Wiggins, Clinic respect? - Page 6 - CyclingNews Forum

Go Back   CyclingNews Forum > Road > The Clinic

The Clinic The Clinic is the only place on Cyclingnews where you can discuss doping-related issues. Ask questions, discuss positives or improvements to procedures.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 01-24-13, 21:49
Joachim Joachim is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 531
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyivel View Post
No we don't, **** you
You must be Welsh
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 01-24-13, 21:52
hrotha's Avatar
hrotha hrotha is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 12,237
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joachim View Post
Nah. It's central. You are anonymous. He is not. You can say what you like with total impunity. He cannot.
Actually, I'm not anonymous. I already revealed my name the last time this popped up, and then I went and called him a ****.

Didn't change anything.

And the impunity is the same. If I did anything illegal behind this screenname, I could be traced easily.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 01-24-13, 21:55
Libertine Seguros's Avatar
Libertine Seguros Libertine Seguros is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Land of Saíz
Posts: 13,763
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bat Man View Post
No question in my mind Wiggins is clean. If you watch him interviewed, his answeres are not calculated. The things he says are much more of a denial than Armstrong's formulaic defenses. Armstrong would play cremlinology in some of things he said, as if he was talking to two audience. Classic case was at the ToC with Kimmage, where he answered by saying doping has always gone on - clearly implying that he's carrying on a tradition. That's the way he would always answer the question. And he said "some people" thought it was good Millar confessed, again implying that was not his view. For those paying attention, it was clear he thought doping should play a role in the sport. With Wiggins there is none of that. Why in the world would Wiggins talk about watching Armstrong having to admit to his children about doping, and talk about his own kid?

If I'd been going around for the last few years smearing Wiggins as a doper, I would be thinking about going on Oprah to say a few things in the spirit of truth and reconciliation.
But what is very noticeable is that Wiggins' strongest anti-doping statements came when he was not a big name, and how badly he reacted to being judged by the standards he set himself.
Wiggins 2007: Tour winners for the next six years should accept that they will be seen as suspect and with reason.
Wiggins 2012: Tour winners are f***ing clean and anybody who doesn't f***ing believe in me is a f***ing w*****.
Wiggins 2007: Any team with anybody with a 1% suspicion of doping should be kicked out the race.
Wiggins 2012: Any team with a doctor who has been named in court documents as being involved in doping should be above suspicion because they said they were clean.
Wiggins 2007: Vino is a doping joke, I mean winning the Tour ITT by two minutes is a sign of obvious doping.
Wiggins 2012: Hey, Chris was within 2 minutes, which only goes to show how wonderful and clean I am!

Yes, people change over time. But the way Wiggins snapped at people for voicing what used to be his own opinion is concerning. He's done more than one U-turn over Armstrong, and this last one is in what we would consider the correct direction... but his U-turn on what he formerly considered healthy suspicion is in the opposite direction. Bradley Wiggins, in his current position as a semi-patron and an unofficial spokesman for the péloton, is filled with awkward, difficult contradictions, conflicts and ambiguities who has to reconcile a maze of contradictory opinions that he has spouted at various times to various audiences with a wildly varying cast of characters in behind him. After all, he rode with Millar in 2009, there was more than a 1% chance about him. Maybe Leinders told Brad he was sorry, just like Millar, so that was enough to make him OK.

Wiggins' tendency to be wilfully contrary and wind people up also makes it harder to tell where he stands. There are far too many contradictions in his soundbites over all of the issues for us to be able to take anything he says as read without closer scrutiny and assessment against other things he's said.

For example, if he came out tomorrow and said doping doctors were the scourge of the sport and ridding it of them is far more important than ridding it of doping riders as it would make progress to a clean péloton much faster, we might consider it fits with his 2007 self's comments about 1% suspicion, and we might agree with him but consider him a complete hypocrite considering the lack of remorse about calling people names for suspecting Sky when one of said doping doctors was on his team. Wiggins says plenty which is agreeable to much of the Clinic - but also disagreeable to his own statements at other times, which makes trusting him on his word very difficult to do.
__________________
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QrFiUlhAPes

Forever tête de la course.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 01-24-13, 21:56
Bat Man Bat Man is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 32
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Hitch View Post
There are more dopers in the sport than Lance Armstrong. Not all of them displayed exactly the same thought proccess and behaviour as him. To suggest that anyone who's behaviour doesn't closely match and mirror that of Lance Armstrong, must be clean, is ridiculous.
That's not quite what I'm saying. Armstrong is known to have been more outspoken than most in his denials of doping. But even his answers did have a formula to them, occasional hidden messages. There is none of that with Wiggins. If Armstrong lied in a sociopathic manner, Wiggins' denials would have to be even more extreme than this - a pure psychopath. It doesn't add up. If I'd been smearing him as a doper, I'd be feeling very guilty right now.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 01-24-13, 21:58
Benotti69's Avatar
Benotti69 Benotti69 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 12,289
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cycle Chic View Post
Well he's had plenty of time to put that one together...took his time but the SKY staff have finally woken up and smelled the Clinic
Fixed free of charge!
__________________
"ahaha, ever had the feeling you been cheated?" JL SF Jan'78
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 01-24-13, 21:59
Joachim Joachim is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 531
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hrotha View Post
Actually, I'm not anonymous. I already revealed my name the last time this popped up,
Can you prove publicly it was your actual name? Would you be prepared to write to Sky with your views under your own name?

Most here wouldn't, because they are able to sit here, in a priviledged position, smearing and sneering at whoever they want.

Quote:
And the impunity is the same. If I did anything illegal behind this screenname, I could be traced easily.
Use your own name then
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 01-24-13, 22:00
xcleigh xcleigh is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 238
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by erader View Post
why does he have such a potty mouth? don't recall big mig ever talking like that. maybe a lack of class or intelligence? and then he keeps bringing up his son.
I don't think his use of colourful language is a sign of anything. Just the way he expresses himself using the full breadth and width of the English swear word. The English love to swear http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_osQvkeNRM
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 01-24-13, 22:01
hfer07's Avatar
hfer07 hfer07 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,011
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by the asian View Post
He even once said that he didn't even ride the Tour with Armstrong.

Glad that at least he has regained his memory.
was he drunken or hung over when he said that?
__________________
Can you imagine what I would do if I could do all I can?
Sun Tzu
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 01-24-13, 22:01
Bat Man Bat Man is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 32
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Libertine Seguros View Post
But what is very noticeable is that Wiggins' strongest anti-doping statements came when he was not a big name, and how badly he reacted to being judged by the standards he set himself.
Wiggins 2007: Tour winners for the next six years should accept that they will be seen as suspect and with reason.
Wiggins 2012: Tour winners are f***ing clean and anybody who doesn't f***ing believe in me is a f***ing w*****.
Wiggins 2007: Any team with anybody with a 1% suspicion of doping should be kicked out the race.
Wiggins 2012: Any team with a doctor who has been named in court documents as being involved in doping should be above suspicion because they said they were clean.
Wiggins 2007: Vino is a doping joke, I mean winning the Tour ITT by two minutes is a sign of obvious doping.
Wiggins 2012: Hey, Chris was within 2 minutes, which only goes to show how wonderful and clean I am!

Yes, people change over time. But the way Wiggins snapped at people for voicing what used to be his own opinion is concerning. He's done more than one U-turn over Armstrong, and this last one is in what we would consider the correct direction... but his U-turn on what he formerly considered healthy suspicion is in the opposite direction. Bradley Wiggins, in his current position as a semi-patron and an unofficial spokesman for the péloton, is filled with awkward, difficult contradictions, conflicts and ambiguities who has to reconcile a maze of contradictory opinions that he has spouted at various times to various audiences with a wildly varying cast of characters in behind him. After all, he rode with Millar in 2009, there was more than a 1% chance about him. Maybe Leinders told Brad he was sorry, just like Millar, so that was enough to make him OK.

Wiggins' tendency to be wilfully contrary and wind people up also makes it harder to tell where he stands. There are far too many contradictions in his soundbites over all of the issues for us to be able to take anything he says as read without closer scrutiny and assessment against other things he's said.

For example, if he came out tomorrow and said doping doctors were the scourge of the sport and ridding it of them is far more important than ridding it of doping riders as it would make progress to a clean péloton much faster, we might consider it fits with his 2007 self's comments about 1% suspicion, and we might agree with him but consider him a complete hypocrite considering the lack of remorse about calling people names for suspecting Sky when one of said doping doctors was on his team. Wiggins says plenty which is agreeable to much of the Clinic - but also disagreeable to his own statements at other times, which makes trusting him on his word very difficult to do.
He'd just been thrown off the tour in 07 and was clearly emotional. To present that distressed state as "the way he used to be about doping" is simplistic because it ignores the context of what had happened.

Armstrong had won 7 tours in a row. He held a huge place in the sport so other riders felt he needed greater respect. He wasn't just some punk kid like Ricco who had never done anything. Therefore there was a great sense that they must allow all the processes to play out, and hear from the man himself, before rushing to judgment. In reality that is understandable
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 01-24-13, 22:04
Libertine Seguros's Avatar
Libertine Seguros Libertine Seguros is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Land of Saíz
Posts: 13,763
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bat Man View Post
He'd just been thrown off the tour in 07 and was clearly emotional. To present that distressed state as "the way he used to be about doping" is simplistic because it ignores the context of what had happened.

Armstrong had won 7 tours in a row. He held a huge place in the sport so other riders felt he needed greater respect. He wasn't just some punk kid like Ricco who had never done anything. Therefore there was a great sense that they must allow all the processes to play out, and hear from the man himself, before rushing to judgment. In reality that is understandable
Being quoted on the record as saying "I love him" goes beyond the call of allowing all the processes to play out.

Or are you saying that Wiggins wasn't actually as anti-doping as he suggested in 2007?
__________________
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QrFiUlhAPes

Forever tête de la course.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:07.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited. All rights reserved. Future Publishing Limited is part of the Future plc group. Future Publishing Limited is a company registered in England and Wales with company registration number 2008885 whose registered office is at Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW England.