Team Sky, Wiggins, Brailsford, TUE's, etc


#1

Can any of the cycling fans on here (the ones who, y’know, read about and watch professional cycling rather than the Streatham fold-up bike crew) give their opinions about Wiggins and Brailsford and the hoo-ha regards TUEs and the mystery package and all that shite. Also interested about peoples opinions of Team Sky in general.

It looks pretty bad, but i’m still struggling with the idea of Wiggins, and to a lesser extent Brailsford being massive cheats. To me it looks like they’ve bent the rules as much as is humanely possible, but surely that’s not the same thing. I’m probably wrong and i must stress i don’t like cycling at all so my knowlege on the matter’s pretty limited.


#2

It’s no longer a mystery… brailsford has said it was a decongestant - Fluimucil, which keeps with their story of Wiggins asthma and allergies.(although groomed wasn’t too sure how bad they were :confused: )

That said TUEs are in place for a reason, UCI signs off on the use of the TUEs… so there isn’t a case to answer in terms of the fairness of sport.

Onto Sky and this is where it gets harder… they’re anti drug use… have been very open about aspects of this, binning off some people… but then this goes against that… kind of…

There’s also the other cyclist saying how tramadol was widely offered by Team GB… now tramadol is not a banned substance by WADA but why would Team GB be offering quite a severe painkiller :confused:

Eventually I come back to the fact that that Wiggins won because
a he’s a good cyclist
b he was surrounded by and team of strong cyclists
and c team sky were years ahead of the game… in terms of funding and in terms of their methods surrounding almost everything, from sleep, nutrition, training to clothing etc.


#3

Groomed = froome

Also (as if that paragraph wasn’t enough) I don’t buy into the idea that 'well everyone else is at it’
Yes they are, people rightly have TUEs, but with Sky’s cleaner than clean ethos I think it surprised a few people who didn’t know about TUEs that this occured.
Pair that with the dubious timings right before major races and it looks a little fishy. Again… with the permission of and within the rules of the governing body.


#4

So my uneducated stab that they’ve not doped but have bent the rules as much as they possibly could have isn’t too far off, only i’m sensing a lot of insinuation that it may be much worse than that…admittedly just from #bigopinioners online. Surely given the level of widespread cheating Team Sky were up against it would’ve been completely naive not to push the boundaries as much as they could without being technically dirty. Could they have even competed otherwise?


#5

First thing to understand is the endemic nature of doping within cycling’s past and recent history. Reading Christophe Basson’s or Tyler Hamilton’s books will give a fair idea from both the clean and dirty sides of the sport.

Secondly, sky came onto the scene in 2010 stating an ambition to race and win clean. 2 years later they went further, stating any member of the team tainted by doping would be thrown off the team. Bye bye Michael Barry, Sean Yates ect… but they kept a hypocritical stance, keeping servais knaevan and leinders (one of cycling’s notorious doping doctors) in the team. This lack of transparency led to questions, easily swept away by Brailsford et al, but the drip effect had started.

Fast forward to 2012. Froome exploded out of nowhere, finishing second in the Vuelta (having been thrown out of the way giro a couple of years before for holding onto a motorbike). Wins the tour in 2013, rumours of a blood disease with possible unethical treatment appears and never really goes away, the tue falsification in the criterium dauphine in 2014, inhaler consumption whilst racing at another race adds fuel to the win at any cost fire.

The following two years see a dripping of accusations and implications of wrong doing with only minor criticism (Paul kimmidge being to the fore) then this whole Russian hacking thing blows the lid clean off.

Imo, wiggins doped to win 2012, and Froome has won each of his tour wins dirty. The gathering snowball effect of facts and stories have knocked down every excuse sky have used so far. Why wait until today to tell the fawning cycling press that the mystery package contained a legal substance?

Tl, dr but dig around and there’s so much information out there


#6

My personal view so far (I’ve not dug really deep) is that it’s probably the case that Sky have stretched the use of certain medical products as much is as possible within the rules of the sport, but that undermines a lot of their comments and zero tolerance posturing over the years. I think it’s only recently become the case that TUE was granted by committee, rather than just a single person, which seems problematic, and open to abuse.

Also the appointment of Geert Leinders is deeply troubling, and at the very least their due diligence procedures failed to spot it being public knowledge he was a doping doctor. Also I think more needs to be discussed about how Shane Sutton was both a six-figure consultant for Team Sky, and a full time taxpayer-funded British Cycling employee. Someone was being mugged off by Sutton, and given that he knew very little specifics but also quite a lot with absolute certainty, he doesn’t come across very well at all.

I think also to bear in mind is that cycling is under a huge amount of scrutiny, and so the fact that Team Sky/British Cycling look a bit shambolic isn’t completely surprising, and you have to wonder what would be the case if you decided to start turning rocks over in the Premier League, or in tennis.


#7

the compete by having a budget 3+times bigger than every other team, a team of 15+ world beaters who they pick 8 from to race in the races they want to win.
They don’t win every race, just the big one, that’s what they focus on. And the warm up race for it.

There are some people who think with sky’s budget and style of racing (being so strong they can dictate the pace of the peloton) that they wish them to fail or prove they aren’t all they’re cracked up to be, yet give proven cheats a lighter touch.


#8

the pricks are all drugged off their tits mate


#9

This would be great…
Yeah sure it’s the horse placenta mate :smile:


#10

Slightly old, but gives a decent account of timeline and promises made

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


#11

I think i’m a bit naive in the sense that i get an impression of certain people on a human level and just can’t see them doing it. That’s the case for Wiggins, Farrah, would be for certain others. That’s not to say i couldn’t see Team Sky breaking their own rules, or Brailsford, or Froome…but i’d be pretty disappointed if it were to be proven that Wiggins had knowingly doped.


#12

Guy scared of needles has regular injections… :joy:


#13

Sorry, wrote that ramble on my phone, lots of mistakes date wise, froome in 2012 should read 2011 ect…


#14

I’m not saying this is connected to these allegations, or won’t name the team, but one side who did very, very well last season had a ridiculous record of players returning back from injuries overly quickly and very rarely getting injured.

For me even the Serie A doping of the 90s/00s has been swept under the table. Players have openly admitted to feeling off their tits during and after games in Italy. I strongly suspect it was the norm in Spain for a while. I honestly doubt it would happen as much here in terms of PEDs, but i do think they cover up a lot of bans for recreational drug use.


#15

On one hand it’d be great, but on the other hand you have to think that there’s absolutely no interest from any stakeholder in football (owners, players, fans, broadcasters etc) to have a drug/cheating scandal go public. I’d guess even 99% of journalists would decide to turn a blind eye. They probably all see it like telling children that father christmas is real, why tell the truth? I guess in cycling it became so much that the deviousness turned so nasty that people had a genuine personal reason to start whistleblowing. In football the stakes are too big, and in tennis it’s probably too hard to prove.


#16

Shame they chucked all those blood bags away :smile:

But yeah, it’s the unspoken truth I think… and whilst there is still racism, homophobia etc to tackle plus the drug use hasn’t led to anyone dying or owt…

Kinda surprised a former pro hasn’t wrote a tell all book for £££s though


#17

Yep, you do get the odd player with long term groin niggles, calf strains etc. Always thought it could be down to personal life problems… be it drugs or mental health… and they use the injury to keep the papers away from asking too many questions… exacerbating the situation


#18

now there’s an idea…


#19

I think that the tipping point for cycling (1998 TdF) was a country’s identity on the global stage was being ridiculed by illegal activities (it is illegal to dope in sport in France). The whole sport (one of the most popular in France, Belgium and Holland at the time) was in turmoil and only the inward nature of the investigations and whilstkeblowing allowed the sport to continue as it is now. Still massively rocked by doping scandals in the early to mid 00s mind.

There just isn’t the attitude to get after football, rugby union, tennis et al atm


#20

that’s really interesting, I didn’t know that about France. Yeah completely agree that we’re not at a tipping point with other sports.