‘The evidence suggests Bradley and Team Sky did cheat’ by Sammy McNally

As of today, Tuesday 27th September, the day after David Brailsford’s (Team SKY’s boss) embarrassing and unconvincing interview in which he attempted to douse the flames of accusation surrounding Team Sky – the BBC is still sticking to its mantra of
“There is no suggestion any of the athletes named have broken anti-doping rules”.
As to whether that statement is due to deference to the two knights of the realm embroiled in the controversy or personal relationships  it is difficult to say, but the statement would definitely need a very large dose of credibility injected into it –  to help it stand up unassisted.(Is there a TUE for that?)
What we can say with a high degree of certainty is that a performance-enhancing drug was given by Team Sky to Bradley Wiggins on the eve of 3 important races and that was only made public when  the hacking group, Fancy Bears, released hitherto unseen medical files.
Amidst the contradictory statements by Brailsford and Wiggins regarding the latter’s health at the time of the injections and the risible claims by Brailsford suggesting he didn’t know the substances administered to Wiggins were performance enhancing – David Walsh (from the Times) the scourge of cycling dopers  summarises bluntly:
“Bradley Wiggins’ 2012 Tour de France win has been tainted”.
What the implications for the medals and awards accumulated by Team SKY are, remains to be seen, but from a cycling perspective, it is likely that those seeking to bypass the rules on performance enhancing substances will have to find another way of doing so rather than under the cover of (alleged) illnesses. And we can thank the Fancy Bears for that, even if it was achieved illegally.

21 Responses to ‘The evidence suggests Bradley and Team Sky did cheat’ by Sammy McNally

  1. ANOTHER JUDE September 28, 2016 at 12:44 pm #

    Of course it is just not on for anyone to even slightly suggest dodgy dealings by any British athlete, particularly a `sir`. Couldn`t happen to a nicer bunch. Maybe the British should take the gongs away from the cyclists and give them to the fancy bears?

    • giordanobruno September 28, 2016 at 6:18 pm #

      Who says it is just not on?
      The allegations have been well covered.
      Perhaps you are imagining things.

      • ANOTHER JUDE September 29, 2016 at 12:21 pm #

        I haven`t heard any British tv news readers saying Bradley is a cheat. I definitely haven`t imagined that.

        • giordanobruno September 30, 2016 at 11:50 am #

          Which is quite different from your earlier claim that no-one could even slightly suggest dodgy dealings by any British athlete.
          Why don’t you call him a cheat? I’m sure Jude would relish a day in court.

          • Sammy McNally September 30, 2016 at 12:06 pm #


            Would you agree that the evidence suggests that Team Sky and Wiggins cheated?

            The British media have shied away from this conclusion for ‘loyalty’ reasons presumably – which is fair enough – but such loyalty as we know round these parts often is applicable on this side of Irish sea – which is equally fair enough.

            If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck – then generally duck it is.

          • Sammy McNally September 30, 2016 at 12:25 pm #


            “but such loyalty as we know round these parts often is NOT applicable on this side of Irish sea – which is equally fair enough.”

          • giordanobruno September 30, 2016 at 3:13 pm #

            I don’t know. I think you are arguing a good case that he was not adhering to the spirit of the rules even if he was technically not breaking them.
            But my point is that the media are more likely to be cautious for legal reasons rather than loyalty.
            All countries media like to build up heroes
            Once the hard proof of wrongdoing is out there they love nothing more than pulling someone down from the pedestal.
            It is AJ’s suggestion that the British media are somehow uniquely fawning that I am disputing.
            The allegations are well documented, but no doubt the lawyers are paying close attention.

          • Sammy McNally September 30, 2016 at 6:52 pm #


            technically if it is shown that a rider had performance enhancing drug as a TUE or that there was a viable alternative – then this is breaking the rules on TUE use. Those are the rules on TUE use – the evidence suggests they have not been adhered to by Wiggins and SKY..

            This would be a technical breach of the rules as well as moral one..

          • giordanobruno September 30, 2016 at 10:26 pm #

            Just to be clear, it is a subject you know more about than I do.
            But you are still saying “the evidence suggests” so you yourself are not unequivocally calling him a cheat,yet that is what AJ, and perhaps you, feel the BBC should do.

            My point is (I am not trying to defend Wiggins here) that the claim made by AJ that the media would not dream of suggesting any wrongdoing by any British athlete is just another instance of confirmation bias and has no basis in reality.

        • Sammy McNally October 1, 2016 at 7:51 am #


          I’m suggesting 2 things

          firstly, the evidence points to Bradley being a cheat – if it were a court of law i think he would be convicted. There may be other facts yet to emerge – I cant see how the rules have not been broken.

          secondly, the BBC’s contention that there is no suggestion of any wrongdoing is a nonsense – there is evidence(suggestions) galore.

          As to why the BBC adopts the stance it does I’m not sure – they should not misleading the public by misrepresenting the strength of the case against SKY.

          The BBC get many things right (not as often as in the past ) – but when they get something wrong they should be called out on it – don’t you agree?,

          • giordanobruno October 2, 2016 at 3:36 pm #

            I agree if the evidence is clear and unambiguous then the media should say so.
            My point is that AJ’s claim that
            “it is just not on for anyone to even slightly suggest dodgy dealings by any British athlete, particularly a `sir`.”
            does not actually stack up.

  2. Sammy McNally September 28, 2016 at 1:25 pm #

    Another Jude,

    Good idea – as I understand it to receive a knighthood you would have to be a) British b) agree to turn up and receive one and most importantly c) be human.

    Given we know so little about the Fancy bears other than their name, I think to be fair to Her Majesty, even if she felt move to switch the gongs to those who arguably deserve them more they might not qualify on any of the conditions required.

    • ANOTHER JUDE September 29, 2016 at 12:25 pm #

      Wogan and Geldof weren`t British when they received those pointless gongs.Jeffrey Donaldson is not really human. You never see him and Daniel O`Donnell in the same place at the same time so that leads me to believe he might actually be a clone. Or maybe Daniel is the clone? Fifty fifty I suppose…….

  3. Jim Lynch September 28, 2016 at 3:45 pm #

    Talking about knighthoods, should Sir Elton John be retiled to;
    Dame Elton John?

    Just a thought.

    • ANOTHER JUDE September 29, 2016 at 12:26 pm #

      He (she) wishes…

    • Sammy McNally September 29, 2016 at 10:29 pm #

      As I understand it the part of Dublin Bob is from is very British indeed – not so much Limerick where Our Te is from though – I grant you.

      On a technical genetic point – human clones are actually human – but I take your point.

    • giordanobruno September 30, 2016 at 11:59 am #

      Jim and AJ
      Elton is gay and not transgender as far as I know.

  4. Sherdy September 28, 2016 at 5:52 pm #

    Team Sky riders apparently ask Team Sky doctors for suitable TUEs, and maybe if the doctors do not sign the appropriate paper work, their employment with Sky might be a short term affair.
    So do you blame Dave Brailsford, team manager, the riders who asked, the soigneurs who probably advised or helped, the doctors who wrote authorisations?
    These teams are very closely knit affairs and every one in the team would be closely involved with such matters, but Brailsford is dodging responsibility by buck-passing to the doctors – surprisingly none of whom have actually been named.
    Sammy mentions the BBC absolving everybody of responsibility for any possible wrong-doing, so was it cheating or not?
    Responsibility must go back to the UCI president Brian Cookson, who took over the job promising to clean up the sport, but then designs rules that teams, especially his good friends Sky, can make a mockery of!
    There may be others guilty by involvement, but when you design rules a certain way, the buck stops with the UCI president.

  5. Sammy McNally September 28, 2016 at 6:52 pm #


    The rules on TUEs are clear there must be no performance enhancement, there must be a strong medical case for taking them and there must be no alternative.

    The evidence so far revealed suggests that none of these 3 conditions were met. The reason that Brailsford is saying that he didn’t know the substance was performance enhancing is because that would be admitting he breached the rules – the other rules he can dance around. Does anyone believe him on that?

    His position in terms of his argument and credibility must surely be untenable?

    The culpability in the process may well extend to the UCI but those who break the rules (ie Team Sky) cant hide behind the alleged guilt of others.

  6. Sammy McNally September 28, 2016 at 10:02 pm #

    A former offering elsewhere on Brad – scepticism confirmed.


  7. Sammy McNally September 30, 2016 at 2:13 pm #

    Suitably damaging…