Popit Posted March 7, 2018 Share There is no comparison. Lance and Co took illegal drugs in massive doses and blood doped. Sky (at best and yet to be proven) abused the TUE system. So in your eyes , that is ok .....????Cheating is cheating ... One of the Lotto Sudal riders , faced with the same issues last year , refused a TUE and withdrew from a grand tour ... No grey area there . You have been involved in cycling for a long time , the tune is the same , just being played by a different band this time round . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eldron Posted March 7, 2018 Share So in your eyes , that is ok .....????Cheating is cheating ... One of the Lotto Sudal riders , faced with the same issues last year , refused a TUE and withdrew from a grand tour ... No grey area there . You have been involved in cycling for a long time , the tune is the same , just being played by a different band this time round .Who said it was OK? I've consistently said it is not - maybe read a few lines up where I say Froome shouldn't be racing. Tune is very much NOT the same. We shouldn't even know about Froomes whoopsy (according to the rules) because it isn't that serious. Salbutamol has (mostly) been proven to Not enhance performance. Making ANY comparison to Sky and Postal is ludicrous. WIGGO took a substance that is allowed out of competition in competition with the approval of the governing body in the form of a TUE. At best it's a moral issue - not even against the rules. Sure there is suspiscion at Sky but of what? Abusing the system? Applying for too many TUEs? Nowhere near Postal level cheating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eldron Posted March 7, 2018 Share Ah good old Pat. Lambasts Sky and then near the end of the interview says "The problem is that no UCI or WADA rules were broken"... The Problem is that NO rules were broken? What? I thought the problem when the UCI and WADA rules DID get broken... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwissVan Posted March 7, 2018 Share Untitled.jpg Dumoulin is looking a bit skinnier than usual... even skinnier than Vroomie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gen Posted March 7, 2018 Share And so it begins. http://www.bbc.com/sport/cycling/43316602 Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonus Posted March 7, 2018 Share "The Frenchman told BBC Sport . . . . " And at that point the world stopped listening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eldron Posted March 8, 2018 Share And so it begins. http://www.bbc.com/sport/cycling/43316602 Sent from my SM-G950F using TapatalkEvery single TUE was received, analysed and approved by the UCI and now the UCI want to investigate SKY for getting too many TUEs. Ummm shouldn't they investigate the people granting/allowing SKY to get all the TUEs in the first place The british government couldn't prove or disprove abuse of TUEs so now the UCI (who is complicit in the possible abuse of TUEs) is going to investigate I'm all for clean sport but this is fast becoming a clownwitch hunt rather than a serious investigation... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bertusras Posted March 8, 2018 Share "So you have to put this in the context of the time; the grey zone was too big and it seemed that this grey zone has been used by Team Sky at the time so, is it doping? Is it just using the rules? That is why the MPs' report just says they were not breaching the rules." And when asked if there could still be cheating even if rules had not been broken, Lappartient said: "If you are using [banned] substances to increase your performances I think this is exactly what is cheating." Added an important word into the above paragraph. All cyclists use some form of substance to increase performance in the end, don't they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gen Posted March 8, 2018 Share Added an important word into the above paragraph. All cyclists use some form of substance to increase performance in the end, don't they?The grey area of TUEs need to be addressed. Yes they have made it harder to get a TUE the last few years..but more definitely needs to be done...actually it should be such a shlep that it isn't worth the bother. Before I think 2013/2014 ( I can't exactly remember) but all you needed was a Dr letter and 1 Dr would approve it.. now there are a lot more supporting docs that have to accompany the Dr motivation and 3 Drs have to review and approve.. If this list is to be believed one can see that there has been a steady decline in TUEs approved.. Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwissVan Posted March 8, 2018 Share It’s about now when some wise ass / one steps in and says: You will never stop cheating and the endless speculation that follows it...introduce strict medical / health controls and let them get on with it....I’m sure if you went back in the hub original archives at almost year dot..... some clown suggested this And here we are...... still Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bertusras Posted March 8, 2018 Share The grey area of TUEs need to be addressed. Yes they have made it harder to get a TUE the last few years..but more definitely needs to be done...actually it should be such a shlep that it isn't worth the bother. Before I think 2013/2014 ( I can't exactly remember) but all you needed was a Dr letter and 1 Dr would approve it.. now there are a lot more supporting docs that have to accompany the Dr motivation and 3 Drs have to review and approve.. If this list is to be believed one can see that there has been a steady decline in TUEs approved.. Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk Hardly the athlete or team's problem if the rules aren't concise and clear? The same thing (albeit in a more technical sense) happens in all forms of competition. Look what has happened to MotoGP the past few years with wings and aerodynamics. There was no regulation preventing the use of wings, so teams started experimenting with it. Regulations were implemented to curb the advances, but teams again re-interpreted the rules and came up with a different solution. That's just what they do. The same with Sky's dotted skin suit. There is no rule saying that it's disallowed. It's questionable, sure, but under current rules, permitted. As in Formula 1, interpretation skills push the envelope of the limits permitted by the rule itself. I guess that applies to all sports, even Richie "permanently off-side" McCaw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frosty Posted March 8, 2018 Share Hardly the athlete or team's problem if the rules aren't concise and clear? The same thing (albeit in a more technical sense) happens in all forms of competition. Look what has happened to MotoGP the past few years with wings and aerodynamics. There was no regulation preventing the use of wings, so teams started experimenting with it. Regulations were implemented to curb the advances, but teams again re-interpreted the rules and came up with a different solution. That's just what they do. The same with Sky's dotted skin suit. There is no rule saying that it's disallowed. It's questionable, sure, but under current rules, permitted. I guess that applies to all sports, even Richie "permanently off-side" McCawThe reason McCaw was perceived to be “permanently off-side” was due to him knowing how the ref blows. Based on each ref’s interpretation of the law, he adjusted accordingly. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gen Posted March 8, 2018 Share Hardly the athlete or team's problem if the rules aren't concise and clear? The same thing (albeit in a more technical sense) happens in all forms of competition. Look what has happened to MotoGP the past few years with wings and aerodynamics. There was no regulation preventing the use of wings, so teams started experimenting with it. Regulations were implemented to curb the advances, but teams again re-interpreted the rules and came up with a different solution. That's just what they do. The same with Sky's dotted skin suit. There is no rule saying that it's disallowed. It's questionable, sure, but under current rules, permitted. I guess that applies to all sports, even Richie "permanently off-side" McCawWe can get technical on the TUE rules etc..it's pretty clear on why and who should apply for a TUE... Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwissVan Posted March 8, 2018 Share The reason McCaw was perceived to be “permanently off-side” was due to him knowing how the ref blows. Based on each ref’s interpretation of the law, he adjusted accordingly. Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkIt’s the nature of competitive sportIf you want win important titles, earn top rates, have the best sponsors, be on TV getting hours of coverage for said sponsors.... etc etc Then you need to at least..... constantly push the envolope to the limit, sadly the limit line is not a brick wall but often a feint dotted line open to interpretation.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bateleur1 Posted March 8, 2018 Share Every single TUE was received, analysed and approved by the UCI and now the UCI want to investigate SKY for getting too many TUEs. Ummm shouldn't they investigate the people granting/allowing SKY to get all the TUEs in the first place The british government couldn't prove or disprove abuse of TUEs so now the UCI (who is complicit in the possible abuse of TUEs) is going to investigate I'm all for clean sport but this is fast becoming a clownwitch hunt rather than a serious investigation... It is like giving your son a cookie every time he asks for it and when you notice the cookie jar is empty you want to blame your son for eating all the cookies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.