A Dave Millar thread

[Mrs John Murphy]

This interview was really the start of Millar's campaign pitch to become UCI president.

Millar is a politician - sly, deceitful and always on the look out for an opportunity for self-promotion.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

See, that's what i meant a few weeks ago by conspiracy theory - the result is already decided and all evidence is simply bent to fit it.

No doubt if Millar had said nothing it would probably be "why is Millar ignoring Kimmage, how disrespectful, omerta, omerta, omerta..."

Disagree. Does Millar actually sound contrite to you?

Millar is part owner of a team, and part of WADA - I'm sorry if you don't like it, but it DOES give him a position to discuss the matter from. I make no judgement on whether he's a white or black hat - I've no way of knowing, and I rather doubt you do either - but this level of animus just...well, it's the sort of thing gives the clinic a bad name AND REDUCES ITS USEFULNESS.

Disagree. Just what exactly do you think the Clinic is used for? And how on earth is that usefulness diminished when someone calls Millar on his two-faced sanctimonious self-aggrandizing BS?

you have to ask what's more important to you - fixing the sport, or getting your bile out - because currently, it seems to be the latter - in which case what value do you bring?

Oh the irony of a post filled with directives for "proper" posting here and asking "what value do you bring"?

Seriously? It takes some pretty serious mental gymnastics to find people giving praise disrespectful, especially when you read the quotes IN FULL.

He's calling Kimmage a fanatic. Not a lot of kudos or credibility attached to the adjective fanatic.

Paul is and always was passionate about cycling - clean cycling. Paul loves cycling. He grew up with the sport but it burned him so badly. He was ostracised and got treated like a **** by so many people – me included – for 20 years. Now all this stuff about Armstrong came out and, suddenly, he was right all along. He's right to still be angry. I'm not sure it's good for him but maybe Paul will be the one to make a difference with the UCI. And here's the beautiful irony. That passionate voice has been the voice of reason through all this.

Change negative psycho connotations to passion and it changes the message entirely. "Fanatic" is NOT a compliment.

Unfortunately, I cannot rewrite the underlined in any sort of positive spin. That right there is a veiled threat / challenge with a barb in the tail I did not even notice the first time. He's trying to position Paul away from UCI leadership because it's his desire to be there and he wants to manage the change or at least be involved.

What I find most bizarre is the complete lack of similar animus against Bjarne Riis, for example, for whom there's not inconsiderable evidence not only of doping, but of continued support of doping as a DS (hamilton's book) - no such evidence exists against Millar or Garmin - one might almost think there' some weird anti-brit thing going on or something. In any event, it's not terribly useful.

Millar did the doping like Bjarne, but came back all holier than thou and alternated between kicking people when they were down, then trying to hitch to their coattails when they were on the up. Revolting.

Simple: show us one quote where Bjarne put the boot into someone. JUST ONE. Go. Now. Find it and quote it for us. Then go back and find the other one, years later, where he claims that booted person is his best bud, and fawns all over him, and how wrong he was. GO. Do it. Now. Don't reply until you have those two quotes.

For Millar, we have Kimmage (by his own admission), and more recently Floyd Landis and even Pat McQuaid, where Millar boots then befriends these guys.

Thanks.

 

[Telmisartan new]

Millar is a **** who is only interested in promoting David Millar.

He is no better than McQuaid.

He's worse than McQuaid. If you had the two of them round for dinner, Pat would get drunk and offer you some lucrative dodgy deals at the end of the night. Davey would sit looking self-important,sipping no more than a half glass of wine whilst talking about himself the whole night until you fell asleep through boredom.

I know who i'd rather have round.

 

[skidmark]

Huh. I've been a critic of Millar for awhile, but that interview seemed to actually put him in a pretty good light, gave context to his oft-sanctimonious talk. I'm definitely rankled by his absoluteness about Wiggins and Sky, that is a problem. But otherwise, I don't really see what the big deal is, unless you've already assumed that he's lying through his teeth about everything. Which I guess is my answer right there as to what the big deal is...

 

[ElChingon]

Huh. I've been a critic of Millar for awhile, but that interview seemed to actually put him in a pretty good light, gave context to his oft-sanctimonious talk. I'm definitely rankled by his absoluteness about Wiggins and Sky, that is a problem. But otherwise, I don't really see what the big deal is, unless you've already assumed that he's lying through his teeth about everything. Which I guess is my answer right there as to what the big deal is...

If you re-read it you'll see where he flip-flops on what he is saying and where he is hiding behind the shadows after he comes out for a peek.

 

[martinvickers]

Disagree. Does Millar actually sound contrite to you?

I'm afraid I don't understand - why should Millar be sounding contrite in this particular interview? It's not leprosy, you know. He doesn't have to go ringing a bell everywhere he goes, shouting "unclean, unclean". The interview wasn't primarily about his own doping.

Disagree. Just what exactly do you think the Clinic is used for?

From the evidence I've seen, venting of personal animus, mainly. Which is a pity, really. It could be so much more useful to actually, you know, help fix the sport.

And how on earth is that usefulness diminished when someone calls Millar on his two-faced sanctimonious self-aggrandizing BS?

It's usefulness is diminished when people throw around allegations and bilious statements clearly based primarily on animus, because it becomes easier to simply write off the whole lot in Wiggins-esque terms -i.e bunch of ****ers.

Oh the irony of a post filled with directives for "proper" posting here and asking "what value do you bring"?

you'll have to enlighten me to the irony; I fail to see it.

He's calling Kimmage a fanatic. Not a lot of kudos or credibility attached to the adjective fanatic.

1. Paul is a fanatic. Absolutely without question. It's just the truth - he's been on a lonely single minded crusade for over a decade in a sport that long ago threw him aside.

It's WHY I LIKE HIM!!

2. You do know where the word Fan is derived from, no?

3. I'm sorry, but that idea of 'insult' simply does not stand up in the face of the totality of what was written, which was clearly both warm and impressed with Kimmage's tenacity.

Unfortunately, I cannot rewrite the underlined in any sort of positive spin. That right there is a veiled threat / challenge with a barb in the tail I did not even notice the first time. He's trying to position Paul away from UCI leadership because it's his desire to be there and he wants to manage the change or at least be involved.

Right, bingo, right there - that's just plain old conspiracy theory. You've no 'evidence' of that all - it's pure join the dots conjecture.

you didn't take that leap because the evidence pointed there. you took the leap simply because you wanted it to be true.

I am stunned if you cannot see how that might damage your credibility, DW?

KIMMAGE HIMSELF has said it's not good for him. Check the last couple of tweets before the Maximus line. Was he trying to stab himself in the back?

Simple: show us one quote where Bjarne put the boot into someone. JUST ONE. Go. Now. Find it and quote it for us. Then go back and find the other one, years later, where he claims that booted person is his best bud, and fawns all over him, and how wrong he was. GO. Do it. Now. Don't reply until you have those two quotes.

Just to be clear, DW, and without meaning too much offence, but I'll reply when I ****ing want, not when you 'allow' me to - might work with others, that ****e, not with me. Just so you know.

Let's be absolutely clear. I don't give a f*** if Bjarne sticks the boot in, or writes nice letters with chocolates to everyone. I don't care if he's a **** or a lovely, lovely man, I do not give a flying f*** about his personality. I don't care if he's the ****ing Ayotollah of pleasentness. It's got sod all to squared to do with anything.

I care that he's a doper. Who never properly apologised.

I care that he's a cheat. Who got to win the big race and keep it.

I double care that he encouraged, or may have encouraged, others to dope.

I like my sport clean, or at least cleaner. I could give a f*** if it's full of charming people.

I find the idea "I don't like Millar, he get's up my nose - therefore he must be a ****, a repeat doper, and dishonest to boot" to be laughable. I'm sorry, but it is. Millar could be a lovely man and a complete cheat - or a ****head and clean as a whistle. Just because Armstrong was both a cheat and a functioning sociopath doesn't mean they all fit, and correlation certainly doesn't prove causation.

Some of the spin being put by Clinicians on this interview simply underscore the tendancy to twist everything to fit pre-conceived ideas and animus, rather than actually look at evidence.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Some of the spin being put by Clinicians on this interview simply underscore the tendancy to twist everything to fit pre-conceived ideas and animus, rather than actually look at evidence.

No. It's not spin at the end.

You asked:

What I find most bizarre is the complete lack of similar animus against Bjarne Riis

Waaaahhhh why pick on Millar, Riis is far more evil, I mean, he must be, right Millar is BRITISH and Riis is FOREIGN.

Well I told you why, and you got all foul mouthed about it.

Fine. You can't find a single thing Riis said about ANYONE nor can you then find a backflip years later when that same person is now flavour of the month.

Fact: Millar did not tell all.
Fact: Millar denied for a long time.
Fact: Millar only confessed after being found with empty vials and being thrown in prison.
Fact: Millar has villified Kimmage, Landis, McQuaid just to name the easy ones.
Fact: Millar gets all buddy buddy with same when they are flavour of the month or he wants to curry favour.

Fact: Riis may not have told all.
Fact: Dunno if Riis denied but I do know he was never caught - it was voluntary.
Fact: Riis has not villified anyone (that I am aware of. Prove me wrong) then turned around and sucked up to them.

As for the animus, you display it in spades, in fact all the Sky fanboys do. They get personal really quickly, with posters they have never met. And don't manage to present rational arguments beyond "you must hate Wiggins, or the British or something something".

 

[Dear Wiggo]

KIMMAGE HIMSELF has said it's not good for him. Check the last couple of tweets before the Maximus line. Was he trying to stab himself in the back?

Black people call themselves something that a white man should be very careful calling same black people.

If I call myself an idiot, it's not fine for someone who has publicly put me down and villified me - in the press no less - to turn around and reiterate that I am an idiot.

You'll also notice, if you're reading his tweets, is that he said it's all well and good but the most important thing to him in life it is not - and he was taking time off twitter to attend to them. I am guessing he means family.

So to label someone fanatic for the second most important thing in their life.

Dunno.

Not buying it.

As for interpreting it - sure it's impossible to read something and not interpret it. You're giving Millar a big hall pass, for whatever reason. One you don't give Riis, I notice. But to say someone else's interpretation is wrong and twisting things, is uh yeah well anyway.

Here's a question: why is Millar being interviewed? Is Donald McRae courting David Millar? The intro to that piece could not be more flowery if you copied sonnets from Shakespeare. I thought Millar was villified in the press? Treated wtih contempt and scorn?

A morning with David Millar is like no other interview in sport (really?). Time reels past in a vivid blur of words for this is a conversation fuelled less by the cups of coffee lining the table in a cafe on High Street Kensington than by a tumultuous year in professional cycling. Of course, with Millar, the tangled mess of corruption and courage is best approached via circuitous and sometimes strikingly beautiful routes. (wtttffff???)

his elusive accent, (charming) echoing all the places he has lived in the world, (exotic, well travelled) talks about writing books (smart) and riding bikes, (pro) about growing old and inevitable endings (old and wise), about the familiar rhythms of the seasons (life experienced) and the sharp surprises of fatherhood (kid shield). But his conversation is bolted down by riveting (interesting conversationalist) insights (experienced) into a damaged sport (damaged in part by David) that could only come from an insider. (qualified!)

his penetrating gaze as a former doper turned patron of the peloton

Seriously? And they label Kimmage as simply, "fanatical"?

How Millar describes Armstrong:

Lance has to move forward with his life because he's still a father and a husband and a leader of a charity.

(he resigned from the charity - pretty sure pedanticaly he's no longer the leader)

How he describes Kimmage:

Don't **** with fanatics.

Yeah right. Real complimentary.

Sorry but that entire thing reads like a Millar fluff piece. British rag interviewing British pro rider potentially on the up.

 

[pedaling squares]

What I find most bizarre is the complete lack of similar animus against Bjarne Riis, for example, for whom there's not inconsiderable evidence not only of doping, but of continued support of doping as a DS (hamilton's book) - no such evidence exists against Millar or Garmin - one might almost think there' some weird anti-brit thing going on or something. In any event, it's not terribly useful.

It's because everybody knows that Riis was a dirty rider and a dirty DS/manager. There is no sport in it, nobody gets to come back months from now and say, "See, I was right." You'll catch on to the game we play here. Posting in The Clinic isn't about stating accurate facts, it's about being right.

 

[martinvickers]

No. It's not spin at the end.

You asked:


Waaaahhhh why pick on Millar, Riis is far more evil, I mean, he must be, right Millar is BRITISH and Riis is FOREIGN.

I'm Irish, arsehole.

Sorry, that's actually an expletive too far - but one has to vent sometimes, i'm SURE you understand...

But as I said, I'm Irish. So take the Brit-hating aussie shtick (and let's be honest, it's increasingly bloody obvious that's what it is) somewhere where it sticks.

And for the record, Riis is worse if and because he facilitated doping on his team (the Hamilton book as source) - same as Bruyneel is worse than Armstrong. Whether or not he's kind to animals is damn all to do with it.

Well I told you why, and you got all foul mouthed about it.

Cry me a river. Have you SEEN the 'masturbation' thread? It's all big boys school here, isn't it?

Fine. You can't find a single thing Riis said about ANYONE nor can you then find a backflip years later when that same person is now flavour of the month.

I never even looked; because as I said, I don't give a f***. I don't care about personalities. I don't care if he's nice to his mother.

But for the record, if a cyclist you DIDN'T like had behaved the way you say Riis has so approvingly, you'd be screaming Omerta at the top of your lungs.

Fact: Riis may not have told all.

May. May, indeed. Laughable fanboy nonsense - turns out you're just somebody else's fanboy. Pathetic

As for the animus, you display it in spades, in fact all the Sky fanboys do.

Honestly, there's a playground missing a crybaby somewhere. It's just reflexive, DW, isn't it -"oh, you fanboy! ".

You can give it, DW, but you don't seem to like to take it. That's good. It's instructive.

I've said it often enough - if Sky are doping, I hope they go down the f***ing plughole, and take every f***ing one of them with them. I have NO skin in their Game. But that doesn't fit your conspiracy, does it, DW. So I must be lying. I probably dope to, come to think of it. And eat babies.

They get personal really quickly, with posters they have never met. And don't manage to present rational arguments beyond "you must hate Wiggins, or the British or something something".

I saw your website, DW; it's pretty obvious you hate Wiggins on a visceral level, and given the Millar rage here and elsewhere, a fair chance you have a problem with the Brits that's pretty personal - the bizzare rant about the injustice of sending convicts to australia during the thread on doping punishments kinda gave that away.

But all of that is kinda of irrelevent - because I DON'T F***ING CARE who likes who. I care....deep breath...about evidence. And the sport.

And so, yes, when i see this nonsense, i call it out for what it is. bull****.

Now get me some real evidence of Millar doping again, or interfering with anti-doping, and we'll boot his **** so quick he'll leave skidmarks.

Until then, it's just so much crap.

 

[blackcat]

I'm Irish, arsehole.

well, you just try a suppository with that. I hear they come in handy. Better than oral contraception, whoops, mean oral laxatives.

 

[Tinman]

well, you just try a suppository with that. I hear they come in handy. Better than oral contraception, whoops, mean oral laxatives.

LOL, so loud you can hear it in Ireland I'm sure. These threads are becoming classics for a long time to come.

 

[martinvickers]

Black people call themselves something that a white man should be very careful calling same black people.

So now I'm to believe FANATIC is equal in insult to N1GGER, and only presumably rapping fanatics can use it. Fanatics with attitude.

Deeeeeep breath. Exhale.

Yes, dear Reader, that is a shark you just saw. And yes, he jumped it.

You'll also notice, if you're reading his tweets, is that he said it's all well and good but the most important thing to him in life it is not - and he was taking time off twitter to attend to them. I am guessing he means family.

So to label someone fanatic for the second most important thing in their life.

Dunno. Not buying it.

Good, cause I'm not selling it.

Second most important thing in my life is Irish Rugby team. And yes, I'm a fanatic about them. Obviously the first most important is either my wife and two kids, or Sky Procycling. Obviousy. You choose, of course.

Any more questions?

As for interpreting it - sure it's impossible to read something and not interpret it. You're giving Millar a big hall pass, for whatever reason. One you don't give Riis, I notice.

I don't tend to give dopers who then become dope friendly DS's a freebie. Shoot me

But to say someone else's interpretation is wrong and twisting things, is uh yeah well anyway.

Never stopped you, did it.

Here's a question: why is Millar being interviewed? Is Donald McRae courting David Millar? The intro to that piece could not be more flowery if you copied sonnets from Shakespeare.

Fine, you don't like McRae. Another dirty Brit, no doubt. Tell him.

I thought Millar was villified in the press? Treated wtih contempt and scorn?

When he was first caught and for several years afterwards, yes he was. I suspect most british fans (not being one myself) probably think he's done something like penance. What did Riis do, again?

Seriously? And they label Kimmage as simply, "fanatical"?

As I've already said, Paul IS fanatical, quite rightly so. What should Millar do, lie about that?

Sorry but that entire thing reads like a Millar fluff piece. British rag interviewing British pro rider potentially on the up.

No, you have no anti-brit animus at all. No. Perish the thought.

As for Millar. Shoot him. shoot both of them. It's the only way they'll learn. Nail 'em up, I say. Nail some sense into 'em.

As Clarke and Dawes said "No, Australian media are much more fair and balanced. Sure, they'll call you fat and reasonably hopeless, but nothing that interfere's with your right to life..."

 

[martinvickers]

It's because everybody knows that Riis was a dirty rider and a dirty DS/manager. There is no sport in it, nobody gets to come back months from now and say, "See, I was right." You'll catch on to the game we play here. Posting in The Clinic isn't about stating accurate facts, it's about being right.

As I've said elsewhere, it's cynicism trying to mascarade as wisdom.

 

[martinvickers]

LOL, so loud you can hear it in Ireland I'm sure. These threads are becoming classics for a long time to come.

well, if you can't enjoy yourself, what's the point, right?

 

[Tinman]

well, if you can't enjoy yourself, what's the point, right?

Absolutely! You've seen Clarke and Dawes on UCI, right?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RkrdqJHQHxs

 

[blackcat]

no one ever gets of the premise that there is PED testing.

Should assess the definition of testing, and then wonder how this become a weasel word at the premise of every entry point to discourse.

How is there testing if they are IQ tests? If you cant fail the IQ tests, how are there PED tests?

Does this change your investigation?

 

[martinvickers]

Absolutely! You've seen Clarke and Dawes on UCI, right?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RkrdqJHQHxs

yes, indeed. Absolute classic. "I. Had. No. Idea. Whatsover."

In Ireland there used to be a similar satirical radio show called Scrap Saturday, starring Dermot Morgan from Father Ted; it was brutally subversive - if they'd got a chance at this, we'd not be able to breathe with the laughter.

 

[RichWalk]

Despite the vitriol being banded about some good arguments being touted about.

For me with guys like Millar, its back to basics; do i support ex dopers still being involved with the sport & in line with this do I believe they should be part of the process toward clean(er) cycling as 'earners'?

Personally although many have offered up useful insights in how the sport should progress and yes, in many different ways, some more self serving than others, I would far rather see proven clean DS's and influential Pros (who remain untainted) make such remarks.

Other than a handful of guys like Kittel, the comments from so called peleton patrons have been at best retospective BS and 'its all in the past' mantra.

taking my Clinic hat off, I'd really like to know why this is? We have footie players all over the news here re Racism and rules in the game, we have Murray asking (with Federer) for more drug testing, we have top althetes arguing that the British Olympic Commitee should be able to enforce lifetime bans for dopers etc etc....

These people are just as high profile within their sport, have huge sponsorship deals and a quite happy to make comments whether they be informed or down right stupid, so why are top cyclists all of a sudden a bunch or PR statement dullards??

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Despite the vitriol being banded about some good arguments being touted about.

For me with guys like Millar, its back to basics; do i support ex dopers still being involved with the sport & in line with this do I believe they should be part of the process toward clean(er) cycling as 'earners'?

Personally although many have offered up useful insights in how the sport should progress and yes, in many different ways, some more self serving than others, I would far rather see proven clean DS's and influential Pros (who remain untainted) make such remarks.

Other than a handful of guys like Kittel, the comments from so called peleton patrons have been at best retospective BS and 'its all in the past' mantra.

taking my Clinic hat off, I'd really like to know why this is? We have footie players all over the news here re Racism and rules in the game, we have Murray asking (with Federer) for more drug testing, we have top althetes arguing that the British Olympic Commitee should be able to enforce lifetime bans for dopers etc etc....

These people are just as high profile within their sport, have huge sponsorship deals and a quite happy to make comments whether they be informed or down right stupid, so why are top cyclists all of a sudden a bunch or PR statement dullards??

I think the Murray comments need to be contextualised towards those of Armstrong about testing. Armstrong at various points said he welcomed being tested, wanted to be tested etc. Why given how dirty he was would he say such a thing - because he knew he was ahead of the testing curve and he could also make positive tests go away.

I suspect that Murray thinks that he is too far ahead of the testing game, he thinks he won't be caught on his doping regime.

Murray is also probably getting better PR advice than most of the peloton as well. That is what sponsors pay the money for.

'Now Andy, in this interview - no whining about being woken up at 6am, that makes it look like you've something to hide. Instead ask for more testing, you know they won't ever put it into action but it makes you look good and will improve your public image and you'll look less like a drug-fueled petulant rodent.'

 

[sniper]

I think the Murray comments need to be contextualised towards those of Armstrong about testing. Armstrong at various points said he welcomed being tested, wanted to be tested etc. Why given how dirty he was would he say such a thing - because he knew he was ahead of the testing curve and he could also make positive tests go away.

I suspect that Murray thinks that he is too far ahead of the testing game, he thinks he won't be caught on his doping regime.

Murray is also probably getting better PR advice than most of the peloton as well. That is what sponsors pay the money for.

'Now Andy, in this interview - no whining about being woken up at 6am, that makes it look like you've something to hide. Instead ask for more testing, you know they won't ever put it into action but it makes you look good and will improve your public image and you'll look less like a drug-fueled petulant rodent.'

sometimes when I'm more cynical, i have a minor suspicion that JV is on here to check to what extent he is ahead of the testing curve, with us clinicians, the ultimate cynics and disbelievers, as labrats putting JV's data bending to the test, i.e. for him to see to what extent (and with what type of arguments) we are able to poke holes into his cleancycling-scheme.
In those darker moments, I contemplate that the feedback JV gets in here could in fact be valuable intel for improving Garmin's already sophisticated program.

 

[fat_boy_fat]

sometimes when I'm more cynical, i have a minor suspicion that JV is on here to check to what extent he is ahead of the testing curve, with us clinicians, the ultimate cynics and disbelievers, as labrats putting JV's data bending to the test, i.e. for him to see to what extent (and with what type of arguments) we are able to poke holes into his cleancycling-scheme.
In those darker moments, I contemplate that the feedback JV gets in here could in fact be valuable intel for improving Garmin's already sophisticated program.

Dream on.

Inside here he can check just one thing: What does the critical fan who does fancy a certain cynical attitude is thinking right now? That’s all.

Neither is this forum a proper representation of the interested public (= potential customers of sponsor goods) nor is a significant amount of valid data available to the few experts around here.

He can only hope to inject certain interpretations that might spread in blogs and other forums and thereby influence opinions on a grassroot level. And he could try to test his arguments on an overcritical group. = PR and PR training.

 

[MellowJohnny]

'Saint David, Radio Millar'

How's that for you

 

[Cycle Chic]

mmmm...Andy's forearm is equalling Nadal's.

 

[2008885]

You can't really tell from that angle, but as he's a right handed pro tennis player, he's going to have rather beefy forearms.

And why is this in the DM thread, do you not like Scotsmen?