Froome and Wiggins TUEs

[themosquitoking]

Careful, he killed a dragon to get that.

 

[geopat]

His "level playing field" justification is very unfortunate and as poor a choice of words as he could have made.

 

[Pro Tour Punditry]

Yes, as an asthma sufferer I would consider this medication desperate. I have pretty severe asthma and this type of medication is unknown to me but granted, I am far from being an elite athlete about to take part in one of the toughest tests in sport.

Should the measure not be "genuinely" required medication? And the person to make that decision would be a doctor?

 

[oldroadman]

The timing of the TUEs says all. The regulations are in place for those who desperately need medication at a particular time and Wiggins did not.

He cheated, end off, in my book.

Well let's all just jump quickly to conclusions shall we?

 

[geopat]

Yes perhaps it should but you get the drift.

That type of medication would be for acute symptoms in exceptional circumstances and its too much of a coincidence for those symptoms to occur before 3 big races imho.

 

[Louch]

A dr said he needed jag, he took jag. Sky seem to be Intentent on throwing under any bus but theirs

 

[oldroadman]

A dr said he needed jag, he took jag. Sky seem to be Intentent on throwing under any bus but theirs

Which is in English????

 

[Dogtrousers]

Which is in English????

What I think it means is that Sky are leaving BW to face the music alone, when he did not act alone, hoping that it will blow over with damage to BW's reputation but not Sky's. Hence "throwing him under the bus" - ie making him the fall guy.

There's a decent piece along these lines in the Guardian here

Personally, ever since reading Walsh's sick-making puff piece "Inside Team Sky", where everyone down to the team's saintly sock-launderer was a totally comitted anti doper and wouldn't dream of any kind of underhand sock-washing, I've been waiting for something like this to come out.

 

[Crackle]

What I think it means is that Sky are leaving BW to face the music alone, when he did not act alone, hoping that it will blow over with damage to BW's reputation but not Sky's. Hence "throwing him under the bus" - ie making him the fall guy.

There's a decent piece along these lines in the Guardian here

Personally, ever since reading Walsh's sick-making puff piece "Inside Team Sky", where everyone down to the team's saintly sock-launderer was a totally comitted anti doper and wouldn't dream of any kind of underhand sock-washing, I've been waiting for something like this to come out.

The alternative explanation is that of patient confidentiality. Sky can't talk about this unless Wiggins gives them the nod and perhaps he hasn't, given that they parted on cool terms shall we say.

I think I've decided I am unsuprised by this. I'd cooled on Wiggins some time ago so I find I'm not even disappointed by him. Did he need this injection, I find it hard to believe he did. Did he know what he was doing, I suspect so. Did it help performance, there I'm of a mixed view as so much depends on individual response and frankly I don't put much stock in Rasmussen or Millar when it comes to talking about doping. Should it be available under the TUE, absolutely not, which is why the MPCC voluntary code does not allow it.

 

[Flying_Monkey]

Well let's all just jump quickly to conclusions shall we?

No, let's stick to expert medical opinion. What is the prevailing medical view on what Wiggins took?

 

[Dogtrousers]

There's nothing much to be gained about agonising over the Wiggins case. He didn't break (or is highly unlikely to have broken) any rules - Sky are too cute for that - so apart from thumbing our noses at him there's nothing that can be done.

A more important question is whether the TUE regulations as they stand, and the regs about corticoids are sound, and if not, what should be done about them?

 

[ColinJ]

A more important question is whether the TUE regulations as they stand, and the regs about corticoids are sound, and if not, what should be done about them?

Accept that confidentiality about TUEs is something that pro athletes have to give up, like the right to pee without someone staring at you! So - publish all drug use under TUEs.

Preferably, do not allow TUEs for drugs which give known performance advantages. If there are real health issues, then allow their use in those cases but suspend the athletes from competition until the advantage has passed.

 

[Flying_Monkey]

Accept that confidentiality about TUEs is something that pro athletes have to give up, like the right to pee without someone staring at you! So - publish all drug use under TUEs.

Preferably, do not allow TUEs for drugs which give known performance advantages. If there are real health issues, then allow their use in those cases but suspend the athletes from competition until the advantage has passed.

That was the MPCC stance, right? No competition for 8 weeks if you've had to use corticosteroids. The problem is that there is also a training advantage. You can train harder not just perform better.

 

[Pro Tour Punditry]

Sir Dave breaks his silence
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/cycling/...-breaks-silence-on-bradley-wigginss-tue---it/

 

[Pale Rider]

Sir Dave breaks his silence
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/cycling/...-breaks-silence-on-bradley-wigginss-tue---it/

Brailsford interview to be played on 5Live between 7 and 8pm.