David Millar goes after the UCI

[ChewbaccaD]

It comes down to whether or not you think Millar really wants a cleaner sport, or is just saying it because it is expedient to say so.

Do you trust David Millar enough to take his words at face-value and as legitimate, honest and truthful expressions of his thoughts?

I can understand why many people do not trust Millar based on his previous actions/words. I can also understand why many people are prepared to believe him.

I'll take a watching brief on this one thanks before declaring Millar to be either the true christ or the anti-christ.

Fair points.

 

[More Strides than Rides]

I appreciate what Ms. JM and Chewie have said. I like chewie's point that some people (himself include) will be more aggressive than others (Millar et al., and myself included). Were all on the same page, but some of us want to flip the chapters faster, which is fine. My own expectation is that those movers and shakers within the sport will move more cautiously, and I am fine with that (others are not). But were all on the same team. I'm even okay with not taking a stand on whether new voices are genuine. I have loved big ring's threads, which put pieces together that were nothing in and of themselves. They play an important role in the exposure of suspicion. But, I think it would be silly if everyone carried that intensity; more red-scare than witch hunt. A little diversity of opinion is a good thing. Its obvious which camps we're in as posters.

So as for Millar, or others who will come along (and they will), its worth it to agree to disagree

 

[BroDeal]

Got this off VS:

"He may be right once in a while, but Millar is still walking ****ing proof that the road from doping to self-serving sanctimony is a profitable one-two punch."

So much truth there.

 

[sniper]

Yea, Occam's razor: He wants a cleaner sport.

Your singular suggestion (because you make clear that there is no other possible explanation) is that he is a doping DS who is trying to hide he is a doping DS? Mmmmkay, I guess that is ONE interpretation. I find it interesting as this actually makes JV worse than Armstrong in relation to doping because not only is he a former doper now running a team-wide doping program, but he is super Dr. Evil because he is now coming out as staunchly anti-doping at a time when he can use the doping case of Armstrong to lend further legitimacy to his pitch on anti-doping, which is actually just a ploy for him to keep being able to dope his riders and win lots of s**t. I'm sure he sits around and prefaces every sentence with "Mwahahaha"...Seems legit... <-shouldn't need rollyeyes, but what the f**k, right?

then why the **** is he claiming Sky and Wiggins are clean?

why not just shut up about Sky?

you and I know Sky dope. JV knows Sky dope.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

then why the **** is he claiming Sky and Wiggins are clean?

why not just shut up about Sky?

you and I know Sky dope. JV knows Sky dope.

He said he believes they are clean. He is allowed that belief, and it is also quite possible that he is being diplomatic considering that he likely does not have proof they dope. JV defended Wigans this summer in his statement about bone-idle ****s like me. I flamed the s**t out of him for it. I still think he was stupid to support a statement like that because the reason people are suspicious of doping is because HIS GENERATION doped like a bunch of junkies. He is as responsible for that suspicion as anyone. So, do I see JV as the poster child for anti-doping? No. Do I believe he has a nefarious purpose for his statements recently about his doping past, and the past of his riders? No, I don't. I don't think JV and Millar see the issue in the same way I do. I don't think they are NEARLY vitriolic and aggressive enough when it comes to people like Pat. I don't think they are nearly as supportive of fans who are skeptical as they should be. I don't think they came forward soon enough by 10-15 years. I think they have a big financial stake in being the "clean team."

All that aside, I don't see a lot more people saying ANYTHING. Nada. Nunca. Nadie. I also believe they both have a sincere desire to see a cleaner sport. Call me crazy...

 

[JimmyFingers]

then why the **** is he claiming Sky and Wiggins are clean?

why not just shut up about Sky?

you and I know Sky dope. JV knows Sky dope.

No you believe they dope, you don't know. Millar believes they don't, and Wiggins doesn't. Just as people like you come into forums like this and say that you know they are doping, Millar has the right to use the platform available to him to voice his beliefs, or knowledge, or opinion. It is highly hypocritical of you to criticise him doing so. He has a different opinion to you, suck it and stop crying about it.

JV has said he believes Wiggins rides clean, and infers the same of Sky. Talansky has also said that they are clean. That's three from Garmin saying that Sky are racing clean, perhaps why Garmin are now catching more flak from this forum.

Cycling isn't still a massively-followed sport in the UK, Millar for a lot of his career ploughed a fairly lonely furrow on the pro-tour and his doping ban further lower his profile with the public. He has been on the path to redemption for a while now, his ability to compete in the Olympics after WADA overturned the BOC's lifetime doping ban and on the back of the successes of his compatriots has raised his profile sufficiently for him to commentate on the Worlds for the BBC. This in turn meant he had the accreditation to quiz McQuaid, and the cultural capital/gravitas for people to listen. Perhaps that is why he is now using the platform to attack the UCI. We know he was tweeting his outrage at the UCI lawsuit against Kimmage ahead of this.

You know there is just a chance that these people are on the level and want the same things you do.

 

[gatete]

He said he believes they are clean. He is allowed that belief, and it is also quite possible that he is being diplomatic considering that he likely does not have proof they dope. JV defended Wigans this summer in his statement about bone-idle ****s like me. I flamed the s**t out of him for it. I still think he was stupid to support a statement like that because the reason people are suspicious of doping is because HIS GENERATION doped like a bunch of junkies. He is as responsible for that suspicion as anyone. So, do I see JV as the poster child for anti-doping? No. Do I believe he has a nefarious purpose for his statements recently about his doping past, and the past of his riders? No, I don't. I don't think JV and Millar see the issue in the same way I do. I don't think they are NEARLY vitriolic and aggressive enough when it comes to people like Pat. I don't think they are nearly as supportive of fans who are skeptical as they should be. I don't think they came forward soon enough by 10-15 years. I think they have a bit financial stake in being the "clean team."

All that aside, I don't see a lot more people saying ANYTHING. Nada. Nunca. Nadie. I also believe they both have a sincere desire to see a cleaner sport. Call me crazy...

Exactly the way I see it, for me something is better than nothing, maybe this will incentivate more riders to come and says something, I mean something, and not the silence we've been hearing.

 

[bobbins]

Millar knows what goes one at sky, his sister is joined at the hip to Dave B

She's as dirty and no good as he is. Maybe worse, the way she bullies and intimidates people.

 

[Cycle Chic]

I don't think they are NEARLY vitriolic and aggressive enough when it comes to people like Pat.

All that aside, I don't see a lot more people saying ANYTHING. Nada. Nunca. Nadie. I also believe they both have a sincere desire to see a cleaner sport. Call me crazy...

Your aggression is just what we dont want. Another aggressive reaction like Wiggins and Armstrong.

 

[TexPat]

Your aggression is just what we dont want. Another aggressive reaction like Wiggins and Armstrong.

It's hyperbole. ChewbaccaD has a very clever literary style. Get over it.
He's not an MP, yet he actually resembles one or his style does anyway.

 

[sniper]

He said he believes they are clean. He is allowed that belief, and it is also quite possible that he is being diplomatic considering that he likely does not have proof they dope. JV defended Wigans this summer in his statement about bone-idle ****s like me. I flamed the s**t out of him for it. I still think he was stupid to support a statement like that because the reason people are suspicious of doping is because HIS GENERATION doped like a bunch of junkies. He is as responsible for that suspicion as anyone. So, do I see JV as the poster child for anti-doping? No. Do I believe he has a nefarious purpose for his statements recently about his doping past, and the past of his riders? No, I don't. I don't think JV and Millar see the issue in the same way I do. I don't think they are NEARLY vitriolic and aggressive enough when it comes to people like Pat. I don't think they are nearly as supportive of fans who are skeptical as they should be. I don't think they came forward soon enough by 10-15 years. I think they have a bit financial stake in being the "clean team."

All that aside, I don't see a lot more people saying ANYTHING. Nada. Nunca. Nadie. I also believe they both have a sincere desire to see a cleaner sport. Call me crazy...

Great post (up until that tiny boldfaced bit)


JV gives me the creeps. His slick, arrogant, calculated, quasi-transparent attitude in here (which you also allude to) is reason enough for me to find him dodgier than Riis. Practically everything he says seems orchestrated. Just look at how he 'accidentally' spilled the beans on Danielson.

Then there is JV's hammering on about marginal gains. Marginal gains used to be Bruyneel's and Armstrong's turf.

JV is a marketing strategist. There is still enough money to be made in cycling for JV to stick around. He could have made good bucks outside of cycling. If he'd be interested in clean cycling, imo he sh/w/could have left cycling long ago, knowing (like you and me do) that clean cycling is a utopia as long as the cash flow is as big as it is.

 

[sniper]

And what the hell is up with Weltz? Didn't he have some questions to answer about his past?

I bet JV isn't at all unhappy that the focus is now deflected away from Weltz.

Weltz is turning into a Leinders type of case. "We're looking into his past, but have no reasons to be concerned". What next? Silence..

 

[hiero2]

David Millar says Lance Armstrong affair the 'best thing to happen' to modern day cycling:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ot...st-thing-to-happen-to-modern-day-cycling.html

I sure hope somebody cross-posted this in the thread for rider reactions to USADA vs LA. That is a fantastic article.

RR - chapeau for starting this thread and bringing this to our attention. thirteen: thanks for the quote.

 

[hiero2]

No you believe they dope, you don't know. Millar believes they don't, and Wiggins doesn't. Just as people like you come into forums like this and say that you know they are doping, Millar has the right to use the platform available to him to voice his beliefs, or knowledge, or opinion. It is highly hypocritical of you to criticise him doing so. He has a different opinion to you, suck it and stop crying about it.

JV has said he believes Wiggins rides clean, and infers the same of Sky. Talansky has also said that they are clean. That's three from Garmin saying that Sky are racing clean, perhaps why Garmin are now catching more flak from this forum.

Cycling isn't still a massively-followed sport in the UK, Millar for a lot of his career ploughed a fairly lonely furrow on the pro-tour and his doping ban further lower his profile with the public. He has been on the path to redemption for a while now, his ability to compete in the Olympics after WADA overturned the BOC's lifetime doping ban and on the back of the successes of his compatriots has raised his profile sufficiently for him to commentate on the Worlds for the BBC. This in turn meant he had the accreditation to quiz McQuaid, and the cultural capital/gravitas for people to listen. Perhaps that is why he is now using the platform to attack the UCI. We know he was tweeting his outrage at the UCI lawsuit against Kimmage ahead of this.

You know there is just a chance that these people are on the level and want the same things you do.

+1 -- kudos. Well said.

 

[Mr.38%]

+1 -- kudos. Well said.

+2 because fundamentalists suck.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

Your aggression is just what we dont want. Another aggressive reaction like Wiggins and Armstrong.

You opposition is noted...

 

[ChewbaccaD]

Great post (up until that tiny boldfaced bit)


JV gives me the creeps. His slick, arrogant, calculated, quasi-transparent attitude in here (which you also allude to) is reason enough for me to find him dodgier than Riis. Practically everything he says seems orchestrated. Just look at how he 'accidentally' spilled the beans on Danielson.

Then there is JV's hammering on about marginal gains. Marginal gains used to be Bruyneel's and Armstrong's turf.

JV is a marketing strategist. There is still enough money to be made in cycling for JV to stick around. He could have made good bucks outside of cycling. If he'd be interested in clean cycling, imo he sh/w/could have left cycling long ago, knowing (like you and me do) that clean cycling is a utopia as long as the cash flow is as big as it is.

I drop my knives. Fair enough.

 

[hiero2]

I am not disputing any of that. All I am saying is that it is prudent to see if Millar is legitimately wanting to see a clean up of cycling or if he is merely positioning himself politically. As others say - on the one hand he has sung Armstrong's praises, claimed that Contador is clean because he is so consistent and spoken highly of Sky, so it is always hard to work out which side of his mouth Millar is speaking from.

I recall after the USADA announcement Millar declared that he was going to go into a cave (or words to that effect) and to think about his response. If this is the fruits of that then good.

While I agree it is always prudent to keep a person's motives in mind - with human motivations running the gamut, from St. Augustine to Idi Amin, along with all the pixels of grey in between - I also am of the opinion that the final call is:

The final result is what you DO. Not what you believe. Actions speak louder than words. In this case, the words ARE an action, yes?

 

[ChewbaccaD]

It's hyperbole. ChewbaccaD has a very clever literary style. Get over it.
He's not an MP, yet he actually resembles one or his style does anyway.

S**t dude, that's one of the biggest complements I've received anywhere for my posts...and I assure you it's dumg f**king luck that I stumbled anywhere near that standard...

 

[compete_clean]

This quote was interesting:

We had Ryder Hesjedal win the Giro, which is considered to be the hardest physical race and I know for a fact that Ryder is clean.

I must admit I had doubts.



It reminds me of when Steve Bauer made a statement for fair play and competition for sport Canada in the 80s. He said something like, "I know Greg Lemond and Andy Hampsten, and I know you can win without doping".

I always thought it was funny he didn't include Hinault and Bernard in that statement.

 

[hiero2]

Look all around you. It isn't just Millar who is changing position. Look at how riders and the media are repositioning themselves.

Just as Millar is suddenly growing a set to ask questions, so are various journalists such as CN, the clowns at AP etc

The cynical view is that they sense which way the wind is blowing. They sense that the UCI, McQuaid etc are on shaking ground and getting ever more shaky as the days get closer to the USADA report coming out.

It is easy to view this as cynical opportunism by Millar and sections of the cycling press, as bandwagon jumping.

Lampooning McQuaid and Verbruggen these days is like shooting fish in a barrel. The test is really questioning the new 'sacred cows' such as Sky, British cycling, Garmin, BMC etc

It isn't as if Millar has suddenly remembered that the UCI was complicit in creating a doping culture. Where was he 5 years ago? Where was he when Landis came out with his allegations? When Landis for example needed support from current riders where was Millar then? Now, all of a sudden with the USADA report due soon, Millar is suddenly finding his voice. The same can be said of the cycling press - where were they 5 or 10 years ago when Kimmage and Walsh were ploughing their lonely furrow?

In the end, you can take two views on 'why now'. Either Millar has genuinely found his voice and his belief and that it is only because he is towards the end of his career and the power of McQuaid and Verbruggen is waning that he can speak freely.

Or you can say that this is cynical opportunism from Millar and others - they realise that no one will really remember their past actions and praise for Armstrong as long as their most recent action is anti-Armstrong and anti-McQuaid. Millar has always been a politician and an expert at saying what the audience wants to hear - anyone who can remember his first articles when he started out in the late 1990s can remember that this has always been how he has conducted himself in public. This incident re-enforces the view that he is 'anti-doping campaigner David Millar'. Is it Millar positioning himself for a role in a post McQuaid cycling world? Hard to tell. It certainly doesn't do his public profile any harm. His comments about Armstrong were critical but also measured in a way that are unlikely to draw the ire of the few remaining Armstrong true-believers, especially when compared to his comments about Landis, or Ricco for example.

There is an old joke about you can tell how fast a revolution has fallen to the counter-revolution when the skinny revolutionaries stop appearing on TV and fat men in suits re-appear. The cynical would say that what we have here is members of the old guard re-positioning themselves and dressing themselves up as revolutionaries.

And this is the ultimate question about the future of cycling if McQuaid and the current UCI does fall, will the new era of cycling be led by genuine anti-dopers who crave clean racing such as Ashenden, Schenk, Kimmage etc, or will it be led by people for whom anti-doping pr is key to a marketing strategy but are happy to carry on as before with 'you pretend to ride clean and we'll pretend to test you'.

Ultimately, there are two views on Millar - either he is an opportunistic fellow-traveller, or he is a genuine revolutionary. Which it is hard to tell given his previous actions.

My emphasis. I agree completely with the "where were they then" thinking. However, I also think there are other options besides "opportunistic" and "revolutionary".

Most people are NOT willing to speak out, especially when they think the bulk of the audience do NOT want to hear what they have to say. It is human nature to generally "go with the flow". What we see today is because the tide is rising, the critical mass has been reached, the wave is breaking - whatever cliche you choose - but we have reached a point where essentially more ordinary people can feel more comfortable speaking out. Also, before, the weight of the countering questions was still heavy for most people. I'm not saying most of the peloton - I'm saying most people, so I am including all the many people who might read the news about what we do, in addition to the riders themselves.

So I see a grey area. Some good intention, some opportunistic timing, some growth of personality and conviction.

 

[shojii]

Since we, as commentators in this thread, appear to have a high degree of fluency in discussing the notions of subterfuge and ulterior motives as part of the human condition, this must least an implicit acknowledgement that we've all played the game to some degree. The argument then, in relation to David's recent comments is not whether he has a secondary game, but what degree.

Motives are complicated things, although DM will receive some personal 'fringe benefits' from speaking out, I'm inclined to believe that these aren't his primary drivers.

Sure, he may have said stuff in the past that appear to be ridiculous and contradictory (as we all have), but that said i) his professional environment has changed dramatically and and ii) people change.

Not excusing anything, or passing judgement but I think (as someone has already written) we should not look this gift horse in the mouth.

I acknowledge that I've not said anything that hasn't been said by others in this thread, but I think do we have good grounds to be quietly optimistic for a favourable outcome for our sport and those that seek a profession in it.

While we should be vigilant, we should also be careful about descending into a culture of McCarthyism.

 

[Benotti69]

My emphasis. I agree completely with the "where were they then" thinking. However, I also think there are other options besides "opportunistic" and "revolutionary".

Most people are NOT willing to speak out, especially when they think the bulk of the audience do NOT want to hear what they have to say. It is human nature to generally "go with the flow". What we see today is because the tide is rising, the critical mass has been reached, the wave is breaking - whatever cliche you choose - but we have reached a point where essentially more ordinary people can feel more comfortable speaking out. Also, before, the weight of the countering questions was still heavy for most people. I'm not saying most of the peloton - I'm saying most people, so I am including all the many people who might read the news about what we do, in addition to the riders themselves.

So I see a grey area. Some good intention, some opportunistic timing, some growth of personality and conviction.

Millar did speak out against Landis. That is the problem.

This is not fundamentalism by saying hang on a second Millar, but your the guy who backed Armstrong and lambasted Floyd, now you are having a go at UCI now when it looks like they are about to put the blindfold on him as the firing sqaud are straightening their tunics, too late mate, way too late.

As for growth of personality, this I dont get. He just sat down and thought about his life and put it into book form, if he didn't get growth of personality out such a cathartic thing to do well then this smacks of opportunism.

 

[doolols]

Millar knows what goes one at sky, his sister is joined at the hip to Dave B

She's as dirty and no good as he is. Maybe worse, the way she bullies and intimidates people.

More unattributed nonsense. Some clinicians just can't seem to accept that a team (i.e. Sky) might have success without doping. It's why we're all here - to complain about cycling being dirty. Unfortunately, I think some here have created a personality for themselves which relies on cycling being dirty. With a completely clean peloton, The Clinic would disappear, and with it, some of its most vocal posters.

 

[D-Queued]

More unattributed nonsense. Some clinicians just can't seem to accept that a team (i.e. Sky) might have success without doping. It's why we're all here - to complain about cycling being dirty. Unfortunately, I think some here have created a personality for themselves which relies on cycling being dirty. With a completely clean peloton, The Clinic would disappear, and with it, some of its most vocal posters.

Awesome!

However, it is far more probable that the die-hard fanbois will support their hero to the grave.

The difference is that us 'haters' aren't battling Cognitive Dissonance. We can let go when the job is done. For the fanboi, the job is never done.

Dave.