Say it ain't so, Brad!

[Nearly Sane]

With this and the doubt over Froome, the legend of British cycling is taking a darker turn



http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/43281807

[Rhiannon]

Has his missus taken to Twitter yet?

[Nearly Sane]

Perhaps the big question is Sebastian Coe's position?

[Rhiannon]

Tbh I've lost interest in these sports. Athletics too. I loved it once. The cheats will always cheat. They make football look like a paragon of integrity.

[Walter]

Tbh I've lost interest in these sports. Athletics too. I loved it once. The cheats will always cheat. They make football look like a paragon of integrity.

in light of this information I now have to consider it's impact on my life .


Done that . Nothing .

[wigginhall]

What about 'confidential material from a well-placed source'?  I find that dodgy in itself.    Wiggins is asking that they go on record, don't blame him.

[jeremyp]

Honestly, I think the DCMS select committee should butt out of this. There's no suggestion that anything illegal has happened, so why are they so intent on destroying British sport?

[Nearly Sane]

Honestly, I think the DCMS select committee should butt out of this. There's no suggestion that anything illegal has happened, so why are they so intent on destroying British sport?

The Jiffy bag could gave been and given the lack of professional records is an open question. Given the reputational risks and the avowed intent of winning clean, then there is surely a value question for the committee to look at. Remember there is a large amount of public money invested in cycling.

Further, the question of whether the IAAF President may have lied to parliament is surely of interest.


In what way are that 'intent on destroying British sport'?

[jeremyp]

The Jiffy bag could gave been and given the lack of professional records is an open question.

What you mean is that there is no evidence of any wrong doing.

Given the reputational risks and the avowed intent of winning clean, then there is surely a value question for the committee to look at.

Wouldn't it be better to let the authorities within the sport decide what is acceptable within the sport?

Remember there is a large amount of public money invested in cycling.

In Team Sky?

Further, the question of whether the IAAF President may have lied to parliament is surely of interest.

That would be a different matter.

In what way are that 'intent on destroying British sport'?

By trying to drag some of our greatest athletes through the mud. By accusing people of ethical failings when it is generally acknowledged even by them that they did not break the rules.

[Nearly Sane]

What you mean is that there is no evidence of any wrong doing.

Wouldn't it be better to let the authorities within the sport decide what is acceptable within the sport?In Team Sky?That would be a different matter.


By trying to drag some of our greatest athletes through the mud. By accusing people of ethical failings when it is generally acknowledged even by them that they did not break the rules.

You used the word suggestion at first, that is different from evidence here. I was pointing out that with the Jiffy bag there is a suggestion of illegality.

Since Coe's testimony happened during the committee's investigation, in what way is it a different matter?

The close links between Sky and  UK cycling in personnel, particularly with Brailsford,  which has substantial funding from the taxpayer makes it difficult to separate this out as not linked.

The sentence about  ' trying to drag our greatest athletes though the mud' isn't justification for your claim, it's just am emotional repetition.  Are ethics and professionalism unimportant?

[jeremyp]

You used the word suggestion at first, that is different from evidence here. I was pointing out that with the Jiffy bag there is a suggestion of illegality.

A suggestion of illegality needs to be backed up with evidence.

The close links between Sky and  UK cycling in personnel, particularly with Brailsford,  which has substantial funding from the taxpayer makes it difficult to separate this out as not linked.

Rubbish. Either Team Sky receives funding from the taxpayer or it doesn't. The fact that it has some personnel who worked for 'UK Cycling at one time is neither here nor there.

Not that there is any evidence that Team Sky has done anything wrong.

The sentence about  ' trying to drag our greatest athletes though the mud' isn't justification for your claim, it's just am emotional repetition.  Are ethics and professionalism unimportant?

That's great coming from somebody who cannot produce any evidence of wrong doing. Isn't your position just an emotional response also?