Doping

A friend of mine, formerly a senior figure in BC, was very careful to stay well out of any BC/Sky business. He thought conflicts of interest were so obvious that people would get burned.

How many other teams can make that same claim since 2010?

Don't know, how many?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHGPixsRWBw

http://www.velonews.com/2017/02/from-the-mag/need-t-amateur-cycling-testosterone-tues_430124#

Asthma TUE reqs:

https://www.wada-ama.org/sites/default/files/tpg_-_asthma_-_version_6.0_-_december_2017.pdf

Thanks for raising the lack of support for Womens' cycling by BC during this period, especially Simon Cope's journey with the jiffy bag.

Deloittes, well read the back pages of Private Eye...

It seems like quite a defeatist attitude to think that how it is now is the best it could ever be, and that as long as the laws are followed the ethics are irrelevant.

Is it that bad to have ethical standards as well as regulatory ones?

I can see your opposition to it being used as a stick to beat Team Sky while there are others who are actually breaking the regulations, and there are a lot of people with an axe to grind.

But do you really think their behaviour is beyond reproach?

Not just a lack of support, but misappropriation of resources, plus with the skinsuits, a commercial benefit to Sky on the back of implied sponsorship, where there was apparently none.

Oh, and another more doping-related example: BC and Sky sharing pharmaceutical stock with no adequate records to tie to individuals, either by accident or design. I guess that didn't break any rules, but it obfuscated who was taking what, and was one effect of inadequate controls on conflict of interest.

I have to say I'm disappointed by the 'no rules broken' and 'ethical grey area' responses in this thread. To me this isn't just about cheating in sport, which frankly I don't think can be adequately policed, but more general ethical behaviour in organisations, especially those receiving public money.

https://twitter.com/ffflow/status/970636290587873281

Does breaking WADA code break the rules though? I don't get it.

We need a statement from Jonathan Tiernan-Locke.

He’s got to be the anonymous source, no?

But weren't all the Sky branded skin suits and bikes cast-offs from the mens' team?

The noise from the TUE story drowns out the neglect of cycle sport overall by BC during this period and of womens' cycle sport in particular.

"Crossing an ethical line" is bullshit. There are no grey areas, they either broke the rules or they didn't and, as no charges have been brought by UKAD, WADA or the UCI, they didn't break the rules.

The problem is that isn't the ethos of Team Sky as Brailsford himself positioned it.

He didn't make it out as a box ticking, following the letter of the law kind of team, he implied Sky would win by following the spirit of the rules, not just the letter.

In the words of the report (my bold): “it does cross the ethical line that (team principal) David Brailsford says he himself drew for Team Sky.”

He must hate his former self right now because he's being bashed over the head by the DCMS committee with his own arguments.

What Brailsford was saying when Team Sky was set up is well documented: they would win clean, it would be "100% clean". They would win things "in the right way". He has said this too since, e.g. to Sky News in September 2016.

I don't think most reasonable people consider pushing the boundaries of the rules by exploiting medical exemptions 100% clean or winning in the right way.

The whole saga is an object lesson in saying 'refute' when you mean 'deny'.

I have to say I'm disappointed by the 'no rules broken' and 'ethical grey area' responses in this thread. To me this isn't just about cheating in sport, which frankly I don't think can be adequately policed, but more general ethical behaviour in organisations, especially those receiving public money.

+1

I’m always quite happy when Seb Coe gets a shoeing. He is insufferable.

Surely Sky need a clear out of the staff who were around when this was happening if they’re to continue attracting riders and sponsorship? No rules broken technically but a massive error of judgement.

I’d like to see riders like Geraint Thomas put on spot about this. Did he know what was going on in the team? Was he benefiting from the same treatment?

I think they're all on the corticosteroids.;

2 Attachments

Chris Froome earlier;

1 Attachment

Actions speak louder than words.

Within days of announcing that Team Sky would do things differently they hired Sean Yates, Scott Sunderland and Brian Nygard, all of whom came from teams with questionable ethics. It was obviously PR puff.

Representatives of a national, state funded body were involved. Also at least two who were given one of the highest honours possible by the UK head of state.

The answer to this is to stop wasting tax payers' money subsidising enterprises which should stand or fall on their own merit, and to abolish the honours system and the monarchy, relics of mediaeval feudalism which have no place in a civilised country. It's pretty rich for politicians to be grandstanding over this while presiding over and benefitting from the very system of corruption, nepotism and self-aggrandisement which creates the incentives which drive grubby little crooks to cheat at games.

The "honours" system is a who's who of devious venal self-serving little shits. In this report alone we have criticism of Lord Coe, Sir Mo, Sir Brad & Sir Dave. Every time there's a scandal, there's a peer of the realm or a knight or dame right at the head of it. It's not that people suddenly become grubby little crooks upon elevation or ennoblement, it's that the system was always designed to selectively embrace the grubbiest little crooks to the bosom of the bastard sons of robber barons who lay claim to the throne of England, where they can rape and pillage the serfdom to their hearts' content as long as they don't challenge the status quo

Park life.

puff

:)

FDJ, Bora and Sunweb would be my educated guess.

WADA says TUE's for 'legitimate medical condition'
Dave knows what he's on about.

Right. Well, while we wait for the overthrow of the monarchy, I'd rather not completely abandon the ability for elected politicians to investigate behaviour of those who already have those non-democratically determined honours.

Unless you are perhaps suggesting we do so in order to speed the onset of revolution, of course.