Sky/British Cycling

I know this isn't a cycling forum but has anyone read The Times this week and their hammering of Sky/British Cycling, questioning the lack of a response to clarification about the 'medical package' that was couriered to Dr Freeman in 2011? 

Personally, I don't believe Sky/Brailsford/Wiggins/British Cycling have ever cheated but maybe they're on the verge of getting caught out crossing ethical boundaries - they always insisted they would go right up to the legal line without crossing it but maybe by going 'right up to the line' they have crossed other, lesser boundaries?

That's my opinion anyway, utterly pointless as it is..

What do you think? Come on, let's gossip.......

«13

Comments

  • Ethical boundaries are wherever an individual decides they are, and they're very blurred.  I can see why a professional athlete might decide that anything within the actual rules is fair game, however distasteful it may appear to the rest of us.  Sky/British Cycling have demonstrated through many of their kit modifications that they're prepared to push rules to the limit, I'm not surprised if they're doing the same with the medical rules.

    I'm actually more surprised (pleasantly) that Chris Froome appears to have gone against that, refusing a TUE on at least one occasion when he'd have had a valid reason for one.

    On a related note but back in triathlon, anyone else spot that a number of age group athletes at Kona were prevented from starting the race for refusing a dope test?  Not the first time that doping amongst age groupers has been shown to perhaps be more widespread than we'd like.  A bit sad, really.

  • Hadn't seen that CD.... really sad.

    As much as I'd love to race Kona, if that were me, I'd always know in the back of my mind that I hadn't got there clean, and it would be devalued...  I'd rather not be good enough than cheat.

    lets be honest.... its all prep for an Ironman on my 100th birthday
  • senidMsenidM ✭✭✭
    All very blurred, when does a medical condition cease to become a disability to an athlete and turn into an asset? Ask Maria Sharapova? or Sir Brad?



    Somehow doubt if you'll ever get a straight answer.
  • Crazy thing is MC, these guys (and gals) presumably doped to get a qualifying spot, then continued right up to the Kona race.  Now, amongst all the qualifiers only a very few are ever likely to be in with a shout of a podium place, so why keep doping after you've qualified?  A place in the top 10 in age group, or a PB?  Really? 

    I guess once you start it quickly becomes a habit with some people.

    It devalues it for the majority (hopefully) who got there under their own steam. Although judging from the drafting packs at the sharp end of some races a few used someone else's steam along the way!

  • senidM wrote (see)
    All very blurred, when does a medical condition cease to become a disability to an athlete and turn into an asset? Ask Maria Sharapova? or Sir Brad?

    Somehow doubt if you'll ever get a straight answer.

    In Sharapova's case she was taking something for a long time that wasn't banned, that apparently a lot of athletes were taking.  She didn't see the warning that it was about to be banned and took it after the deadline.  There was a half-hearted attempt to claim that she'd originally taken it for medical reasons, but she was really playing by the 'if it's not on the banned list it's fair game' rule the whole time. Then the rule changed, she got caught and was herself banned.

    Brad's case is a bit greyer in that he took something on the banned list, but did so after a doctor said that he needed it for medical reasons (i.e. he got a TUE).  If those medical reasons weren't true (or exaggerated) then that's the ethical line being crossed for me, but whether we like it or not, if he's got a note from the doctor he's within the rules.  Maybe the rules need tightening, but it's hard to see how you'd write them to prevent athletes taking performance-enhancing substances while still allowing them to take things for genuine medical reasons.

  • Its a big complicated mess!

    Only my opinion but in professional sport athletes should be pure athletes and if they need treating with banned drugs then they should step aside and not compete until their condition is cured!

    In amateur sport its a little bit harder as most of us are there to complete not compete.  However when has anyone seen the test van at an event?  I have raced quite a few "qualifiers" and never seen any testing carried out even though AG winners are producing times very close to top professionals.  If you were close to qualification and missed out, you might be a little pissed by that!

  • I suspect the reason they continue to dope is because they have deluded themselves into thinking they are not really cheating. Rationalised in some perverse way. It's probably not as calculated as just qualify then stop. There is always a new goal to achieve and if you stop doping then suddenly you're stepping backwards, it just becomes part of your training routine I guess.

    It's this kind of stuff and the extra competitive atmosphere that turns me off the age group qualifiers.

  • For me wiggins is clean.



    He had to get approval from the authorities to get the treatment. It's not like the bad old days when drugs were taken secretly.



    He had permission. He's clean.



    Interesting about kona. I'm sure a lot of that goes on. Sad but obviously true.
  • 4040 ✭✭
    I agree about Wiggins. And I think the Sky organisation are clean.



    A real shame about the age groupers, got to wonder what the point is really!
  • D0MD0M ✭✭✭

    What troubles me about the Wiggins TUE, is from my limited knowledge of the episode (so i may be wrong, I admit), he took a very powerful performance enhancing drug to treat his asthma. This drug is very rarely used to treat asthma, but it is used sometimes. To me, this smells of, we are within the rules so it's ok. Really, really. My view is they used the technicalities of the rules to get an advantage. Also, i am sure you can kind a doctor to prescribe and state you need the drug if you are a person of their stature. I'm sorry, it stinks and devalues the win. 

  • D0MD0M ✭✭✭

    Find, not kind lol.

  • 4040 ✭✭
    Yes, it does, but legally they are within the rules - Brailsford would always stress that they would go right up to the line but not cross it. Mind you, they also hid the fact they were literally going to the line so I guess they knew that even though what they were doing was within the rules it would still be wrong in many eyes.
  • Big_GBig_G ✭✭✭

    DOM, I agree.  And also, didn't he say in his book that he never injected anything, but this drug was injected?  I may be wrong, but I'm sure that's what they said on MarathonTALK the other week.

  • DOM the drug was approved by the UCI medical committee. They cleared it. They should be in the best place to know and reject it if needs be.

    Friend of mine is a pharmacist. She says lots of people are on that drug for asthma and she can't see a problem with it.



    Wiggins has said he's had injections. I don't think I know of anyone who's never had an injection.

    Medical treatment is fine in my book - but not vitamin supplement injections that used to be common in cycling. No need for that.



    If sky were dirty then there would be a lot more stuff coming out than one tue that was approved by their own governing body.
  • HA77HA77 ✭✭✭

    My opinion is that Wiggins had the TUEs for some performance enhancing purpose. Within the rules, yes but still not right.

    Just wondering if he had the TUE, would he then be able to take the same drug again and claim that any positive results were due to the TUE?

    My feeling is that team Sky are probably a bit like Nike Oregon Project. Pushing everything to just within the limits of the rules.

  • cougie wrote (see)
    Friend of mine is a pharmacist. She says lots of people are on that drug for asthma and she can't see a problem with it. 

    True, but it's also known to be a PED, which is why he needed a TUE.  It's also quite a strong drug to take for asthma - the issue seems to be that Wiggins needed very strong asthma medication immediately before 3 of his biggest target races, but at no other time.  All approved and above board, granted, but it's pushing the boundary of legality - if you can get a doctor to sign it off then it's OK, regardless of whether it was actually needed to treat the condition or not.

    cougie wrote (see)

    Wiggins has said he's had injections. I don't think I know of anyone who's never had an injection.
    Medical treatment is fine in my book - but not vitamin supplement injections that used to be common in cycling. No need for that.

    If sky were dirty then there would be a lot more stuff coming out than one tue that was approved by their own governing body.

    Wiggins also said previously that he'd never had injections while at Sky.  Presumably he either forgot about the ones right before his biggest races to treat a condition that would have threatened his participation in the race, or maybe he didn't want to bring it up because he knew there would be awkward questions to answer.

    Yes, medical treatment is fine, but only if there's a condition that needs treating and only if there are no non-PED medications available, in my view.

    And yes, if sky were doing illegal stuff across the board then there'd be a lot more coming out.  With Armstrong there was a steady stream of claims of cheating which were all ignored at the time because, as he so frequently said himself, he wasn't failing any tests.  I don't think anyone would fall for that again - if similar claims were being made about Sky we'd have written them off long ago.

  • Fe ing Madness wrote (see)

    Its a big complicated mess!

    Only my opinion but in professional sport athletes should be pure athletes and if they need treating with banned drugs then they should step aside and not compete until their condition is cured!

    In amateur sport its a little bit harder as most of us are there to complete not compete.  However when has anyone seen the test van at an event?  I have raced quite a few "qualifiers" and never seen any testing carried out even though AG winners are producing times very close to top professionals.  If you were close to qualification and missed out, you might be a little pissed by that!

    You have just banned the whole Novo Nordisc team in one not fully thought out statement.

  • I should have pointed out that I am Diabeticimage

    Whilst insulin requires a TUE these athletes also need insulin to live so I would think thats not the same as an acute condition?

  • Mostly pointing out that your blanket statement of banning TUE's outright (or competing under one at least) would penalise athletes who genuinely need their medication. One size doesn't fit all and that's why the system is needed, it does need proper clarity and policing though.

  • Cougie it's interesting you think doping goes on in age grouper triathlon but not in podium / olympic cycling? Every tour de france podium has had a doper on for the last 30 years, why do you think it would change for an "english" cyclist?

    I know two pharmacists and an ENT consultant surgeon all of which disagree with his treatment. if you are that sick just days before cycling a grand tour, you simply cannot perform

    It would be interesting to see a study on anyone who is on this medication to their physical well being and athletic performance in a lab. I am certain that a vast majority are not competing at high level sport and the condition is somehow detrimental 

    The fact are the drug is banned and proven very potent and effective. To "need" it the same time every year just before 3 grand tours is a bit laughable don't you think? Then never to mention it ever, anywhere. books, newspaper, autobiography, along with a huge amount of contradictions 

     

    I know he got granted a TUE which means he is allowed to take the drug. How clean is the system? Does he actually have a physical condition though? 

    I've been having tests for asthma last few weeks, displayed every single symptom, even got prescribed an inhaler for 4 weeks (roughly 200 puffs). Had another spiromtery test yesterday with an asthma nurse who then showed me my numbers. I have very, very, very good lung function despite suffering with high HR / breathing issues and my performance has vastly dropped (I'm talking +30 BPM for same pace). Even with a basic reliever we saw upto 3% increase across various variables (FEV etc) in under 20 minutes off just 4 single puffs..She said she has seen upto 20% increase 

    Now I wonder how many cyclists are on the same path gaining an advantage when they don't have any real problems and then using stronger meds.....Well.. No comment now

    Look at the Lance saga /  Festina affair. I can't believe anyone who thinks the cycling world is clean in any way 

    Pain is weakness leaving the body
  • Interesting, Scott. I have a 10k this weekend, maybe I should have a few chugs on my inhaler beforehand.

  • image 

     

    Pain is weakness leaving the body
  • Competing with a TUE is only "legal" if the stated reason for applying for (and receiving) the TUE is the truth. So saying that UCI doctors approved use of a rather inappropriate drug therefore it's use was legal is exactly the loophole a cheat would aim to exploit.

    i dont know many asthmatics who require incredibly powerful rescue drugs to combat the effects of an amazingly wide variety of pollen (types, climate, geography) who continue to smoke either. You'd have thought there might be a marginal gain to be had there, too...

  • 4040 ✭✭

    The sky defence is that they have always operated within the rules, that what they did was legal but as you say, staying legal still allows loopholes that could be defined as cheating. 

    The Times are now calling for Brailsford to resign

  • Meanwhile there is no doping in football no siree as they haven't really looked....
  • 40 - indeed. The problem is the original Sky proclamations that they would be whiter than white, demonstrably clean, and obey the spirit of the law, not just the letter, in order to help shepherd in a New Era of cycling wherein fans could have faith about what they saw. 

    I'm quite sure there's doping in football. Certainly there is in tennis and we all know what a farce athletics is. Thing is, I don't care; about football, or the willfull ignorance of its fans. 

  • Scott Edgington wrote (see)

     

    The fact are the drug is banned and proven very potent and effective. To "need" it the same time every year just before 3 grand tours is a bit laughable don't you think?  

    Where is it proven to be very potent and effective as a performance enhancer.   I've read what David Millar said about it (didn't he used to claim to have only used epo 3 times?) but haven't been able to find anything that suggests it is actually much of a performance enhancer beyond that.

    As far as inhalers goes I don't think they would be a ped if you didn't have asthma as from memory the amount of O2 you can get into your lungs isn't the limiter in athletic performance if you are healthy ?  

  • Every TdF podium for 30 years has had a doper on it ? 

  • Popsider - It's banned. WADA test and review tons of medicines each year and ban ones deemed performance enhancing. Why else would they be banned, there's quite a few statements and also lots of contradictions across he board about dosages and why and when the medication was needed etc.



    And the whole idea of abusing the TUE system is to gain access to meds and claim to have a medical condition to use them whilst healthy to gain an advantage. Like the Tramadol thing, anyone really needing it really isn't going to be performing well or competitive in the TDF. If healthy then it's obviously going to help



    Dave - Can you name a clean podium? Each one has had some form of implication with drugs or a convicted doper. Indurain, Mercx way back too it's all widely known they would have doped or abused substances. Proven, not so, only in comparable like for like times and stuff



    I'd love for Team Sky to be clean, or any team but it's just not happening. The bending of rules and shadiness is embarrassing, sport isn't transparent enough.
    Pain is weakness leaving the body
  • Even this years ? 

    ( or last for that matter ? ) 

    You been at the green inhaler again ? 

Sign In or Register to comment.