Log in:  

Register

Froome Talk Only

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

Moderators: Eshnar, King Boonen, Red Rick, Pricey_sky

Re:

10 Mar 2018 18:50

GraftPunk wrote:Oh, I am so looking forward to the cumuppance with some posters here. With the amount of condescending comments, that will be the best dish served cold.


Genuine question...which 'side' do you believe is guilty of condescension :confused:
brownbobby
Member
 
Posts: 898
Joined: 27 Sep 2017 07:14

Re: Re:

10 Mar 2018 18:57

brownbobby wrote:
GraftPunk wrote:Oh, I am so looking forward to the cumuppance with some posters here. With the amount of condescending comments, that will be the best dish served cold.


Genuine question...which 'side' do you believe is guilty of condescension :confused:


That's the best part, it's like "share the road", every side comes away from it feeling vindicated
hazaran
Member
 
Posts: 424
Joined: 14 Jul 2015 00:37

Re:

10 Mar 2018 20:07

veganrob wrote:So some people think it is just great that MC stands out front defending her man and even puts words in his mouth because he appears so naive. But she shoud be not open to any criticism fo that? Sorry, can't have it both ways. She is fair game.
Like several other cycling wives, MC plays an active role in her husband's career. Despite the misogyny inherent in the sport, she is not the first. Anquetil's wife was heavily involved in his career. Ditto Coppi's second wife: there's a great story of her hurling insults from the team car at Magni one time. These sort of actions, of course they make discussion of the person fair. No one - no one - denies that.

But. Let's try and be reasonable. This place is testosterone fuelled at the best of times. But effectively arguing that MC should butt the **** out? Could we please just stop and listen to ourselves?
She interfered numerous times. She blocks people left and right on his twitter account, she argues with people all the time on this same HIS account, she explains stuff about his husband, stuff he should talk about
Do we really believe that women should be seen and not heard? Do we really believe that just because they share the load so publicly, that makes him a cuck (an insult that has been used on this thread today)?

Insult her, mock her, point out every stupid thing she does. But. Please. Park the misogyny. It's not a good look. It reeks of insecurity.
User avatar fmk_RoI
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,885
Joined: 16 Sep 2010 07:31

10 Mar 2018 20:34

MC: I don’t think Chris fully understood that (Vinokourov) had doped.

CF: No, I knew.

MC: Not fully.
Wiggo's Package
Member
 
Posts: 553
Joined: 07 Mar 2017 14:27

10 Mar 2018 20:41

She got herself involved, so she's open for criticizing and vice versa. It's simple as that.
The same applies for everyone, for example Quintana's father. He get involved, he speak up publicly, so I have every right to criticize his stance, or to agree with him.
I don't agree with him, or with Michelle, and I'm perfectly entitled to do so.
That's my view.
User avatar Blanco
Member
 
Posts: 1,394
Joined: 06 Jun 2017 19:33
Location: Serbia

10 Mar 2018 20:43

If a self journalist wants to. Defend someone that. Dumb and manipulative...

...insult them, mock them, point out every stupid thing they do...

...But. Please. Park the journalist specific insults. It's not a good look. It reeks of insecurity...

...Deflection tactics however are absolutely fine. Lesson No 1. At Journalist school...

...just after they teach you about. capitals and Punctuation...

...Obvs
Wiggo's Package
Member
 
Posts: 553
Joined: 07 Mar 2017 14:27

Re: Re:

10 Mar 2018 20:45

brownbobby wrote:
GraftPunk wrote:Oh, I am so looking forward to the cumuppance with some posters here. With the amount of condescending comments, that will be the best dish served cold.


Genuine question...which 'side' do you believe is guilty of condescension :confused:

I guess it depends on your definition. There are posters on here 1) who try with their fancy words trying to obfuscate at every turn (which is pathetic given most posters are not natural English speakers) 2) think they are very clever and know the inside out of cycling from a pedal to the UCI/WADA etc 3) genuine posters who, down to Union Jack specs, just can't see past Sky/Wiggins/Froome. Personally, for what's it worth, and I'm sure nobody gives 2 **** what I think, the sooner Sky are out of the peloton the better. Why, simply it will end this puerile nationalstic crap.
User avatar ferryman
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,173
Joined: 30 Dec 2009 23:43
Location: LostinFife

10 Mar 2018 21:19

spoken like a true scot................

which do you think is more multi cultured...team sky or Scotland?

the fact that team sky are based in Britain makes them no better..or no worse

Mark L
User avatar ebandit
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,135
Joined: 02 Aug 2012 18:24

Re: Re:

10 Mar 2018 21:29

ferryman wrote:There are posters on here 1) who try with their fancy words trying to obfuscate at every turn (which is pathetic given most posters are not natural English speakers).
We should come up with a list of fancy words to ban. I'll start with obfuscate.
User avatar fmk_RoI
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,885
Joined: 16 Sep 2010 07:31

Re:

10 Mar 2018 21:32

ebandit wrote:spoken like a true scot................

which do you think is more multi cultured...team sky or Scotland?

the fact that team sky are based in Britain makes them no better..or no worse

Mark L

More multi cultured, team sky or Scotland?

What a stupid question
rick james
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,459
Joined: 02 Sep 2014 13:21
Location: Ecosse

Re: Re:

10 Mar 2018 21:33

ferryman wrote:
brownbobby wrote:
GraftPunk wrote:Oh, I am so looking forward to the cumuppance with some posters here. With the amount of condescending comments, that will be the best dish served cold.


Genuine question...which 'side' do you believe is guilty of condescension :confused:

I guess it depends on your definition. There are posters on here 1) who try with their fancy words trying to obfuscate at every turn (which is pathetic given most posters are not natural English speakers) 2) think they are very clever and know the inside out of cycling from a pedal to the UCI/WADA etc 3) genuine posters who, down to Union Jack specs, just can't see past Sky/Wiggins/Froome. Personally, for what's it worth, and I'm sure nobody gives 2 **** what I think, the sooner Sky are out of the peloton the better. Why, simply it will end this puerile nationalstic crap.

Offt the pain is strong
rick james
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,459
Joined: 02 Sep 2014 13:21
Location: Ecosse

Re: Re:

10 Mar 2018 21:36

fmk_RoI wrote:
ferryman wrote:There are posters on here 1) who try with their fancy words trying to obfuscate at every turn (which is pathetic given most posters are not natural English speakers).
We should come up with a list of fancy words to ban. I'll start with obfuscate.


Agreed.
aphronesis
Veteran
 
Posts: 6,727
Joined: 30 Jul 2011 16:47
Location: Bed-Stuy

Re: Re:

10 Mar 2018 22:22

fmk_RoI wrote:
veganrob wrote:So some people think it is just great that MC stands out front defending her man and even puts words in his mouth because he appears so naive. But she shoud be not open to any criticism fo that? Sorry, can't have it both ways. She is fair game.
Like several other cycling wives, MC plays an active role in her husband's career. Despite the misogyny inherent in the sport, she is not the first. Anquetil's wife was heavily involved in his career. Ditto Coppi's second wife: there's a great story of her hurling insults from the team car at Magni one time. These sort of actions, of course they make discussion of the person fair. No one - no one - denies that.

But. Let's try and be reasonable. This place is testosterone fuelled at the best of times. But effectively arguing that MC should butt the **** out? Could we please just stop and listen to ourselves?
She interfered numerous times. She blocks people left and right on his twitter account, she argues with people all the time on this same HIS account, she explains stuff about his husband, stuff he should talk about
Do we really believe that women should be seen and not heard? Do we really believe that just because they share the load so publicly, that makes him a cuck (an insult that has been used on this thread today)?

Insult her, mock her, point out every stupid thing she does. But. Please. Park the misogyny. It's not a good look. It reeks of insecurity.

I never said she should butt out or stop what she is doing in social media or whatever. I just said by being there, she opens herself up to criticism. And she has done her fair share of it also. i don't think she shies away from it at all
User avatar veganrob
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,486
Joined: 29 Aug 2010 23:15
Location: The D

Re: Froome Talk Only

10 Mar 2018 22:37

Back at the Ruta, one of the riders, can't remember who, said he chatted with Froome at the finish of one stage, and came away with a different understanding of his situation. I didn't understand what he meant at the time, but now I think Froome may have told him he expects if there is a ban it will be proactive, i.e., no back-dating, meaning any results prior to the decision will be retained. IOW, stop worrying that Froome is riding under a cloud.

This raises an interesting situation. Froome obviously wants to ride the Giro, so if he thinks any ban will be proactive, it's in his interest that the decision be delayed till after that GT. Now maybe the decision could come sooner, but suppose there's bargaining going on. Froome is willing to accept a ban of a year, more or less, if it's proactive and comes after the Giro. He promises not to appeal (OK, we're not talking about a sworn statement, but a probable word of honor situation). WADA/UCI also promise not to appeal if the ban is a year, more or less.

Now here's the rub. The two sides could in theory come to this agreement at any time, but they can't announce it before the end of the Giro, because the ban has to begin when the decision is announced. So Froome would be riding the Giro, knowing he will keep the results, but no one else can know. So this doesn't really solve the problem of riding under a cloud, because everyone thinks he is, and all the bad publicity, complaints, threats, etc., will continue.

So what can Froome do? Maybe assure Vegni, Prudhomme, Lappartient in confidence of what the deal is? But wouldn't that also be an admission that the decision has been made? A public announcement by Froome and UCI assuring everyone that if there is a ban, it will be proactive and not be announced during the Giro? But even that would seem to be more than they could say if the decision is not official at that time. Maybe one of our lawyers can suggest a way they could pull this off.

veganrob wrote:
I never said she should butt out or stop what she is doing in social media or whatever. I just said by being there, she opens herself up to criticism. And she has done her fair share of it also. i don't think she shies away from it at all


I give Michelle credit for not playing the wife card (as far as I know). That contrasts with, say, Ivanka Trump, who as special assistant to the President is an official gov. employee, yet when asked about the sexual harassment claims against the President, replied, I don't think that's an appropriate question to ask the President's daughter. I think that kind of double standard is what bothers a lot of posters here, but again, I don't think Michelle herself is guilty of it. Some of her fans/defenders, but not she herself.
Merckx index
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,789
Joined: 27 Jul 2010 19:19

Re: Froome Talk Only

10 Mar 2018 23:14

Merckx index wrote:Back at the Ruta, one of the riders, can't remember who, said he chatted with Froome at the finish of one stage, and came away with a different understanding of his situation. I didn't understand what he meant at the time, but now I think Froome may have told him he expects if there is a ban it will be proactive, i.e., no back-dating, meaning any results prior to the decision will be retained. IOW, stop worrying that Froome is riding under a cloud.

This raises an interesting situation. Froome obviously wants to ride the Giro, so if he thinks any ban will be proactive, it's in his interest that the decision be delayed till after that GT. Now maybe the decision could come sooner, but suppose there's bargaining going on. Froome is willing to accept a ban of a year, more or less, if it's proactive and comes after the Giro. He promises not to appeal (OK, we're not talking about a sworn statement, but a probable word of honor situation). WADA/UCI also promise not to appeal if the ban is a year, more or less.

Now here's the rub. The two sides could in theory come to this agreement at any time, but they can't announce it before the end of the Giro, because the ban has to begin when the decision is announced. So Froome would be riding the Giro, knowing he will keep the results, but no one else can know. So this doesn't really solve the problem of riding under a cloud, because everyone thinks he is, and all the bad publicity, complaints, threats, etc., will continue.

So what can Froome do? Maybe assure Vegni, Prudhomme, Lappartient in confidence of what the deal is? But wouldn't that also be an admission that the decision has been made? A public announcement by Froome and UCI assuring everyone that if there is a ban, it will be proactive and not be announced during the Giro? But even that would seem to be more than they could say if the decision is not official at that time. Maybe one of our lawyers can suggest a way they could pull this off.

veganrob wrote:
I never said she should butt out or stop what she is doing in social media or whatever. I just said by being there, she opens herself up to criticism. And she has done her fair share of it also. i don't think she shies away from it at all


I give Michelle credit for not playing the wife card (as far as I know). That contrasts with, say, Ivanka Trump, who as special assistant to the President is an official gov. employee, yet when asked about the sexual harassment claims against the President, replied, I don't think that's an appropriate question to ask the President's daughter. I think that kind of double standard is what bothers a lot of posters here, but again, I don't think Michelle herself is guilty of it. Some of her fans/defenders, but not she herself.


Allegedly it was Fuslang according to Froome. But I’m not sure I believe what Froome says. There was a recent video of Tom Dum refusing to shake Froome’s hand.
User avatar thehog
Veteran
 
Posts: 21,485
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 20:00

Re: Froome Talk Only

10 Mar 2018 23:50

thehog wrote:
Allegedly it was Fuslang according to Froome. But I’m not sure I believe what Froome says. There was a recent video of Tom Dum refusing to shake Froome’s hand.


I love how "not putting his hand in with the other riders for the staged media shoot prior to the race because he is sick" has become "Tom Dum refusing to shake Froome's hand". That's some serious fake news stuff.
hazaran
Member
 
Posts: 424
Joined: 14 Jul 2015 00:37

Re: Froome Talk Only

10 Mar 2018 23:55

Merckx index wrote:Back at the Ruta, one of the riders, can't remember who, said he chatted with Froome at the finish of one stage, and came away with a different understanding of his situation. I didn't understand what he meant at the time, but now I think Froome may have told him he expects if there is a ban it will be proactive, i.e., no back-dating, meaning any results prior to the decision will be retained. IOW, stop worrying that Froome is riding under a cloud.

This raises an interesting situation. Froome obviously wants to ride the Giro, so if he thinks any ban will be proactive, it's in his interest that the decision be delayed till after that GT. Now maybe the decision could come sooner, but suppose there's bargaining going on. Froome is willing to accept a ban of a year, more or less, if it's proactive and comes after the Giro. He promises not to appeal (OK, we're not talking about a sworn statement, but a probable word of honor situation). WADA/UCI also promise not to appeal if the ban is a year, more or less.

Now here's the rub. The two sides could in theory come to this agreement at any time, but they can't announce it before the end of the Giro, because the ban has to begin when the decision is announced. So Froome would be riding the Giro, knowing he will keep the results, but no one else can know. So this doesn't really solve the problem of riding under a cloud, because everyone thinks he is, and all the bad publicity, complaints, threats, etc., will continue.

So what can Froome do? Maybe assure Vegni, Prudhomme, Lappartient in confidence of what the deal is? But wouldn't that also be an admission that the decision has been made? A public announcement by Froome and UCI assuring everyone that if there is a ban, it will be proactive and not be announced during the Giro? But even that would seem to be more than they could say if the decision is not official at that time. Maybe one of our lawyers can suggest a way they could pull this off.

veganrob wrote:
I never said she should butt out or stop what she is doing in social media or whatever. I just said by being there, she opens herself up to criticism. And she has done her fair share of it also. i don't think she shies away from it at all


I give Michelle credit for not playing the wife card (as far as I know). That contrasts with, say, Ivanka Trump, who as special assistant to the President is an official gov. employee, yet when asked about the sexual harassment claims against the President, replied, I don't think that's an appropriate question to ask the President's daughter. I think that kind of double standard is what bothers a lot of posters here, but again, I don't think Michelle herself is guilty of it. Some of her fans/defenders, but not she herself.

Very interesting take.

Considering his '18 results, maybe he's riding clean now :D . For the deal to take place, he can't afford to get popped now.
SOLO LA VITTORIA È BELLA
User avatar Tonton
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,157
Joined: 17 May 2013 18:59

Re: Re:

11 Mar 2018 00:12

rick james wrote:
TourOfSardinia wrote:
rick james wrote:So Michelle Froome runs the show, her man is a multiple grand tour winner so she must be doing something right ....but the clinic knows best

rick you are part of the clinic.
you post here more than most!

Maybe, but I don’t post lies about people who I don’t know or haven’t met.. some folk obsession blinds them and makes them post some crazy bull **** stuff


you got truth, RJ
Alpe73
Member
 
Posts: 739
Joined: 27 Dec 2012 01:23

Re:

11 Mar 2018 00:27

Craigee wrote:All the Froome Fanbois here need to harden up. His wife is extremely outspoken publicly, mostly on her own twitter page. She is making herself free game for criticism.

Nice way of changing the topic from doping though and making Froome and his family into victims.

If I were them, I'd need something else than Cound being inserted to harden up.
Goodbye, Tommeke; thank you for all you have given us!
User avatar Netserk
Veteran
 
Posts: 19,997
Joined: 30 Apr 2011 13:10
Location: Denmark

Re: Re:

11 Mar 2018 01:52

Alpe73 wrote:
rick james wrote:
TourOfSardinia wrote:
rick james wrote:So Michelle Froome runs the show, her man is a multiple grand tour winner so she must be doing something right ....but the clinic knows best

rick you are part of the clinic.
you post here more than most!

Maybe, but I don’t post lies about people who I don’t know or haven’t met.. some folk obsession blinds them and makes them post some crazy bull **** stuff


you got truth, RJ


According to the CN podcast, there did seem to be some bad blood on TD's part towards Froome, as they said on the podcast that at the press conference or race intro, I can't remember which, TD and Froome were sat next to each other and Froome tried to initiate conversation and TD just blanked him and his body language was less than friendly and Froome apparently looked rather embarrassed. Obviously that may be just be one interpretation of events by one journalist but it wouldn't surprise me.
bigcog
Member
 
Posts: 1,415
Joined: 09 Jul 2012 18:33

PreviousNext

Return to The Clinic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 20 guests

Back to top