-
Because certain substances may not be permitted under certain circumstances but will be in others, which means it is down to someone to make a judgement call as to whether someone qualifies or not; can they justify prescribing something that would otherwise be prohibited.
If it's not a grey area then why is there all this fuss? Why is Brailsford keeping schtum? Why was Wiggins talking to Marr and not somebody who actually knows a bit about the subject?
I don't think that Wiggins has done anything wrong necessarily, but I've not been convinced by any line of argument on here that he definitely hasn't.
The_Kindness_of_Trees-
I don't think that Wiggins has done anything wrong necessarily, but I've not been convinced by any line of argument on here that he definitely hasn't.
Well - he definitely hasn't (legally) because he was given TUE's by the authorities.
Ethically, my personal view is that they did step over the line. I don't Sky would be happy if it was another team and were they in the MPCC he wouldn't have ridden / taken it. And if it was Valverde or Contador I'd be thinking there goes the filthy doper again. IANADr but it seems likely that what he was given was more than strictly necessary and probably did have positive impact on performance.
That said, the treatment was signed off 3 times, (by different people?) so it clearly wasn't that obviously dodgy.
villa-ru
Sky's PR team are playing a blinder. Leaving Wiggins to hopelessly flail alone in outer space as they cruise away in the Death Star.