Brailsford Should Stand Down

Page 3 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Velo_vicar said:
Do you really think Brad meant he never rode against LA at all? Or do you think in the context of an interview about LA being stripped of his tour titles 99-05. BW might, as i think most people would have interpreted the comment, have been saying he didn't ride against LA in the years he won/finished the race in the shortest time (not sure how to refer to what he did). i think drivel is equally distributed in this debate.
Armstrong rode doped to his gills in 09 and 10. Do you not remember him keeping Wiggins of the podium in 09?

Armstrong was stripped of all wins? Did he win anything in 09 and 10? Yep!
 
Oct 28, 2012
600
0
0
Dr. Maserati said:
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.


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.
The problem is also that even with a strict policy in place they still can't guarentee compliance from staff against individual acts of doping, just as other zero tollerence teams that are currently weathering a storm of allegations have discovered. No team can guarentee a riders past, and no team has the resources to monitor their staff 24hrs/day 365days/year. Riders don't live in convienient team hamlets, or even have contact with their teams on a daily basis, and their is no real way of guaranteeing that they don't fraternise with riders from other teams, as we can now see that the large group of ex USPS riders were still doing after spreading their wings through the peloton.
 
I think Dave probably should stand down...to challenge Pat. Dave has done what he set out to achieved with a team...winning the TDF without PEDs. He should take that energy and commitment to clean cycling forward and apply the same zero tolerance policy to the licensing of teams etc. Get the likes of Hog and Riis out of the sport.
 

mountainrman

BANNED
Oct 17, 2012
385
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!!
Very serious. Publicity came to her, she did not seek it. She hated giving speeches, although every organisation wanted her to speak. She was far more at home taking maggots out of the wounds of dead and dying. Her charism was "serving the poorest of the poor" not as a missionary order. She became known because of what her houses did, the press was a by product of that.
 
Jul 29, 2009
175
0
0
Crusader said:
Blood bags, EPO, Testosterone, HGH, etc, etc, unfortunately.
Plus the knowledge of how not getting caught - which is priceless.

On a more serious note: Why do we have to be so black and white? We don't know yet what will safe cycling from the cancer of doping. It might be JV's approach, it might be Sky's approach. Both methods have pro's and con's. Both methods do damage to some people in the sport. Time will tell which method will work better.

I do respect Sky for what they do. Not an easy call. But isn't that exactly what has been asked from cycling for many years now? A fresh start? I think it is worth a try. Doesn't mean all teams have to do it like that.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
mutschi said:
Plus the knowledge of how not getting caught - which is priceless.

On a more serious note: Why do we have to be so black and white? We don't know yet what will safe cycling from the cancer of doping. It might be JV's approach, it might be Sky's approach. Both methods have pro's and con's. Both methods do damage to some people in the sport. Time will tell which method will work better.

I do respect Sky for what they do. Not an easy call. But isn't that exactly what has been asked from cycling for many years now? A fresh start? I think it is worth a try. Doesn't mean all teams have to do it like that.
Yeah just too bad they waited until
1. They had achieved their original stated aim with said dodgy back office staff
2. push came to shove via the USADA / LA case

This current action is as believable as Millar kicking Hein, Tinkov kicking Bruyneel or all the media finally kicking McQuaid.

Opportunistic, safe actions aimed at self-promotion or *** covering.
 
Oct 24, 2012
13
0
0
Maybe it is time for everybody to realize the Sky isn’t blue, white or black; it’s grey. Having a 100% clean staff never guaranteed a clean team just like having some ex-dopers on staff never meant a team definitely doped.

The above quote from Gerard Vroomen makes perfect sense .

If Sky was going to run an organised doping program for the TdF team then I doubt very much the ex-doped riders on the staff would have been the ones to make that decision . That would have been for Brailsford and the team medical staff to decide .
I can't see Sean Yates , Bobby Julich or de Jongh having the medical knowledge required .
 
Jul 13, 2012
342
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?
Come on, your just wanting a giggle aren't you? It did make me laugh i do admit.

I can just see The Reverend Millar now,comforting his flock that the peloton is now clean,shepherding his young followers down the righteous path,free of sin and damnation, canonizing the Lord's saviour on earth Wiggo who has restored our faith in the purity of man so that we can all now strive for the podium of life.

Its either that or his sister Fran is on a nice little earner at Sky and he has to trot out the party line. Millar is a self-aggrandising tool, him and Brailsford are no strangers to staring at the four walls in a French police station,Millar a convicted doper, Brailsford a proven liar,hardly the calibre of individual one would earmark to clean up cycling in my view.
 
Jul 17, 2009
4,317
1
0
IainMc said:
If Brailsford can't embrace pro cycling warts and all, he should stand down before he does any more damage. Guys like Jonathan Vaughters are the future.

Brainsford's act is a front.
 
sofacycling said:
Maybe it is time for everybody to realize the Sky isn’t blue, white or black; it’s grey. Having a 100% clean staff never guaranteed a clean team just like having some ex-dopers on staff never meant a team definitely doped.

The above quote from Gerard Vroomen makes perfect sense .

If Sky was going to run an organised doping program for the TdF team then I doubt very much the ex-doped riders on the staff would have been the ones to make that decision . That would have been for Brailsford and the team medical staff to decide .
I can't see Sean Yates , Bobby Julich or de Jongh having the medical knowledge required .
Correct, but they would have had the inside knowledge and contacts required to point someone in the right direction.
 
Boeing said:
Brainsford's act is a front.
I agree (+1).

The 'teams' seem to be acting singularly.

Including this thread which perpetuates the duality.

What we need is synergy, team leaders to go public with solidarity and synergy?

Two before One.

'All we need' is a credible public front.

Stand and deliver!

Duty now for the future.

Otherwise pure DEVO.
 
BroDeal said:
Until they start getting rid of riders, this is a farce. They would have to sack nearly every rider over the age of twenty-five to give this policy any credibility.
Hey Bro.

Usually I agree with you, but...

It isn't the riders, it's the Teams, Sponsors and Governance.

(caveat: I read your post out of context?)
 
Jul 23, 2009
2,891
1
0
Was Brailsford the only man in cycling who couldn't figure out that Julich and Yates were dopers? He must be marginally ***. This is PR to make his team seem clean beyond clean... if you can just overlook that messy bit with the doctor, if you'd be so kind. As if any British sponsors are going to turn their backs on Sky so soon after a TDF victory and a huge medal haul at the home Olympics. DB is safe - the media love Sky, the UCI love Sky, and the fans that pay the bills couldn't be happier.
 
Mar 10, 2009
6,158
1
0
pedaling squares said:
Was Brailsford the only man in cycling who couldn't figure out that Julich and Yates were dopers? He must be marginally ***. This is PR to make his team seem clean beyond clean... if you can just overlook that messy bit with the doctor, if you'd be so kind. As if any British sponsors are going to turn their backs on Sky so soon after a TDF victory and a huge medal haul at the home Olympics. DB is safe - the media love Sky, the UCI love Sky, and the fans that pay the bills couldn't be happier.
Well it is the best angle he could play to keep his world clean from any doping tag(s). He still has some firing to do though, if he completes the task he may have just trumped USPS and fooled the world, well those who can't see too far at any rate.
 
May 26, 2009
3,687
1
0
Velo_vicar said:
BW might, as i think most people would have interpreted the comment, have been saying he didn't ride against LA in the years he won/finished the race in the shortest time (not sure how to refer to what he did). i think drivel is equally distributed in this debate.
Which is actually a absolutely ridiculous way to interpret his words as he mentioned he combated him at the Criterium International in which neither of them were close to winning. So interpreting it like you did is a bit of a stretch wouldn't you say? :rolleyes:
 
May 26, 2009
3,687
1
0
Crusader said:
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.
I'm at a complete loss how hiring Geert Leinders and taking the correct initiative can be in the same breath. This is at best reactionary.

And let's not forget that this method has been proven not to work before, which makes the idea that this is the correct intiative rather debatable.
 
May 26, 2009
3,687
1
0
armchairclimber said:
I think Dave probably should stand down...to challenge Pat. Dave has done what he set out to achieved with a team...winning the TDF without PEDs. He should take that energy and commitment to clean cycling forward and apply the same zero tolerance policy to the licensing of teams etc. Get the likes of Hog and Riis out of the sport.
And thus spoketh the Reverend Armchairclimber, apostle of the true faith.

I personally would think someone hiring Leinders and then acting all evasive would be not suited for the job, but that's probably because I prefer facts about religious experiences. Always at odds, religion and facts.
 
Jul 29, 2012
102
0
0
OK... Let's say Sky are dirty. Therefore, Omerta is paramount. So, the last thing you would do (especially in light of imminent uncertanties) is sack the very people who could drop you in the doodah big time? 7+2=13 something doesn't add up.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
dadane said:
OK... Let's say Sky are dirty. Therefore, Omerta is paramount. So, the last thing you would do (especially in light of imminent uncertanties) is sack the very people who could drop you in the doodah big time? 7+2=13 something doesn't add up.
Sky per se are not dirty. Small, sophisticated pockets of it are. Wiggins and co, as an example.
 
Jul 29, 2012
102
0
0
Dear Wiggo said:
Sky per se are not dirty. Small, sophisticated pockets of it are. Wiggins and co, as an example.
Agreed. BUT, are they doping their way to victory or using more subtle methods?

Edit: If that wasn't clear: There is more than one way to cheat. (i.e. subtle methods does not equal 'marginal gains')
 
They hardly had the door slammed on them.

They have left on good terms with financial compensation, and without their reputations being exposed (giving them a future in the sport).

In addition to that, they have all held their secrets for decades.

Unless something happens ex post like what happened to Landis, I don't think there is any risk.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY