There seems to be plenty of evidence that almost everyone in the community thought that claims made by bicep2 was reckless and hyped for the purpose of generating the news headlines. They didn’t even disclosed clearly about possiblity that claims could be wrong even when they full well knew they could. A reviewer forced them to add that possibility in that paper which they only did grudgingly. If it wasn’t for the reviewer, the paper would have been now looked as outright lie. This was one of the most sought after experimental result and it was expected that team would be very careful in making any claims. So when big claims were indeed made, it didn’t took too lonng to do independent review and refute their claims.
https://phys.org/news/2014-06-experts-big-bolstering-discove...
https://dreamheron.wordpress.com/category/bicep2-cmb/page/6/
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2015/01/30/bicep2-wro...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/bicep...