Graham McWilliam, the deputy head of Sky News and the chairman of the Team Sky board, has expressed support for the team following reports that it is being investigated by UK Anti-Doping (Ukad).
Ukad is reported to have launched an investigation into Sir Bradley Wiggins and Team Sky regarding a package said to have contained medicine which was flown to France on the final day of the 2011 Critérium du Dauphiné at La Toussuire.
Addressing the team in correspondence he later published on Twitter, McWilliam said:
“Keep your feet firmly on the ground and stay focused on what’s important. For Team Sky that’s racing and winning, the right way. That’s what we’ve done from that start and that’s what we’ll continue to do in future. I can assure you of Sky’s full and continued support. There is no equivocation on our part. We trust you, we believe in you and we remain as excited about this sport as ever.”
Meanwhile, Nicolas Roche, a rider who is soon to leave Team Sky for BMC Racing echoed the comments of a number of other riders when he said that there was “a major problem” with the therapeutic use exemption (TUE) rules.
Speaking to Cycling News, he said:
“Like I said already on my Twitter a few weeks ago, when Wada was hacked the first time and before the Wiggins story, there is a major problem with TUEs. There is a problem with the actual system. Again, you can do whatever you want against Wiggins but unfortunately, as far as ethically it’s wrong, he is within the rules. It is wrong that these rules are like that. That’s where the main problem is.
“It’s a problem not just in cycling, but in all sport. There was something like 6,000 TUEs this year. To be honest, this year I was sick three times and I never needed a TUE, so there is a real problem on the easiness of getting TUEs and how athletes can abuse them.
“I think if you work on that then you have a solution. But the problem is much more than Wiggins, it’s the whole system that needs to be revised.”
Add new comment
11 comments
Meanwhile, as reported in CW, Vladimir Putin has just weighed in on the subject of TUEs. Thats Vladimir Putin the autocratic, some would say militarily aggressive, President of Russia, ex KGB agent and no doubt keen cycling fan. Oh, and accountable as Russian head of state for the state sponsored doping programme uncovered by WADA prior to the Rio olympics, you may recall.
By all means get your knickers in a knot at the behest of the Daily Mail based on their reputation as an organisation which supports fair play in all aspects of public life and also keen fans of cycling. I respect your right, etc.
Or alternatively get a sense of proportion, and a grip of yourself, and recognise when you are being manipulated and by whom.
I can assure you of Sky’s full and continued support.
Translated: "Our brand is being tarnished. If there is another scandal we will be ending our sponsorship by 2018".
I was involved with a BSB superstock 1000 team for a while and did 6 years of motorsport photography. Believe me, if that sport reflects sport in general it's all about cheating or at the very least stretching the rules. Don't also forget the sometimes those in charge are also complicit. I doubt the politics and ethics of the cycling world, the motorcycling world and every other sport are that far away.
Sean Emmett too drunk to ride on Sunday and also punched someone.....Sean has been taken ill today. Superstock factory Hondas don't need to go to parc ferme. Karl Harris on coke, not officially he wasn't. Electronics hidden inside petrol tanks, not in this championship. The list was endless.
Ever mention any of this officially - have your accreditation removed by Higgs and Palmer and probably sued as nobody would stand up for you even though they know what's going on. Omerta isn;t just a cycling thing.
Not entirely sure ethics is relevant in pro sport, is it?
As with all business, it's all about the filthy lucre.
Probably.
Depends on the sponsor I guess. Some might not like it if you turned up at their office saying "We managed to technically not cheat, according to some interpretations, and we've won the TdF, don't worry about all the stuff in the paper. Can we have another £30m for next year please?"
But ethically wrong so STFU.
Oh, well if it's ethically wrong let's just ban everyone with asthma, allergies, skin irritation...
Bit of catching up to do there.
Or ban people from making trite Mail-grade comments...
Like STFU? With you there.
But within the rules so STFU.