-
Look, I don't think he's been doped to gizzards his entire career. However, we're trying to make what was once probably the dirtiest sport for doping into the cleanest.
To get there, this is all part of the process in my opinion. Great strides have been made, but people are still getting popped for doping now. It's not gone away. I do worry that the ability to go back and re-test samples when the tests get better is going to find more and more stuff even as we go forward. Just look at the mess that is the 2012 Olympics.I also agree that it appears he's not broken any rules. However I still come back to his book. Why lie?
On OBE being a decent team, I don't dismiss this. Most of the world tour teams have been pretty good at some point in the last 5 years. However, since Lance you've got a handful of cycling superstars, of which Froome and Wiggins are two. They ride for the team which bleats the most about being transparent and super clean, but then mess up when put under even mild scrutiny.
It's also not irrelevant that Team Sky and British Cycling are so closely related. This makes Sky as close to a state sponsored team as any "private" professional team out there. As such, taxpayers and lottery players who help fund this relationship are allowed to hold them to account IMO.
Scrabble-
What I was driving it is there are double standards being applied, there is an inherent bias amongst cycling fans and the cycling press against them. Like USPS they came from a non-traditional cycling country and quickly dominated the sport, or at least the sport's blue ribbon event. And fans and commentators didn't like it, arrogant, upstart Brits with their talk of zero-tolerance, of being clean and marginal gains. You read the comments at the clinic and see a pattern of resentment towards 'anglophone' countries and riders: US, Australia, Britain and even Germany get lumped together at being anglo and Northern European and are set against Southern and even Eastern-European riders, the later held up as plucky, from poor backgrounds who only dope as a last resort. They are the good dopers, set against the merciless, monied efficiency of the bad dopers, us, the Yanks, the Germans or the bad dopers, in their eyes. A case in point would be when the clinic en masse attacked Kittel for being racist and bullying when he called out Sayar on Twitter as a doper when he won the Tour of Turkey, then was subsequently popped a couple of months later. The narrative created their was of a plucky rider from a small country and from a small team being bullied by the Anglos and Germans, and the questions asked of Kittel weren't praising him for breaking omerta, but instead saying why isn't he calling out Wiggins or Sky.
These people don't really want a clean sport, they aren't truly anti-doping. Italian, Spanish, Russian etc dopers are given an easy ride, instead they just want to see Sky burn, and the old order of riders from traditional cycling countries winning again. It is a truly strange agenda, but if you call them out on it you are derided as a 'skybot' or fanboy, a bit like the Trump trolls infesting Reddit with their cries of cucks and libtards.
Look at the way Kimmage time after time tears into Sky, in between tweets lauding the Irish rugby team, whose shape and size and speed are most likely the result of PEDs (rugby is particularly rife), or fanboy tweets over football, another sport with a huge PED problem that is mostly ignored. But he knows anti-Sky tweets are what grab the attention, and he can plug into the clinic narrative easily and get the trolls all riled up. The unfortunate thing is this antipathy spreads to the roadside, Sky riders are going to get hammered in the Tour, again.
Sorry, went off on a tangent. I suppose those double-standards infuriate the sense of justice in me so while I agree Sky and Wiggins have questions to answer, the witch hunt against them is disproportionate to what is actually going one. 3 TUEs for Wiggins, 2 for Froome, a jiffy bag, inconsistent answers, that is the sum of accusations against them. Compare that to OBE with convicted dopers running the team and, as @andyp points out, hiring a rider who only narrowly avoided action for some very sketchy blood values.
Nothing against OBE, just a convenient example of a similar team that doesn't invite nearly the sort of scrutiny and vitriol Sky do.
Tl:dr anti-clinic/Kimmage rant, Geraint don't let me down. Stannard, you too.
Jimmy_Fingers
OBE may not be winning the TdF but they've been winning monuments, one-day races and stages in the TdF from the get-go. They have been extremely successful but simply don't receive the same teeth-grinding aggression that Sky do from corners of Twitter. And now they are developing into a GT team with the Yates bro's and Chaves, but they seem to get a mostly free pass.
As far as Wiggins goes, 3 TUEs in how long a career? Did he win any of his Olympic medals with a TUE? He's been a world-class athlete throughout his career, mayhap they pushed the limits to get him the TdF win, but he didn't have a TUE in 2009 when with Garmin when coming third, unless you think Vaughters and Millar ran a dirty team and were doping him back then. He was winning stage races before he had the TUE in 2011, 2012 and 2013. I've said before allergies are an utter arse and if they affected him badly in 2010 when he was poor in the TdF I can see why they went down the TUE route. Was it an abuse of the system? Maybe, but then that is a fault of the system.
No TUEs for his hour record, ITT world champs, recent track achievements. I don't think they should over shadow his entire career. Unless you are of the opinion that they are the tip of the iceberg and he's been doping his entire career, just like his Da.