Brailsford Should Stand Down

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Jul 17, 2012
5,303
0
0
The Hitch said:
what sky are doing is the equivalent of a young man showing a barman a photocopy of his passport to prove he is old enough to buy alcohol.

And all the fans are shouting - LOOK!!!!, it says he was born in 1993 so he must be over 18.

Saying "we are clean" and "wiggins proved that the tour can be won clean" and "everyone belives wiggins is clean" every 5 seconds, do not mean someone is not doping.

And firing Sean Yates and Lienders (after a long time) does not mean a team is not doping either.

In the same way that someone having a scanned copy of a legal document that says they were born in 1993 does not mean they were born in 1993. Surely yall see it could be done with paint?
Its a good analogy but I do feel like you're not giving Sky credit for trying. If you are doing something illicit and nefarious the last thing you do is alienate and expell those that you are doping it with. If Sky is cuplable of systematic doping in the model of US Postal, as is so fondly espoused in every other post I read about them practically, it is suicidal to be isolating and sacking team members.

However misguided this is, I do think the motivation is the right one, I applaud the fact that dopers that have cheated in the past and not been caught are getting some sort of punishment and I hope it will move Sky forward in a positive manner.

To use your analogy, Sky could be in the back hiding in the corners, not going up to the barman, rather asking someone else to buy their beer for them. Like OPQS, Katusha, Astana, Liquigas and all the other teams that are saying and doing precisely nothing.
 
Sep 29, 2011
81
0
0
The Hitch said:
what sky are doing is the equivalent of a young man showing a barman a photocopy of his passport to prove he is old enough to buy alcohol.

And all the fans are shouting - LOOK!!!!, it says he was born in 1993 so he must be over 18.

Saying "we are clean" and "wiggins proved that the tour can be won clean" and "everyone belives wiggins is clean" every 5 seconds, do not mean someone is not doping.

And firing Sean Yates and Lienders (after a long time) does not mean a team is not doping either.

In the same way that someone having a scanned copy of a legal document that says they were born in 1993 does not mean they were born in 1993. Surely yall see it could be done with paint?
But equally it doesn't mean they are. The truth will out. The LA story shows us that even with the best and most aggresive laywers and the most bullying of tactics the truth will come out. Some day a team will say "we are clean" and they will be. It strikes me that it is hard to keep a conspiracy quiet that is dependent on the secrecy of so many people many of whom you will inevitably fall out with. LA's tactics might have delayed the truth but it came out. It is easier to run a clean team than try and conceal a cheating team for ever.
 
RichWalk said:
not saying he 'has to' but its people in his type of role that need to be part of a new leadership ethic within cycling, if they all go *** it I'll carry on doing it my way then I don't see much of a future.
Yep agreed, but I think it needs to be more than just making your team look good, you need to be out there actively lobbying teams and other stakeholders in the sport. Sky may have a clean image but you just have to look at Katusha or Radioshack and see that most teams don't care.
 
Jul 13, 2012
263
0
0
Ferminal said:
Yep agreed, but I think it needs to be more than just making your team look good, you need to be out there actively lobbying teams and other stakeholders in the sport. Sky may have a clean image but you just have to look at Katusha or Radioshack and see that most teams don't care.
Absolutely, I'd love to see a gathering of those making the right noises across the sport to hammer out how things can really change and improve; those without a voice should be encouraged to seek a different calling or retire.

We aren't anywhere near that point just yet but the key is to keep this positive impetus going, otherwise it will just be rhetoric and re- branded hot air.
 
Oct 2, 2012
152
1
0
Lumping all cyclists who have doped in the past is pretty simple-minded, and the one strike and you're out lacks compassion and understanding. There are repentant dopers and unrepentant dopers, and the first should have a place in the sport.
 
Jul 13, 2012
263
0
0
Sarcastic Wet Trout said:
Lumping all cyclists who have doped in the past is pretty simple-minded, and the one strike and you're out lacks compassion and understanding. There are repentant dopers and unrepentant dopers, and the first should have a place in the sport.
thats a very difficult argument to win and I suspect most will differ on their view of whether dopers, repentant or not should be involved; a distinction I'd draw is the commercial aspect of any such return/future involvement.

Making a case that ex cons are useful for eductating high risk/new offenders is not the same as making large amounts of money in the past, (at the expense of clean riders) then getting busted/admitting you doped and remaining within the sports hierarchy and still earning good money - this time at the expense of others who can ride/help manage teams without a doping background. As I said views differ.
 
Oct 29, 2012
8
0
0
RichWalk said:
Very fair points, his personal view point and future direction obviously have a bearing on how he acts, as I've said before I doubt he will struggle for work outside cycling.

My view was/is that as a sporting director he should have a degree of moral duty and care toward the environment he makes a living from; not saying he 'has to' but its people in his type of role that need to be part of a new leadership ethic within cycling, if they all go *** it I'll carry on doing it my way then I don't see much of a future.
Well said. Brailsford needs to look at the bigger picture and take some responsibility for the overall business not just his team.
 
Oct 30, 2012
10
0
0
Franklin said:
Indeed! That's why they hired a guy who has been judged accomplish to doping fraud :rolleyes:

Really, the amount of drivel the apologists post is beyond ridiculous.

The guy willingly and knowingly took in a very dodgy doctor. Every move he makes now is beyond hypocritical due to that fact. No amount of cheering and spinning from the apologists can change history.

Like Brad who claimed he never rode against LA, DB now wants to turn back the clock. Too bad he has been exposed :cool:
I am well aware of Dr. Geert Leinders. And I am not an apologist for Sky. Nor am I a fan. I am a neutral. I have no favorites. I am just stating that Dave Brailsford is doing a good job. And I have outlined the reason's why he is, by taking the correct initiative in clearing out the doping brigade. Of course he is faced with no choice. What doping if any ? goes on amongst the current riders at Sky. The answer to that will lead to 10,000 posts of speculation. And in doing so producing no real evidence of actual doping. It would be great to prove something, but without that evidence, that is not possible. Would I be surprised if Bradley Wiggins failed a drugs test ? Absolutely not. But without a positive drug test we can only speculate. And yes. There are quite a number of questions that need specific answers. I wonder what will become of Micheal Rodgers if anything, with his reported past link to Michele Ferrari. Doesn't that warrant further investigation ?
 
Jun 11, 2010
28
0
0
IainMc said:
If you have been there and done something, it gives you far greater insight. Don't you think that guys like David Millar, who clearly hates his dark past, are being truly helpful to the new generations of cyclists? Evangelistic even?
I think what Millar hates is the fact that got found out. His rebirth is purely PR and ultimately political in its nature.

Remember his and most other confessions are in my opinion, limited in their scope and honesty.
 
May 21, 2010
809
0
0
Sarcastic Wet Trout said:
Lumping all cyclists who have doped in the past is pretty simple-minded, and the one strike and you're out lacks compassion and understanding. There are repentant dopers and unrepentant dopers, and the first should have a place in the sport.
And all irrelevant if the paymasters at Sky say" no doping ,no dopers,no skeletons zero nadda zilch, or we are gone" as dont forget sky plough plenty of £££££'s into the track team etc and british cycling in general.Where is the compassion for the up and coming riders in the development squads etc,whose future,any scandals would put in question through no fault of their own?
Wheres the compassion for the Basson's and Brian Smith's ? who lost out on carreer's?
 
Oct 28, 2012
600
0
0
RichWalk said:
Absolutely, I'd love to see a gathering of those making the right noises across the sport to hammer out how things can really change and improve; those without a voice should be encouraged to seek a different calling or retire.

We aren't anywhere near that point just yet but the key is to keep this positive impetus going, otherwise it will just be rhetoric and re- branded hot air.
Do I need to remind people that Mother Teresa never sought limelight of publicity for her work?

Standing infront of a camera twirling in a pink tutu while holding aloft a self awarded 'golden cuckold of the decade' statuette, does not mean that other teams are not actively engaged in fighting against doping and reforming the sport. All it means is that a certain team were born as media darlings, and will continue to be media darlings untill the hypocracy of their claims become unpalatable to the intended audience.

There is nothing origional in their approach beyond being media created media darlings.
 
Jul 13, 2012
263
0
0
Ecowarrior18 said:
I think what Millar hates is the fact that got found out. His rebirth is purely PR and ultimately political in its nature.

Remember his and most other confessions are in my opinion, limited in their scope and honesty.
Straight to the point, regardless of what good his ilke are now doing, you could go further and question what other walks of paid life could you still operate within, in such a manner, still be earning and even be a figure of influence?
 

martinvickers

BANNED
Oct 15, 2012
4,903
0
0
Ecowarrior18 said:
I think what Millar hates is the fact that got found out. His rebirth is purely PR and ultimately political in its nature.

Remember his and most other confessions are in my opinion, limited in their scope and honesty.
Well, it's an opinion, I grant you. Rather like arseholes, everyone has one. And they are often filled with much the same substance.

This conversation would be much more interesting with something approaching evidence, honestly...
 
Jul 13, 2012
263
0
0
Le Baroudeur said:
Do I need to remind people that Mother Teresa never sought limelight of publicity for her work?
To be fair, I don't think she had access to Twitter ;)
 
blah blah blah

me still thinks that winning the tdf 2012 will stand for more with anyone that
counts

but what do i know?

i'm morally bereft and never done bug2er all to bring effective changes in our sport

let the uci do that ( ok i'm trolling on that point! )
 

martinvickers

BANNED
Oct 15, 2012
4,903
0
0
Le Baroudeur said:
Do I need to remind people that Mother Teresa never sought limelight of publicity for her work?

Standing infront of a camera twirling in a pink tutu while holding aloft a self awarded 'golden cuckold of the decade' statuette, does not mean that other teams are not actively engaged in fighting against doping and reforming the sport. All it means is that a certain team were born as media darlings, and will continue to be media darlings untill the hypocracy of their claims become unpalatable to the intended audience.

There is nothing origional in their approach beyond being media created media darlings.
Never sought publicity? Are you serious? The woman was an ardent missionary taking global contributions - she didn't become known by accident, you know!!
 

martinvickers

BANNED
Oct 15, 2012
4,903
0
0
RichWalk said:
Straight to the point, regardless of what good his ilke are now doing, you could go further and question what other walks of paid life could you still operate within, in such a manner, still be earning and even be a figure of influence?
if you took illegal drugs in order to increase performance in another job, and successfully did so, say banking, they'd probably give you a payrise. Doping is a sports issue; non-sport analogies are of limited utility...
 
Oct 30, 2012
10
0
0
martinvickers said:
Never sought publicity? Are you serious? The woman was an ardent missionary taking global contributions - she didn't become known by accident, you know!!
What does Dave Brailsford have to do with Mother Teresa. Yes nothing. Back on topic please.....;)
 
Meh.

Sky, Garmin, Katousha, and so on only need grant WADA the authority to open doping cases on their own and the budget to back-date test about 5 years. My estimation the born-again anti-doper JV would dance around this initiative with an opinion that eventually eliminates any chance of it happening. What say you JV1973?

I say give the authority to WADA in 5 working days. Come day 7, they will have a 10 year backlog of doping positives. Which is why the UCI would never let it happen. UCI == Pat, Hein, management committee.

I care that there is some semblance of a legitimate game to Pro Cycling. If riders are non-positive regardless of their team, then great. If not, that's okay too.
 
Jul 13, 2012
263
0
0
martinvickers said:
if you took illegal drugs in order to increase performance in another job, and successfully did so, say banking, they'd probably give you a payrise. Doping is a sports issue; non-sport analogies are of limited utility...
I think you will find I am referring to cheating within a paid environment, not a sports vs other work analogy. That said in todays world there will always be rewards for cheats, I just don't see them being held up as part of a new moral process that often...........
 
May 19, 2012
537
0
0
RichWalk said:
You could say he's been naive, he could argue he's had the proverbial rug pulled from beneath his feet; whatever the current situation, Sky claimed the aim was to have a clean 'team' and win the Tour, they clearly didnt.

To imply a man of Brailsfords acumen had no knowledge that cyclists dope and still do, is a stretch for even the most optimistic cycling observer. Whatever the actual reality was times have changed dramatically since their inception and the back peddaling measures are now in full effect at Sky.

Their zero tolerance stance can be construed in many ways however at least they are making some sort of stand and not staying silent like most other teams.
I'm not arguing this means a clean team but rather cycling has to start somewhere, this is Sky/Brailsford approach.

From my point of view guys like Brailsford as team managers need to start pushing real world ideas out there as to how doping will be minimised; reduced stage distances, much tougher bans for riders and team managment and the points system being based upon a teams performance rather than individual riders are some worth exploring...........get to it if you want to stay and make a difference!
Silence is always better than lying.
 
Oct 30, 2012
10
0
0
The theme to all the threads and posts is one of suspicion. This one is no different and for good reason. How is any human being going to be able to believe one word that comes out of any managers mouth or rider. It is healthy to be skeptical. The skepticism and cynicism is a natural response to current and past events. No one is above suspicion and sadly that will be the enduring theme for the foreseeable future. The fallout from the current climate is only in its infancy. No one knows what is around the corner.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Crusader said:
Dave Brailsford is doing a fine job at Sky. There are strict anti-doping policies in place. Getting rid of those who have skeleton's in the closet in relation to doping is part of that regime. Sky's no nonsense approach is sending out a clear message that zero tolerance will be shown to those who violate their anti-doping policies.
This is Sky's problem - they do not have a strict policy in place. They have PR.

If they had a "policy" then they would either have not hired all the people they are now getting rid of or they would have explained that their policy exempted people who doped years ago.

ebandit said:
exactly!

but those 'clinic regulars' will see it as merely a pr move to hide the doping
It is not PR to hide the doping, it is PR to portray that they are anti- doping.
A subtle but pertinent difference.

Dell Boys problem is he sticks his finger in the air to work out which way the current wind is blowing and go with it.
Problem is it is difficult to do when there is a storm.
His actions have damaged clean riders in his team. Silly man.
 
Jul 13, 2012
263
0
0
Dr. Maserati said:
It is not PR to hide the doping, it is PR to portray that they are anti- doping.
A subtle but pertinent difference.

His actions have damaged clean riders in his team. Silly man.
Yep, the much used and abused 'turn a blind eye' stance; 'our teams clean, of course we know doping exists, if our riders do and are daft enough to get caught they are contractually dismissed'
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS