Oh shoot’, it’s a complete taboo..." is an odd way to phrase it if you really mean "In British cycling culture, at the words ‘illegal injection’ or the suggestion of one, you go, ‘Oh shoot’, it’s a complete taboo...



Interesting that the Scum are attacking the team sponsored by their owner, as you say.

 

[Maenchi]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cycling/43294639
Brad speaks....

 

[Foghat]

maybe you would like to tell us what bradley has done wrong?

Go and read the UCI rules on TUE applications. Then review the widely available evidence, and you'll find it clearly shows that Wiggins, Brailsford and Sky's medical personnel must have conspired to submit fraudulent applications, and that the approving UCI doctor Zorzoli was either complicit with or duped by the Sky conspiracy.

Of course the UCI has no appetite to re-visit or correct the corruption and the misapplication of its own rules, for obvious reasons - but remember that just because someone is able to dupe the rule-makers/policers it doesn't mean they didn't break the rules. Unfortunately, WADA seemingly can't generate enough interest or enthusiasm, or perhaps funds, to do another major investigation into cycling water that has long gone under the bridge, and UKAD is too toothless, so Wiggins and Sky continue to get away with having evaded appropriate sanction for illegally administering rocket-fuel performance-enhancing drugs to achieve several major wins/results.

That's one rather significant thing Wiggins can be shown to have done wrong. Given the clear lack of ethical behaviour by Sky in all manner of forms, the endless saga of serious failings, and having that true bastion of morality Murdoch at the top of the tree, there is little reason to maintain any kind of faith that it is the only thing he's done wrong in terms of breaching rules when enhancing his performance.

 

[FishFright]

Here's a radical doping solution , make it the teams problem. If any of its members get busted and found guilty then the entire team gets a months ban, then a years ban for a second offence. If getting caught would lose the rest of a team a chance of competing I'm sure things would change in a hurry.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Maybe Wiggins read this?
http://www.cyclingweekly.com/fitness/supplements-for-cyclists-368262

 

[david k]

Is this medication against the rules or not. If not are we banning coffee and vitamin C?

I know caffeine is banned in rugby at a certain amount, so yeh coffee is against the rules if you have enough of it

 

[hoopdriver]

Here's a radical doping solution , make it the teams problem. If any of its members get busted and found guilty then the entire team gets a months ban, then a years ban for a second offence. If getting caught would lose the rest of a team a chance of competing I'm sure things would change in a hurry.

Grossly unfair to the innocent parties and would never survive a legal challenge in any court. Look at the fiasco with the Russian athletes and there was an altogether stronger case to be made there about banning the nation, as a team.

 

[hoopdriver]

I know caffeine is banned in rugby at a certain amount, so yeh coffee is against the rules if you have enough of it

You’d have to have so much you’d be running off the ground to pee every minutes...

 

[david k]

You’d have to have so much you’d be running off the ground to pee every minutes...

Ha ha maybe, I was told three strong coffees would put us over the limit, but none of us really had a clue.
Actually the approach to supplements back then was very casual, that's why I have some sympathy for these types of meds for atheletes, they are readily available and it's natural to want to take a pain killer, anti inflammatory etc. It's not really heavy scale EPO or blood doping.
Some who don't understand that group these people the same, they are at different ends of the spectrum imo

That's said it does appear sky manipulated the rules if not cheated, I guess they are not on their own

 

[david k]

1. The athlete is ultimately responsible for what goes into their body. "My doctor told me to" is no excuse.
2. David Millar abused it and says the effects were very significant.
3. Yes. The list is WADA's and applies across all sports.

I agree with that, not sure how much say an athelete has at the top level, I suspect a lot of pressure could be asserted, easier to comply, but yes no excuse
The significance is really the thing here, when is a medication beyond a treatment and becomes and enhancer of performance, are we therefore saying any medication that makes significant gains is banned.
So the only consideration for the control is how good the drug is? How do you draw a line for that?

 

[david k]

That's the million dollar question.

In the case of this specific class of drugs, corticosteroids, the MPCC (and David Millar) have called for controls. Lappartient has said he'll do something, if that's OK with ASO. http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/mpcc-repeats-call-for-wada-to-prohibit-corticosteroids-and-tramadol/

But in the more general case, how do you tweak the TUE system so it's not open to abuse, but still puts the athlete's welfare first ... No idea.

It's a problem I not sure we can find a great answer to. With teams always after any advantage they will continue to manipulate any rule or line anyone comes up with. We almost resign ourselves to accepting manipulation will happen and some will gain an advantage, as long as we fight the large scale I can live with this, not sure there's an alternative, we effectively have to take people at face value

 

[smutchin]

Here's a simple solution: don't give TUEs for known performance-enhancing substances like Triamcinolone.

All this "level playing field" bs is nonsense. Illness and injury are natural hazards for a professional sportsperson. Them's the breaks.

I'm pleased to see that many of the younger generation of riders would rather ride totally clean or not ride at all. Tim Wellens turned down the TUE option at last year's Tour after falling ill due to an allergy. And after the crash that shattered his leg in 2015, Taylor Phinney even refused painkiller injections.

 

[mjr]

Maybe Wiggins read this?
http://www.cyclingweekly.com/fitness/supplements-for-cyclists-368262

And Farah read http://www.cyclist.co.uk/in-depth/1224/we-tried-legal-doping-and-this-is-what-happened perhaps?

This stuff is promoted in so many publications, it seems little wonder amateurs are using. And then you can bet some will continue when they turn pro. Cycle sport seems to have a bit of a drug problem and it's been going on much longer and goes much deeper than one newish pro team.

Is there any stomach among BC clubs to stamp this out? It's one of a handful of topics (equal opps, pavement cycling and h&h being some others) which from what I've seen will at best be ignored or deleted if you ask about it on a club's forum and at worst get you asked to leave or booted. Others have suggested in the past that the clubs I've interacted with have been unusual - if that's so, please show us clubs talking openly about what they do to combat this shoot...

 

[jowwy]

Go and read the UCI rules on TUE applications. Then review the widely available evidence, and you'll find it clearly shows that Wiggins, Brailsford and Sky's medical personnel must have conspired to submit fraudulent applications, and that the approving UCI doctor Zorzoli was either complicit with or duped by the Sky conspiracy.

Of course the UCI has no appetite to re-visit or correct the corruption and the misapplication of its own rules, for obvious reasons - but remember that just because someone is able to dupe the rule-makers/policers it doesn't mean they didn't break the rules. Unfortunately, WADA seemingly can't generate enough interest or enthusiasm, or perhaps funds, to do another major investigation into cycling water that has long gone under the bridge, and UKAD is too toothless, so Wiggins and Sky continue to get away with having evaded appropriate sanction for illegally administering rocket-fuel performance-enhancing drugs to achieve several major wins/results.

That's one rather significant thing Wiggins can be shown to have done wrong. Given the clear lack of ethical behaviour by Sky in all manner of forms, the endless saga of serious failings, and having that true bastion of morality Murdoch at the top of the tree, there is little reason to maintain any kind of faith that it is the only thing he's done wrong in terms of breaching rules when enhancing his performance.

So again i ask what has bradlet done wrong......you say team sky duped the uci doctors, but again there is no refutable evidence to back up that allegation..........

If its true that they have some sort of insider giving them this information, then name them and tell us everything. Dont keep using the word "allegedly" because that means didley squat.........provide irrefutable evidence to back up the claims or just say nothing. Cause all its now done is fan the flames of an alleged doping ring.........which from the outside looks like nothing of the sort, unless your a conspiracey theorist looking for a story or hidde agenda.

As for the jiffy bag people keep refeering too......as shane sutton as already stated, it was for Dr Freeman not SIR Bradley Wiggins. That is a known fact.