Doping

Not as strong as cortisone. If you need that to race then you are too sick to race. I'd rather not have question marks over results.

As I said, the court of public opinion. You are speculating while knowing only the scraps of information in the public domain. I'm not comfortable with condemning someone over speculation.

That is your opinion nothing more, and the very simple fact remains he did nothing that wasn't legal and sanctioned.

So?

Are you calling me fat?

Natural? Testosterone is natural too. Turbo training isn't natural. Oxygen tents aren't natural.

There's loads of uses for cortisone that would not make you too sick to race.

Isn't that the point of it? Wiggins was awful in 2010 off the back of third in 2009, and the reason was cited as allergies.

I'm not sure of your point.

Well he has said he was unable to compete in 2010 because of the intense allergic reaction, hence the TUE in 2011 to help him. He didn't have a TUE in 2009 when he finished third while riding for Garmin. Or a TUE for any of his successes before and after 2012. Without TUEs he was arguably the finest pursuiter the track has ever seen, multiple Ilympic golds and Word Championships including endurance events. He won stage races like Paris-Nice and the Daupine on the road without a TUE, he won the ITT World Champs without one, and the Hour record. His ability as a bike rider beyond the microcosm of 2012 (which we'll agree he didn't win because of individual brilliance, and wasn't even the best rider on the team) has always been world class, he is clearly an extraordinary athlete when you take his palmeres into account, omitting the TdF win. Even that year he was winning stage races before the TUE, so you can argue that the TUEs were an insurance he was riding at his best, without the allergies.

Tl:dr his ability on a bike is proven time after time, the TUE was insurance he was able to perform to that ability

I never want to type TUE again

Also reference his rant after he was chucked off the 2007 Tour while riding for Confidis when one of their riders tested positive. That always felt very honest to me.

What Bradley did was technically legal, do we go beyond that and say he's cheated the whole time?

What’s the day before Wednesday called?

Are you suggesting allergies can't develop later in life or change based on location? Or that the best treatment for an existing ailment not change over time?

Who sanctioned the TUE?

His 2009 TDF week 3 blood spike was down to machine calibration error

I think Wiggins' credibility would be in a better state now if it wasn't for all that "I never use needles" stuff in his book, followed by the "oh yes, apart from those ones" when the TUEs (also not mentioned) came out.

I don't think his credibility is totally shot, but if there wasn't the general air they've been trying to cover something up, there'd be less of a whiff about the way these things are perceived.

Enlighten us, o wise one.

Ummm I know allergies I had terrible ones as a kid to dust mites and cats, my nose would just piss away, eyes swell, asthma, headaches it was horrible.

These days nothing. Even cats. No treatment worked when I was younger, parents tried everything under the sun, pills, nasal sprays, inhalers, homeopathy, literally everything. But it just stopped but I remember what it was like.

Ultimately my and I suspect your medical knowledge isn't up to really debate this thoroughly.
I think your stance is to support your argument over what you likely believe.

Given how bad no restrictions would go for atheletes health TUE is the best solution but it's s total mess and doesn't really do what they claim it to.

Remember, Fluimucil is not licensed for sale in the United Kingdom, in any of its forms

Bullshit.

The Clinic is that way >>>>>>>>>

Best place for conspiracy theories and false claims.

Neither is mayonnaise a la moutarde but it doesn't make it unobtainable....

I just think you have to remember is Wiggins had three of them. Over three years. He won shitloads either side of them. Did he cheat to win them?

It's not that binary, is it.

What I'm saying, if you read it again, is the opposite of how you're trying to read it really.

He's clearly had a whole load of success which is almost certainly genuine. So why have they (both Wiggins himself and Team Sky) cocked this episode up so spectacularly, and given the whole affair such an air of suspicion when the whole thing, if legitimate, could have been done in a way which doesn't seem so suspect?

Suggesting that Sky and Wiggo have covered themselves in shit isn't the same as pointing fingers and shouting "cheat". But if you think they've emerged from this with all their credibility intact then there's probably no point even trying to engage in a conversation about it.

Let’s not forget that we’d know none of this if the Russians hasn’t leaked the details on TUEs, to divert attention away from their state sanctioned doping program.

Team Sky have always been shit at PR, Brailsford obviously fancies himself as some hot shot PR specialist, but it’s always toe curlingly embarrassing when they try and be upbeat. I think any sports organisation suffers to credible when they have the spotlight on them, mainly because elite sport is hard and people get trampled and discarded in the pursuit of wins.

But whatever you think of how the team have handled this, the fact remains that no evidence of wrongdoing has been established and there are no doping violations to answer.