More trouble for Team SKY.

slim_boy_fat

redvision wrote:

Slim Boy Fat wrote:

I’m going to keep an open mind and enjoy the sport until someone plonks some factual evidence in front of me that allows me to make a decision either way. I’m not sure how anyone can draw any other conclusion than that.

That's your prerogative.
But how can evidence be plonked in front of you if it is destroyed??

Got to add, personally I think all this burying head in sand is comical given some of the accusations made on this forum towards doping in other sports (football) without one bit of evidence, yet here numerous members are continuing to believe sky are clean because there is no evidence (because the team lost or destroyed it).

Honestly, just read what you have written above back to yourself. You think it’s comical that some believe Sky to be innocent just because there is no incriminating evidence? If I’m ever up in court I hope you are not on the jury.

blazing_saddles

So, folks have their heads in the sand for thinking someone might be innocent, because their isn't evidence that they are guilty?
Have I got that right? 8)

redvision

Blazing Saddles wrote:

So, folks have their heads in the sand for thinking someone might be innocent, because their isn't evidence that they are guilty?
Have I got that right? 8)

An independent investigation has found the team exploited the TUE system. The report suggested this exploitation likely went further, possibly full doping, but this could not be proven as the medical records needed had been 'lost'.

At the same time you have a current rider who is under suspicion for another possible offence.

You also have former coaches openly admitting there was a habit of using the TUE system to boost performances of riders and calling for the team to finally be honest.

The only thing missing is a failed drugs test.

slim_boy_fat

redvision wrote:

Blazing Saddles wrote:

So, folks have their heads in the sand for thinking someone might be innocent, because their isn't evidence that they are guilty?
Have I got that right? 8)

An independent investigation has found the team exploited the TUE system.

That is incorrect. They expressed an opinion that they thought that is what had been going on. They provided zero evidence to substantiate this claim.

Honestly, your are hear accusing people of ‘burying their head in the sand just because their is no evidence’whilst forming your own opinion on a total misrepresentation of the facts.

redvision

Slim Boy Fat wrote:

redvision wrote:

Blazing Saddles wrote:

So, folks have their heads in the sand for thinking someone might be innocent, because their isn't evidence that they are guilty?
Have I got that right? 8)

An independent investigation has found the team exploited the TUE system.

That is incorrect. They expressed an opinion that they thought that is what had been going on. They provided zero evidence to substantiate this claim.

Honestly, your are hear accusing people of ‘burying their head in the sand just because their is no evidence’whilst forming your own opinion on a total misrepresentation of the facts.

There is no smoke without fire.

There was a great analogy on the radio yesterday morning in which it was said that what you have is an abundance of circumstantial evidence, including personal testimony by former coaches and doctors, which is effectively like having a crime scene full of fingerprints but no murder weapon.

And as I said previously, many on here claim doping is widespread in other sports, without any evidence, yet here there is an independent report strongly suggesting team sky were exploiting the system (and possibly doping) yet those same forum members are refusing to accept or believe it. Complete hypocrisy!

slim_boy_fat

redvision wrote:

Slim Boy Fat wrote:

redvision wrote:

Blazing Saddles wrote:

So, folks have their heads in the sand for thinking someone might be innocent, because their isn't evidence that they are guilty?
Have I got that right? 8)

An independent investigation has found the team exploited the TUE system.

That is incorrect. They expressed an opinion that they thought that is what had been going on. They provided zero evidence to substantiate this claim.

Honestly, your are hear accusing people of ‘burying their head in the sand just because their is no evidence’whilst forming your own opinion on a total misrepresentation of the facts.

There is no smoke without fire.

There was a great analogy on the radio yesterday morning in which it was said that what you have is an abundance of circumstantial evidence, including personal testimony by former coaches and doctors, which is effectively like having a crime scene full of fingerprints but no murder weapon.

And as I said previously, many on here claim doping is widespread in other sports, without any evidence, yet here there is an independent report strongly suggesting team sky were exploiting the system (and possibly doping) yet those same forum members are refusing to accept or believe it. Complete hypocrisy!

There is no guilt without incriminating evidence.

I’m sure there is doping in all sports and when I’m provided with factual evidence of it I’ll condem the guilty parties. I suggest you do the same rather than forming the opinion that someone is guilty even though there is no evidence.

kirkee

Kremlin Fancy Bears scandal causing distrust and outrage in the west. Yes its shady whats been uncovered with Sky et al. However, in the grand scheme of things its ultimately been put out there by Russia to distract from their own state run dealings with doping, Ukraine invasion and the most recent case of nerve agent poisoning of the double agent in Salisbury. Its suspicious what Team Sky have aledgedly been doing. Im concerned with what could be going on with Team Katusha or Gazprom when you consider whos funding them!

redvision

Slim Boy Fat wrote:

I’m sure there is doping in all sports and when I’m provided with factual evidence of it I’ll condem the guilty parties. I suggest you do the same rather than forming the opinion that someone is guilty even though there is no evidence.

Circumstantial evidence is sometimes enough and, following the report, I am confident that it is only a matter of time before the truth comes out.

RichN95.

redvision wrote:

There is no smoke without fire.

Anyone who resorts to that cliche is invariably wrong.

redvision

RichN95 wrote:

redvision wrote:

There is no smoke without fire.

Anyone who resorts to that cliche is invariably wrong.

:roll:

chuuurles

Pross wrote:

Shortfall wrote:

chuuurles wrote:

reading the goal post adjustments and wiggling in here is hilarious. History repeats and all that.

wants B rad to Sue Piers Morgan.... straight outta the old playbook

Can you explain this please?

It's just one our regular Clinic visitors with a new login. I'm surprised it has taken them 2 days, maybe they forgot the group login details.

Yea, just a bone idle w@nker here!

top_bhoy

redvision wrote:

Slim Boy Fat wrote:

I’ve genuinely got no idea if Sky are gaming the system and until someone provides some factual evidence I’m not going to know.

But the evidence may well have been there but sky 'lost' or did not record the medical records.

It really was a terrible coincidence that the Drs laptop was stolen, no-one could remember enough to confirm what was in the jiffy bag and the same good Dr became seriously ill to the point he couldn't attend and answer awkward questions.

Sky have interfered with or have influenced much of the evidence which should have been available to stop all of the allegations and rumours dead in their tracks. Knowing the regulatory framework around drugs in cycling, Skys attitude was and remains, appalling. Sky could be entirely innocent of all the allegations and charges but they are where they are and its a situation entirely of their own making.

I'd like to think that with the current publicity and furore, all future TUE and inhaler use will be getting scrutinised intensively. The downside to this is that it also sounds like an opportunity for the unscrupulous to push something else under the radar.

Pross

redvision wrote:

Blazing Saddles wrote:

So, folks have their heads in the sand for thinking someone might be innocent, because their isn't evidence that they are guilty?
Have I got that right? 8)

An independent investigation has found the team exploited the TUE system. The report suggested this exploitation likely went further, possibly full doping, but this could not be proven as the medical records needed had been 'lost'.

At the same time you have a current rider who is under suspicion for another possible offence.

You also have former coaches openly admitting there was a habit of using the TUE system to boost performances of riders and calling for the team to finally be honest.

The only thing missing is a failed drugs test.

It's a stretch to call the Parliamentary Inquiry an independent investigation. They invited all sorts of people who have never been involved with Team Sky and yet the person bearing the brunt of the accusations only got to provide a written statement. Have you read the full section of the report relating to Sky / BC? The amount of references to credible, unnamed sources and the leaps of faith using conjecture and rumour to reach their conclusion seems far from investigation or independence. There's far to much credence given to the opinion of what is basically a bunch of unqualified glorified parish councillors. On the other hand the investigation by the proper authority, UKAD, was unable to find evidence of cheating even though they were frustrated by the lack of medical paperwork.

redvision

The report echoed the UKAD investigation in that it was hampered by sky losing the records.

It is a massive coincidence given the circumstances and the suspicion around the team for years now.
On top of that you have former sky coaches who admit the team played the TUE system - which effectively supports the reports claims that riders were taking medication under a TUE which they did not need.

I bet Michele Ferrari is thinking to himself, if only i thought of losing the records i kept!

blazing_saddles

redvision wrote:

The report echoed the UKAD investigation in that it was hampered by sky losing the records.

It is a massive coincidence given the circumstances and the suspicion around the team for years now.
On top of that you have former sky coaches who admit the team played the TUE system - which effectively supports the reports claims that riders were taking medication under a TUE which they did not need.

I bet Michele Ferrari is thinking to himself, if only i thought of losing the records i kept!

You can repeat this as many times as you like, but in terms of proof you have exactly diddly squat.
Possible Triamcinolone use out of competition does not, under any circumstance, constitute full doping, btw.

redvision

Who knows. How can you be so sure that there wasn't a full doping program (through exploiting Tues)??

It might be circumstantial evidence but that in a court of law can be enough to convict someone.

iainf72

redvision wrote:

Who knows. How can you be so sure that there wasn't a full doping program (through exploiting Tues)??

It might be circumstantial evidence but that in a court of law can be enough to convict someone.

How many TUE's do you think are issued?

Vino'sGhost

redvision wrote:

Who knows. How can you be so sure that there wasn't a full doping program (through exploiting Tues)??

It might be circumstantial evidence but that in a court of law can be enough to convict someone.

The head of the UCI was talking about evidence of an organised program yesterday.......

RichN95.

iainf72 wrote:

redvision wrote:

Who knows. How can you be so sure that there wasn't a full doping program (through exploiting Tues)??

It might be circumstantial evidence but that in a court of law can be enough to convict someone.

How many TUE's do you think are issued?

I think some people on the internet curse that Froome TUEs were leaked as well. It’s really inconvenient for their narrative.

top_bhoy

redvision

iainf72 wrote:

redvision wrote:

Who knows. How can you be so sure that there wasn't a full doping program (through exploiting Tues)??

It might be circumstantial evidence but that in a court of law can be enough to convict someone.

How many TUE's do you think are issued?

It's not necessarily about how many were issued, it's about how many were actually needed for medical reasons, not performance gains.

RichN95.

redvision wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

redvision wrote:

Who knows. How can you be so sure that there wasn't a full doping program (through exploiting Tues)??

It might be circumstantial evidence but that in a court of law can be enough to convict someone.

How many TUE's do you think are issued?

It's not necessarily about how many were issued, it's about how many were actually needed for medical reasons, not performance gains.

Even if all of the TUEs are fraudulent then it's still only about 1% of riders using them. That's not a problem. There will be more than 1% actually doping.

RichN95.

I'm amused at these headlines "UCI chief calls for investigation". Have they actually watched the interview? He's asked a leading question to which he prompt divests all responsibility to CADF, and suggests - in response to more leading questions - that he'd like them to do something, and finishes by preempting a judgement - that no rules have been broken.

redvision

RichN95 wrote:

redvision wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

redvision wrote:

Who knows. How can you be so sure that there wasn't a full doping program (through exploiting Tues)??

It might be circumstantial evidence but that in a court of law can be enough to convict someone.

How many TUE's do you think are issued?

It's not necessarily about how many were issued, it's about how many were actually needed for medical reasons, not performance gains.

Even if all of the TUEs are fraudulent then it's still only about 1% of riders using them. That's not a problem. There will be more than 1% actually doping.

It's a big problem if those using the fraudulent TUEs are the ones winning GTs and riding for a team which claims its whiter than white and has zero tolerance for performance enhancing drugs.

blazing_saddles

Geraint has chipped in today.
This is where he see the current situation with TUEs and Team Sky stand:-

Given the scrutiny surrounding TUEs, Thomas says he would not take (use?) them even if he needed them for medical reasons.

"Just being in Team Sky, if I had one, it's going to come out, it's going to get leaked," he said.

"If I was in a different team, maybe it wouldn't - but the way the world is at the moment, it's going to come out and people are going to judge me on that.

"If I technically did need it and could have it, I'd probably still not have it purely because of the perception of what TUEs are seen as now, which is wrong in itself, totally wrong.

"Life's not fair I guess. That's what we've got to live up to on this team."

RichN95.

redvision wrote:

It's a big problem if those using the fraudulent TUEs are the ones winning GTs and riding for a team which claims its whiter than white and has zero tolerance for performance enhancing drugs.

They're not though, so there's no problem.

redvision

RichN95 wrote:

redvision wrote:

It's a big problem if those using the fraudulent TUEs are the ones winning GTs and riding for a team which claims its whiter than white and has zero tolerance for performance enhancing drugs.

They're not though, so there's no problem.

In your opinion.
The report suggests otherwise.

RichN95.

redvision wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

redvision wrote:

It's a big problem if those using the fraudulent TUEs are the ones winning GTs and riding for a team which claims its whiter than white and has zero tolerance for performance enhancing drugs.

They're not though, so there's no problem.

In your opinion.
The report suggests otherwise.

The report is about 2011/2. It's 2018 now. And thanks to the Fancy Bears we know that Froome didn't have any TUEs for his Tour wins.

iainf72

redvision wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

redvision wrote:

Who knows. How can you be so sure that there wasn't a full doping program (through exploiting Tues)??

It might be circumstantial evidence but that in a court of law can be enough to convict someone.

How many TUE's do you think are issued?

It's not necessarily about how many were issued, it's about how many were actually needed for medical reasons, not performance gains.

But the number is relevant in the context of your statement.

Do you accept based on the number of TUE's issued, it would be impossible to run a full doping programme by exploiting them?

larkim

I've said for a long time TUEs are a complete red herring. The Fancy Bears leaks confirmed that (arguably with the exception of Wiggins') the nunber of TUEs for high profile athletes was incredibly small, and that they were invariably for acute medical conditions which had a very short duration and were usually while the athlete in question was known to be sidelined with an actual injury - e.g. Farah had morphine when he had a tooth / abcess infection and collapse (as well documented at the time) etc.

It's definitely true to say that the TUE process has been tightened and improved in recent years, but the one thing we can all be certain about if TUEs are being bandied about is that the relevant authorities know about TUEs in existence - by very definition, they are logged with the relevant bodies and are readily accessible to them. If they felt there was any suggestion of inappropriate or borderline TUEs they have it within their gift to refuse them.

It seems some people have the impression that you just ring up someone with the word "doctor" in their name, fill in an online form that no-one checks, and magically you are allowed to use all sorts of performance enhancing substances.

That's most certainly not true today, and hasn't been the case for a number of years. Those who trot out TUE abuse are the same ones who say "no smoke without fire". It's a lazy position, unresearched and verifiably wrong, based on what you are being fed by lazy journalists who also appear not to understand the concept or the process.

And if I was a systematic doper, I'd be delighted that the focus seems to be on TUEs, because it would mean that the microdosing, novel drug use, combination drug use, masking use etc are all going under the radar because people are too stupid to see where the real issues are.