I worship Team Sky. But I feel like I’ve been taken for a ride
How to feel when, for reasons that are purely negative, the sport you love and the riders you admire appear on every front page and dominate every radio news bulletin? The answer: weary, conflicted and confused.
The latest report from the digital, culture, media and sport select committee into Team Sky and Bradley Wiggins’s alleged use of therapeutic use exemptions (TUEs) and corticosteroids as performance enhancers ahead of the 2012 Tour de France, among other high-profile races, is another headline cycling does not need. The report suggests Sky has crossed an “ethical line” rather than clearly violated any doping rules – but it’s not a good look for a team that sold itself as a paragon of virtue. Sky and Wiggins continue to protest their innocence as the vultures gather.
I have always supported Sky and its riders when they compete in the biggest races. While I am by no means hugely patriotic, I take pride in watching a British team dominate cycling’s biggest races where previously they did not come close to French, Italian, Spanish and Belgian competitors. However, more than any team, rider or nationality, I am a fan of the sport of cycling. I love fast, thrilling racing and place my trust in the integrity of competition.
I am also an amateur cyclist inspired to ride by the pros. So how to react? On one hand, given cycling’s often negative exposure, I feel defensive when it is dragged through the mud, particularly by those without much knowledge of it or those with an axe to grind. Though more popular than ever, cycling has always been niche, the classroom outsider in a country where football is king. Cycling is full of peculiarities and foibles that those without a real understanding of its demands and intricacies struggle to grasp. So I often feel the need to stick up for cycling when it is beaten down. But as each new story emerges about practices at Sky it becomes increasingly difficult to support the team and its riders without feeling increasingly naive and duped.
The latest report from the digital, culture, media and sport select committee into Team Sky and Bradley Wiggins’s alleged use of therapeutic use exemptions (TUEs) and corticosteroids as performance enhancers ahead of the 2012 Tour de France, among other high-profile races, is another headline cycling does not need. The report suggests Sky has crossed an “ethical line” rather than clearly violated any doping rules – but it’s not a good look for a team that sold itself as a paragon of virtue. Sky and Wiggins continue to protest their innocence as the vultures gather.
I have always supported Sky and its riders when they compete in the biggest races. While I am by no means hugely patriotic, I take pride in watching a British team dominate cycling’s biggest races where previously they did not come close to French, Italian, Spanish and Belgian competitors. However, more than any team, rider or nationality, I am a fan of the sport of cycling. I love fast, thrilling racing and place my trust in the integrity of competition.
I am also an amateur cyclist inspired to ride by the pros. So how to react? On one hand, given cycling’s often negative exposure, I feel defensive when it is dragged through the mud, particularly by those without much knowledge of it or those with an axe to grind. Though more popular than ever, cycling has always been niche, the classroom outsider in a country where football is king. Cycling is full of peculiarities and foibles that those without a real understanding of its demands and intricacies struggle to grasp. So I often feel the need to stick up for cycling when it is beaten down. But as each new story emerges about practices at Sky it becomes increasingly difficult to support the team and its riders without feeling increasingly naive and duped.
Source:
theguardian
Comments
Post a Comment