ghisallo2003 wrote: bilwit wrote:
The investigation had little to do with the TUEs you reference, which shows that you are as uninformed as all these other smear campaign media drones. The TUEs were not part of the investigation because--all ethics aside--they were legally prescribed and taken. There was nothing to investigate. The UKAD investigation that was concluded was for the "jiffy bag" taken after the last stage of the 2011 Dauphine. I must emphasize the word after
, because it was administered after he already won the stage and overall. The Daily Mail put this on a headline and implied that Triamcinolone was taken, however this doesn't make any sense because if they were trying to cheat, they wouldn't take it AFTER the race already ended and, moreover, he participated (and won) the 2011 National Road Race a week later, so any PED would have been flagged there if there was any (this is a moot point anyway since he crashed out of the 2011 Tour).
What is shady is Sky's excuses for having no medical records and the laptop being stolen is pretty absurd, but the fact is that the freaking DAILY MAIL put out this story which led to a 14-month long UKAD investigation for an allegation that didn't even make sense. Wiggins would be right to pursue legal action against them for defamation. It was unsubstantiated from the beginning.
The allegation would make sense If the contents of the jiffy were used on the final day, even after the stage, which would technically requires a TUE, or took place in a country in which this would be unlawful.
Why would they take the TUE hours after Dauphine ended if they intended to use it for the Tour? Like I said, given that he did the Nationals within a week, it would have been flagged there.
bilwit wrote:What is shady is Sky's excuses for having no medical records and the laptop being stolen is pretty absurd, but the fact is that the freaking DAILY MAIL put out this story which led to a 14-month long UKAD investigation for an allegation that didn't even make sense. Wiggins would be right to pursue legal action against them for defamation. It was unsubstantiated from the beginning.
A bit of a contradiction here. You say a 14 month long investigation didn't make sense, while at the same you call Sky's excuses shady. It is more then shady that a very professional organisation like Sky "lost" a laptop and have erased medical records to hide their shady business. All these things exactly show why they where investigated and also why I don't believe they are innocent.
The investigation didn't make sense because it was solely based on hearsay put out by The Daily Mail about alleged "cheating" that took place AFTER a race already concluded, where it would not benefit them. If they wanted to cheat, they could have easily just shot him up out of competition, closer to the Tour or--in this case--before Dauphine started. Like I said, it's all ultimately worthless anyways since he was DNF at the Tour that year after breaking his collarbone.
For those of you who think they used the TUEs to legally shoot him up with PEDs before the Tour and that it's proof of some systemic Team Sky/British Cycling conspiracy:
(note that Fluticasone/Salbutamol are used in inhalers that used to require a TUE until 2010)
2003 - DNF at the Giro due to allergies
2003 - Cofidis - French Cycling Federation grants TUE for Fluticasone and Salbutamol
2004 - CA - Authorization to compete at the summer Olympics using Fluticasone and Salbutamol under IOC doping regulations after a series of lung function tests by Andrea Wooles
2005 - 2008 - FDJ - Went back to IOC each year for renewal--lung function tests, nasal endoscopy, etc
2008 - High Road - TUE for Salbutamol, Budesonide & Formoterol.
2009 - Garmin - Repeat of 2008 High Road TUE
2010 - Sky - none
2011-2013 - Sky - Triamcinolone
Looks like someone with a history of hay fever & asthma to me. Also note that they don't need a TUE to take PEDs out of competition
, as long it's out of their system come test time. The fact that they applied for the Triamcinolone TUEs altogether shows that they wanted to be transparent about its usage.