argyllflyer said:
A pretty tiresome argument - they're not. Wiggins would not commit 100% to backing Froome. Additionally, Brailsford is on record that Wiggins is not there in order to have a higher overall team morale. He would have split the team into 'Pro Wiggo' / 'Pro Froome' and 'neutral / afraid to join one or other'. He believes a strong team in harmony will beat a team with stronger individuals racing for themselves.
Porte is the GC fallback.
I think Froome's concern was about the loyalty of Brailsford not so much if Wiggins would pull for him. He is very aware of the "True" British and "Adopted" British cultural battle. If there was even a sniffer of a chance that Wiggins would take leadership during the race (like a Froome crash), Brailsford would switch. Reminds me of AC and Lance in 2009 and the loyalty of Johann. At least Froome could choose, AC did not have a choice.
Froome crashing today reminds me of AC in 2011 TDF, he was not meant to be there, the courtcase hanging in the background, then we see his first TDF crash (interesting it was wheels touching like Froome) and then another crash, just wasn't meant to be. I get the same feeling here with Froome. Not blaming him about the Wiggins decision, but I still think he should have buried the whole pot of stew and moved on.