Brailsford Should Stand Down

[IainMc]

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.

 

[Velo_vicar]

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.

i think what JV is doing is great for the present. But i hope in the future there is no one with a doping past in cycling because noone has doped. one policy addresses the present one is trying (clumsily) to plot the future.

 

[IainMc]

I think Vaughters is more likely to take us to a better future by using the experience of past dopers to help guide the sport. In Team Sky both Julich and de Jong were great assets. To have them leave just because one guy can't let go of what appears to be a personal crusade is just crazy.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

And what is it that past dopers can bring to the table that past non-dopers can't?

I for one welcome our new, spin merchant, ex-doper, excuse generator overlords.

 

[IainMc]

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?

 

[JimmyFingers]

I think Brailsford is doing the right thing, these people doped and have never been punished, it seems fitting that they are now. They were paid a wage as professional cyclists, they won prize money and earnt money through endorsements through cheating and they deceived the fans that cheered them on. They deserve their come-uppance.

Brailsford is also taking a huge risk axing members of Sky's inner-circle if you believe, as many do here, that doping is systematic at Sky in a US Postal model. It leaves Sky very open to whistle-blowers, not the policy you would think that a doping team would go down.

Just sayin'

 

[Andy99]

Yeah, of course he should stand down.

Looking at the results sky have had he is evidently a terrible manager.

 

[Crusader]

And what is it that past dopers can bring to the table that past non-dopers can't?

Blood bags, EPO, Testosterone, HGH, etc, etc, unfortunately.

 

[mountainrman]

It is entirely possible that it is Sky who are essentially deciding/ taking the final decision on what goes, particularly since Lance, and Rabobank - they may well have given an ultimatum.

Squeaky clean , no skeletons , no tolerance , is probably the package Brailsford has sold to and agreed with Sky : indeed, right now he probably has egg on his face for not asking enough questions of recruits in the first place.

And we all know how News International and Sky are unwilling to bend rules. Wonder if they are hacking / have hacked his phone!!

I personally think Brailsford has done a good job.
The kind of new broom that is needed.

The likes of Vaughters are needed too - there is room for both.

The likes of Brailsford has to be the future and increasingly common. It is ONLY by the success of guys like Brailsford with the no tolerance policy, that other sponsors will be tempted into a sport which has been for two decades a grave yard for scandals. Brailsford is proof it can be done.


Outsiders will always view the likes of Vaughters and Millar with suspicion. Particularly since Millars message of anti doping was just the same before he was caught . as it is now long afterwards. And whilst most consider him now sincere, that history is not helpful in persuading new money into the sport.

 

[IainMc]

I'm not saying that past dopers don't deserve some sort of punishment, I just believe that those who have come clean have a part to play in sorting out the mess they helped to create. You could even argue that guys like Millar have done more good than harm in the long run. If Brailsford's utopia is taken up by many other team managers I think we have more to lose than gain. And of course in that utopia a great number of managers would also have to resign.

 

[ebandit]

egg

while recent events may have caused waves leaving brailsford having to do some explaining he won't be going anywhere

not after he delivered on his promise of a tdf win within 5 years

+ i smile at above post re david millar 'hating his dark past'..............if it was not for that what platform would he have to 'spurt on' so much?

 

[martinvickers]

I'm not saying that past dopers don't deserve some sort of punishment, I just believe that those who have come clean have a part to play in sorting out the mess they helped to create. You could even argue that guys like Millar have done more good than harm in the long run. If Brailsford's utopia is taken up by many other team managers I think we have more to lose than gain. And of course in that utopia a great number of managers would also have to resign.

You worry too much, IainMc - while Bjarne runs a team, there's no such risk...

 

[Crusader]

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.

 

[ebandit]

pr

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.

exactly!

but those 'clinic regulars' will see it as merely a pr move to hide the doping

 

[IainMc]

What, me worry?

 

[Jeremiah]

Yeah,Sky is clean just like USPS..

 

[dolophonic]

Puritanical..that's the way to do it ..

 

[veganrob]

Puritanical..that's the way to do it ..

Excellent. It works just great that way in the USA

 

[Ferminal]

Not knowing half his management had been involved with doping at some stage of their career suggests incompetence, but otherwise he's doing a good job.

 

[RichWalk]

Not knowing half his management had been involved with doping at some stage of their career suggests incompetence, but otherwise he's doing a good job.

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!

 

[Franklin]

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.

Indeed! That's why they hired a guy who has been judged accomplish to doping fraud

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

 

[Ferminal]

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!

Brailsford is just running a team, it's not his job to worry about how the sport is going to clean itself up. Sky can win in a clean or dirty sport and that's what he has to worry about. Brailsford doesn't have the emotional commitment to improving the sport like a Vaughters does.

I don't see why Sky should be any more or less of a leader on this than any other team, if Movistar and OPQS aren't stepping up why should Sky? Just focus on doing the job.

 

[The Hitch]

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?

 

[RichWalk]

Brailsford is just running a team, it's not his job to worry about how the sport is going to clean itself up. Sky can win in a clean or dirty sport and that's what he has to worry about. Brailsford doesn't have the emotional commitment to improving the sport like a Vaughters does.

I don't see why Sky should be any more or less of a leader on this than any other team, if Movistar and OPQS aren't stepping up why should Sky? Just focus on doing the job.

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.

 

[Velo_vicar]

Indeed! That's why they hired a guy who has been judged accomplish to doping fraud

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

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.