So who won the tour from 1999 to 2005
2 lurkers |
80 watchers
Mar 2018
8:42am, 7 Mar 2018
1,468 posts
|
stuart little
Teaboy - that's precisely my point (apologies if I haven't articulated it well). Things that are "unethical" have been banned in sports - diving, spot fixing, steroids, etc. It doesn't stop folk from trying, but there is a known punishment. What sky (and many, many others) have done is go right to the legal line. Like it or not, the only point "ethics" comes into that grey area is when you try and rewrite the rulebook.
|
Mar 2018
8:52am, 7 Mar 2018
4,082 posts
|
larkim
You're making assumptions about what Sky have done there SL - if you read Wiggins' interview, he is very clear - there was no systematic use of triamcinolone to reduce weight, there was no cabal of a handful of riders secretly using it for that purpose etc. Effectively there's the word of an anonymous source who doesn't know the difference between "pawn" and "porn" and Wiggins (and the rest of the Sky infrastructure) saying that it didn't happen. Of course, it's easy to say "they would say that wouldn't they", but if we're prepared to accept one person's (anonymous) perspective, why are we not prepared to accept the other side too? There is a presumption that Sky have pushed the limits, but I'm clear in my mind that I've not seen any corroborated evidence that they have - the MPs report is not a million miles of what a lot of forum posters would have reported from afar without a solid base of facts to support it. Of course, because Sky can't offer irrefutable proof of what was in the jiffy bag, what specific medications were administered when, we have a cloud of suspicion based largely on the fact that, at the bottom line, Sky were successful. If you can't be successful without being immediately accused of nefarious practices, we might as well stop watching the sport. |
Mar 2018
8:58am, 7 Mar 2018
25,262 posts
|
Derby Tup
So the MPs (that’s elected members of our parliament) are simply tittle-tattling? Guilty of cheating and hypocrisy is my verdict A fair chunk of the field will be doping (they always are) and our boys beat them, ‘clean’. The moon is made of blue cheese (FACT) and Rudolf was the one eating the carrot you left out on Xmas eve night (FACT) |
|
Mar 2018
9:21am, 7 Mar 2018
4,083 posts
|
larkim
DT - have you read the report and the "evidence" that stacks it up? I can be naive at times, and I recognise this. But I also want to see facts, and I've seen almost none from the whole palaver. If you inherently believe Wiggins / Sky are cheats, the report will confirm that. If you inherently believe Wiggins / Sky are not cheats, there's nothing in the report which refutes that. If you're asking is it acceptable that the record keeping by Wiggins' team / Team Sky was so poor as to not be able to refute the allegations against them, I'd answer that it completely isn't acceptable. But that's not the same as meaning that the allegations made anonymously were true either. Now that the allegations are properly public and documented I'd expect to see / hear others confirming them - I'd find it incredible that there's only one person currently or previously within Team Sky that had a) seen / heard first hand the abuses being documented and b) wasn't prepared to blow the whistle on it. So far, all we have is one barely literate source of anonymous allegations which EVERYONE ELSE says is untrue. If there is illegal practice at Sky, there's now a platform for others to come out and say "Yes, I saw that" or "Yes, I heard that" or "Yes, I benefitted from that". And honestly, if there's illegal practice there I want to hear about it - I've no vested interest in Sky being clean. But I do hate with a passion commentary and character assassination that is just fueled by preconceptions which have nothing behind them other than myth and rumour. There's no smoke without fire is a fair enough perspective - but I've seen charcoal being made, and there was plenty of smoke and no fire at all. |
|
Mar 2018
9:27am, 7 Mar 2018
25,263 posts
|
Derby Tup
The anonymous source is a red herring I think. I’ve followed pro-cycling since a mate went to Europe c 1980 to be a ‘domestique’. It is all bent / corrupt. It’s part of the appeal in a perverse way. What would the Velvet Underground be like without drugs? About the same as a totally clean bike race
|
|
Mar 2018
9:29am, 7 Mar 2018
25,264 posts
|
Derby Tup
Oh and no I haven’t read the report
|
|
Mar 2018
9:46am, 7 Mar 2018
4,084 posts
|
larkim
If you've not read the report, I'm not sure you can judge the red herring nature of the anonymous source. The ONLY source for the report saying that Sky used triamcinolone routinely with a group of riders to lean down and use the drug as a performance enhancer, not for medical reasons, is that source. And yet that finding is the one which has got the most headlines. It really isn't a red herring - it's the fundamental of the reasons why Wiggins is being criticised. I do partly buy the "part of the appeal" argument - all sport is better when it isn't just anodyne, and it's been a huge part of the criticsm of Team Sky at the grand tours that they just make them dull by the way they approach them. But I'd argue strongly that the MPs report does little to clear anything up and turn what is just a rumour mill into anything substantive, and that disappoints me greatly. |
|
Mar 2018
9:56am, 7 Mar 2018
4,086 posts
|
larkim
Interesting stuff from Shane Sutton:- skysports.com |
Mar 2018
10:13am, 7 Mar 2018
12,332 posts
|
Chrisull
larks - gonna have to call you out on this section "- if you read Wiggins' interview, he is very clear - there was no systematic use of triamcinolone to reduce weight, there was no cabal of a handful of riders secretly using it for that purpose etc. " It is not just the evidence of one "anonymous" rider. (and heavens above look at "anonymous" riders Christophe Bassons who abandoned the TDF after pressure from Lance Armstrong and two years later, of his own volition, the entire sport and now works in anti doping - or Filippo Simeoni who dared to squeal about doping and suffered the wrath of Armstrong for daring to break the omerta, or journalist Paul Kimmage - the book Rough Ride - which leaves him still as a persona non grata - where would we be without their whistelblowing accounts??? They just jealous also rans as many would have us believe, or those brave enough to speak out?). It is evidence from Sky's own records. They bought triamcinolone. They had 55 ampoules ordered on their behalf, only some of which is account for in their medical records system.This is considered an amount too great for just one rider - (this is asserted elsewhere) theguardian.com This is why we know it wasn't fluimucil in the jiffy bag, because there were no records of them having sourced it at the time (unless of course they bought it in a French pharmacy, but then the jiffy bag incident would never have happened). They did buy triamcinolone at the time. Hence the "it's triamcinolone in the jiffy bag" is a bit more than guesswork, but stops short of proof. A good lawyer would convince a jury any day with the circumstantial evidence. And Sutton's interviews hints that Wiggins knows/or has more to tell about the triamcinolone usage. |
Mar 2018
11:01am, 7 Mar 2018
6,352 posts
|
paul the builder
Lark - also this: """The ONLY source for the report saying that Sky used triamcinolone routinely with a group of riders to lean down and use the drug as a performance enhancer, not for medical reasons, is that source. And yet that finding is the one which has got the most headlines.""" isn't quite right. Wiggins has himself explained that the Triamcinolone was used in a 'preventive' way, rather than as a treatment for an attack already happened. That's outside TUE rules. *If* they hadn't done anything wrong (the team, or the individual riders), shouldn't it be easy to demonstrate that? Shouldn't they be all over this with data, justifications, records? Seems to me that if Sky are ashamed of what they've done (and we take for the moment that they've only gone *right up to* the line and not over it) to the extent of not documenting it, and lieing to cover it up (Flumicil) - then where's their motivation to have stopped *just* before the line? Since what they are doing is so shameful, they might as well do a bit more.... After all, practically no-one fails a test now (except the odd stupid/sacrificial individual). |
Related Threads
-
Cheating in amateur sports
Apr 2017
-
Are you doping? Do you know someone who is?
Mar 2017
-
Tour De France
Aug 2020
-
Le Tour 2016
Jul 2016
-
Tour de France 2016
Jun 2016
-
T\'Tour in otley
Apr 2016
-
Le Tour 2015
Aug 2015
-
Le Tour 2014
Jun 2015
-
Tour of Britain
Jan 2015
-
Womens Tour Of Britain
May 2014
