More trouble for Team SKY.
Comments
-
larkim wrote: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.
Why does the abuse of TUEs allow other forms of cheating to go under the radar?0 -
The media, who should be asking questions, get hung up on one person's TUEs and stop looking elsewhere. This was the whole aim of the Fancy Bears in the first place. The people currently writing about Wiggins are the same ones that used to write about Russia. Fortunately Russia has since retired from sport and is no longer a threat like Wiggins.Shortfall wrote:Why does the abuse of TUEs allow other forms of cheating to go under the radar?Twitter: @RichN950 -
RichN95 wrote:
The media, who should be asking questions, get hung up on one person's TUEs and stop looking elsewhere. This was the whole aim of the Fancy Bears in the first place. The people currently writing about Wiggins are the same ones that used to write about Russia. Fortunately Russia has since retired from sport and is no longer a threat like Wiggins.Shortfall wrote:Why does the abuse of TUEs allow other forms of cheating to go under the radar?
Funny that, a lot of people on these threads have been criticising the media as being uninformed and sensationalist. Besides which, the media have nothing to do with the actual process of drug testing athletes. I don't see anyone going easy on Russian doping just because of the Sky story either.0 -
Shortfall wrote:RichN95 wrote:
The media, who should be asking questions, get hung up on one person's TUEs and stop looking elsewhere. This was the whole aim of the Fancy Bears in the first place. The people currently writing about Wiggins are the same ones that used to write about Russia. Fortunately Russia has since retired from sport and is no longer a threat like Wiggins.Shortfall wrote:Why does the abuse of TUEs allow other forms of cheating to go under the radar?
Funny that, a lot of people on these threads have been criticising the media as being uninformed and sensationalist. Besides which, the media have nothing to do with the actual process of drug testing athletes. I don't see anyone going easy on Russian doping just because of the Sky story either.
That might have something to do with the dozens of positive tests and re-tests that they notched up during the saga.
Evidence rather than suspicion, no?
"Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.0 -
My point is that the media digging into TUEs are heading down a blind alleyway, and they would get a better bang for their buck following through alternative routes. If TUEs are being abused, that's newsworthy. But the governing bodies know the scope and range of TUEs issued inside out, so unless you're making the case that the UCI / IAAF / WADA are complicit in issuing TUEs for sports performance enhancement (and I don't think that is the argument being made - the argument being made is that coaches, teams and athletes are abusing TUEs) it's a dead end - there's likely almost nothing to find.
On the other hand, undetected ACTUAL doping without trying to dope in plain sight risks not being investigated as thoroughly.
If I was Dan Roan, I'd be trawling through suppliers of substances likely to be used for doping, talking to sales staff, admin staff, couriers, overseas suppliers who are linked to things like EPO production and following the trail. But it's much easier to trot out "TUEs are being abused" because it has now become part of the lingua franca of doping, and that worries me because good investigative journalism does have a massive role to play in supporting anti-doping and calling out the cheats.2015 Canyon Nerve AL 6.0 (son #1's)
2011 Specialized Hardrock Sport Disc (son #4s)
2013 Decathlon Triban 3 (red) (mine)
2019 Hoy Bonaly 26" Disc (son #2s)
2018 Voodoo Bizango (mine)
2018 Voodoo Maji (wife's)0 -
Commenting on a flawed and inconsistent report chaired by a careerist expense-cheating MP that accuses a team of serious flaws in “ethics” whilst using unnamed sources, I see the bullsh!t “whiter than white” reference has now permeated the narrative all the way up to the likes of Lappartient - “It’s sad to see that when Team Sky was launched, I remember they say ‘we will be clean, we will win races and be clean, more white than white”.
It’s nice when Reality’s script actually matches The Wire...0 -
I don't see it as an either/or scenario. I think that going after Sky over the TUE thing is legitimate given that their two best riders have been mired in controversy over their use. This doesn't prevent WADA or the UCI or whoever from continuing with thorough doping controls and neither does it prevent other journalists from investigating other doping stories or scandals.0
-
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've said this a couple of times now so I've re-read the DCMS report and cannot see any reference to it in there. Could you point me to the relevant section please?
What I have seen in that report are lots of words like 'David Millar believes....' and 'some doctors think...' which is hardly a high level of evidence.
As I've said previously, the 'lost' laptop and lack of proper paper trail on the medication bothers me a lot but it is still a big leap from that to and illegal substance was administered to Wiggins it could be:-
1. The laptop was genuinely stolen and Sky weren't following their own procedures. However, it should be easy to show something from the time mentioning the stolen laptop such as an insurance claim, police report or a line in the teams accounts.
2. Freeman was up to something dodgy either with individual riders or unrelated to the team hence the claims his laptop was stolen and the lack of backups with incompetence from the team meaning this wasn't uncovered.
3. Other riders were using medication that the team wanted to keep quiet either illegally or legitimately but they didn't want to add to the sh!tstorm by exposing them so let the ex-rider take the flak.
4. There was systematic misuse of the TUE system to benefit from the performance enhancing attributes of the medication by Wiggins and / or other team members.
The committee have concluded 4 without having appeared to even consider any of the other options (admittedly number 1 is least plausible).0 -
Shortfall wrote:I don't see it as an either/or scenario. I think that going after Sky over the TUE thing is legitimate given that their two best riders have been mired in controversy over their use. This doesn't prevent WADA or the UCI or whoever from continuing with thorough doping controls and neither does it prevent other journalists from investigating other doping stories or scandals.
"Mired in controversy" because people equate TUE with doping. Which it isn't.
Reminds me of tabloids using the phrase "bogus asylum seekers"Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
Is Froome 'mired in controversy of their (TUE) use'?
His controversy is over an AAF, not abusing TUEs.
Still that may not suit the narrative you want portrayed.0 -
Agree with this. It's become shorthand for doping or at least questionable practice, when in reality it isn't and is there to safeguard athletes and keep them healthy.iainf72 wrote:
"Mired in controversy" because people equate TUE with doping. Which it isn't.
Reminds me of tabloids using the phrase "bogus asylum seekers"2015 Canyon Nerve AL 6.0 (son #1's)
2011 Specialized Hardrock Sport Disc (son #4s)
2013 Decathlon Triban 3 (red) (mine)
2019 Hoy Bonaly 26" Disc (son #2s)
2018 Voodoo Bizango (mine)
2018 Voodoo Maji (wife's)0 -
Shortfall wrote:I don't see it as an either/or scenario. I think that going after Sky over the TUE thing is legitimate given that their two best riders have been mired in controversy over their use. This doesn't prevent WADA or the UCI or whoever from continuing with thorough doping controls and neither does it prevent other journalists from investigating other doping stories or scandals.
Froome hasn't been mired in controversy over the use of a TUE, he'd already said he'd had one before the hacks and it stayed there. Ironically his current situation may well stem from his refusal to take a TUE as he tried to give himself good PR when the Wiggins story broke. His old team doctor said in a recent interview (linked somewhere on one of these threads) that he should be getting treated under a TUE for corticosteroids rather than trying to deal with it through an inhaler in relatively high doses.
Even if abuse of TUEs was prevalent the system has changed and is now far more robust, if there are still concerns maybe the authorities should be looking at prescribed medication out of competition where there are plenty of substances that can be used without bothering the TUE system.0 -
Dorset Boy wrote:Is Froome 'mired in controversy of their (TUE) use'?
His controversy is over an AAF, not abusing TUEs.
Still that may not suit the narrative you want portrayed.
Can you prove that the fast-tracked TUE Froome received for prednisolone before Romandie '14 which he then went on to win was legit and not abuse?0 -
thegreatdivide wrote:Dorset Boy wrote:Is Froome 'mired in controversy of their (TUE) use'?
His controversy is over an AAF, not abusing TUEs.
Still that may not suit the narrative you want portrayed.
Can you prove that the fast-tracked TUE Froome received for prednisolone before Romandie '14 which he then went on to win was legit and not abuse?
Can you prove it was?
The TUE was granted, therefore it was accepted there was a legitimate need.Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
iainf72 wrote:thegreatdivide wrote:Dorset Boy wrote:Is Froome 'mired in controversy of their (TUE) use'?
His controversy is over an AAF, not abusing TUEs.
Still that may not suit the narrative you want portrayed.
Can you prove that the fast-tracked TUE Froome received for prednisolone before Romandie '14 which he then went on to win was legit and not abuse?
Can you prove it was?
The TUE was granted, therefore it was accepted there was a legitimate need.
And it was under the new, more stringent process I believe?0 -
Pross wrote: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've said this a couple of times now so I've re-read the DCMS report and cannot see any reference to it in there. Could you point me to the relevant section please?
I was referring to comments by Shane Sutton and Dr Fabio Bartalucci (one of the teams former doctors).0 -
Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0
-
redvision wrote:Pross wrote: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've said this a couple of times now so I've re-read the DCMS report and cannot see any reference to it in there. Could you point me to the relevant section please?
I was referring to comments by Shane Sutton and Dr Fabio Bartalucci (one of the teams former doctors).
Yet Sutton didn't claim that when he had the chance in front of the MPs. Bartalucci is more interesting, especially as he says Froome should be using the same product for his asthma rather than his inhaler.0 -
redvision wrote:Pross wrote: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've said this a couple of times now so I've re-read the DCMS report and cannot see any reference to it in there. Could you point me to the relevant section please?
I was referring to comments by Shane Sutton and Dr Fabio Bartalucci (one of the teams former doctors).
So, comments in the press, rather than the document.
Dr Fabio Bartalucci you say?Bartalucci has often treated riders with asthma during Grand Tours but struggles to understand why Team Sky increased Chris Froome's use of a salbutamol inhaler instead of requesting a Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE) from the UCI to use Triamcinolone.
Kind of shot yourself in the foot there...."Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.0 -
-
So far, he's less guilty than Simon Yates then?0
-
Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0
-
Blazing Saddles wrote:redvision wrote:Pross wrote: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've said this a couple of times now so I've re-read the DCMS report and cannot see any reference to it in there. Could you point me to the relevant section please?
I was referring to comments by Shane Sutton and Dr Fabio Bartalucci (one of the teams former doctors).
So, comments in the press, rather than the document.
Dr Fabio Bartalucci you say?Bartalucci has often treated riders with asthma during Grand Tours but struggles to understand why Team Sky increased Chris Froome's use of a salbutamol inhaler instead of requesting a Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE) from the UCI to use Triamcinolone.
Kind of shot yourself in the foot there....
How is that shooting myself in the foot?
He confirmed that team sky would often use those drugs. That's the whole point of this debate. The team employed doctors who freely prescribed such medication and the report claims that these medications were not needed for medical reasons.
Shane Sutton openly admitted the TUE boundaries were pushed to the limit.0 -
redvision wrote:Blazing Saddles wrote:redvision wrote:Pross wrote: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've said this a couple of times now so I've re-read the DCMS report and cannot see any reference to it in there. Could you point me to the relevant section please?
I was referring to comments by Shane Sutton and Dr Fabio Bartalucci (one of the teams former doctors).
So, comments in the press, rather than the document.
Dr Fabio Bartalucci you say?Bartalucci has often treated riders with asthma during Grand Tours but struggles to understand why Team Sky increased Chris Froome's use of a salbutamol inhaler instead of requesting a Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE) from the UCI to use Triamcinolone.
Kind of shot yourself in the foot there....
How is that shooting myself in the foot?
He confirmed that team sky would often use those drugs. That's the whole point of this debate. The team employed doctors who freely prescribed such medication and the report claims that these medications were not needed for medical reasons.
Shane Sutton openly admitted the TUE boundaries were pushed to the limit.
Surely that quote above is suggesting that Triamcinolone is the more appropriate treatment for Froome's condition i.e. they are doing exactly the opposite of what everyone is saying and failing to use the most appropriate treatment so that they don't need to go through the TUE process? Also, there's a disconnect between the doctors freely prescribing such medication and the report claiming the medication was not needed. Maybe the doctors considered it was necessary and they know better than the MPs writing the report.0 -
Pross wrote:redvision wrote:Blazing Saddles wrote:redvision wrote:Pross wrote: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've said this a couple of times now so I've re-read the DCMS report and cannot see any reference to it in there. Could you point me to the relevant section please?
I was referring to comments by Shane Sutton and Dr Fabio Bartalucci (one of the teams former doctors).
So, comments in the press, rather than the document.
Dr Fabio Bartalucci you say?Bartalucci has often treated riders with asthma during Grand Tours but struggles to understand why Team Sky increased Chris Froome's use of a salbutamol inhaler instead of requesting a Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE) from the UCI to use Triamcinolone.
Kind of shot yourself in the foot there....
How is that shooting myself in the foot?
He confirmed that team sky would often use those drugs. That's the whole point of this debate. The team employed doctors who freely prescribed such medication and the report claims that these medications were not needed for medical reasons.
Shane Sutton openly admitted the TUE boundaries were pushed to the limit.
Surely that quote above is suggesting that Triamcinolone is the more appropriate treatment for Froome's condition i.e. they are doing exactly the opposite of what everyone is saying and failing to use the most appropriate treatment so that they don't need to go through the TUE process? Also, there's a disconnect between the doctors freely prescribing such medication and the report claiming the medication was not needed. Maybe the doctors considered it was necessary and they know better than the MPs writing the report.
Or maybe the team employing those doctors were pushing them to prescribe medication which delivered proven performance benefits, and could find a medical need to justify a TUE for it.
Perhaps this is too cynical but it is inferred by the report and we all know has a history in the sport.0 -
redvision wrote:
Or maybe the team employing those doctors were pushing them to prescribe medication which delivered proven performance benefits, and could find a medical need to justify a TUE for it.
Perhaps this is too cynical but it is inferred by the report and we all know has a history in the sport.
Again I ask the question : How many TUEs do you think were issued?Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
redvision wrote:Perhaps this is too cynical but it is inferred by the report and we all know has a history in the sport.
Exactly, it's inferred from a report that has been compiled from mainly hearsay, second hand reports and undisclosed sources and even then the most they have come up with is crossing an ethical line that was defined by the team itself rather than any governing or anti-doping body.
I can certainly understand the cynicism given the sport's history and the 'dog ate my homework' stuff in relation to medical issues but feel it's unfair that Wiggins is taking the brunt when he may have had no knowledge of any of the background and just relied on the doctors the team appointed to look after his health and ensure he didn't fall foul of anti-doping rules to do their job.
I'm more cynical of the anti-doping efforts in football and yet you regularly defend that sport.0 -
Pross wrote:
I'm more cynical of the anti-doping efforts in football and yet you regularly defend that sport.
I do defend football because I have yet to see anything that suggests a widespread doping culture as many on here claim.
However, if a report like this was published on doping in football, especially when considered in conjunction with personal testimony from former doctors employed by the team and coaches closely connected to the team, then i would be very very concerned.0 -
Abuse of TUE's - not by the numbers that the UCI have on their website, how many riders is this for 400+ ??? or does it include all elite riders regardless of category, gender etc -
Year TUEs granted
2009 239
2010 97
2011 55
2012 46
2013 31
2014 25
2015 13
2016 15
2017 200
