Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

Page 890 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Aug 11, 2012
416
0
0
Re: Re:

kwikki said:
"Jeff"":1a28bdmr][quote="tomycs said:
Tbh if the Clinic accepted the everyone dopes = level playing field argument, that [insert fav team/rider here] defenders like to bring every now and then, this would be a very lonely place.
What gets to me with Sky is the greed, very similar to USPS, it seems to me english speaking folk have an obsession with winning the TdF at least 5 times or they don't matter.
Pretty much.

Personally I think this British/English invasion hasnt done cycling any good.
Yes.

Things were so much cleaner before Sky came along. :rolleyes: I just feel sorry for all the lily-white Dutch, French, Belgian, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, American, German, Scandinavian riders who wouldn't have dreamed of cheating until those nasty British came along and made doping obligatory. Before Sky, cycling was pure. Now it's dirty.

I think your use of the word 'invasion' shows exactly where you are coming from.[/quote]Dont feel sorry. Just stick to the track. You shouldnt give your opinion about the road. You showed me enough regarding Adam Yates and all those other hundred posts of yours since April.
 
Jul 2, 2015
18
0
0
Mighty words coming from a guy analyzing at length what Oleg Tinkov says. I'm not so sure which one of us is closer to the gutter.
 
Apr 3, 2016
1,508
0
0
Re: Re:

"Jeff"":20iku38q][quote="kwikki said:
"Jeff"":20iku38q][quote="tomycs said:
Tbh if the Clinic accepted the everyone dopes = level playing field argument, that [insert fav team/rider here] defenders like to bring every now and then, this would be a very lonely place.
What gets to me with Sky is the greed, very similar to USPS, it seems to me english speaking folk have an obsession with winning the TdF at least 5 times or they don't matter.
Pretty much.

Personally I think this British/English invasion hasnt done cycling any good.
Yes.

Things were so much cleaner before Sky came along. :rolleyes: I just feel sorry for all the lily-white Dutch, French, Belgian, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, American, German, Scandinavian riders who wouldn't have dreamed of cheating until those nasty British came along and made doping obligatory. Before Sky, cycling was pure. Now it's dirty.

I think your use of the word 'invasion' shows exactly where you are coming from.[/quote]Dont feel sorry. Just stick to the track. You shouldnt give your opinion about the road. You showed me enough regarding Adam Yates and all those other hundred posts of yours since April.[/quote]

I know you said you "know everything about cycling", but you shouldn't assume that everyone else holds you in such high regard as you hold yourself.

I'm not into *** fights, gentlemen. So if you've nothing else to bring to the table you'll have to go elsewhere for your sport.
 
Re: Re:

BYOP88 said:
thehog said:
Cycle Chic said:
so considering the UCI and ASO are indeed still reeling from the Armstrong disaster / fallout....would they really be so stupid as to give Brailsford and Sky another backdoor pass ? doesnt add up.

Could they really be passing all those drug tests ? doesnt add up.
Another 5 years of Froome/Sky to get 8 victories, would ASO really want that?
If Froome's lucky he's got 2 more TdF wins in him. But it all depends on the TV ratings if the Tour loses more ratings next year, that will probably be Froome's last TdF win.

I'm interested to see the course they conjure up for next year. If ASO can't get reduced team sizes they might try to build a strange course. However ASO do require stages finishes to pay so they may mean more mountain stages with a decent into the nearby village.
 
Oct 25, 2012
485
0
0
Re: Re:

kwikki said:
"Jeff"":1nb2ntwj][quote="tomycs said:
Tbh if the Clinic accepted the everyone dopes = level playing field argument, that [insert fav team/rider here] defenders like to bring every now and then, this would be a very lonely place.
What gets to me with Sky is the greed, very similar to USPS, it seems to me english speaking folk have an obsession with winning the TdF at least 5 times or they don't matter.
Pretty much.

Personally I think this British/English invasion hasnt done cycling any good.
Yes.

Things were so much cleaner before Sky came along. :rolleyes: I just feel sorry for all the lily-white Dutch, French, Belgian, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, American, German, Scandinavian riders who wouldn't have dreamed of cheating until those nasty British came along and made doping obligatory. Before Sky, cycling was pure. Now it's dirty.

I think your use of the word 'invasion' shows exactly where you are coming from.[/quote]

I'd be a fan of British Cycling (cycling in/from Britain, as opposed to the organisation). I enjoy those Elite series races that are shown on TV from time to time, and I admire teams like JLT, PedalHeaven, etc), and enjoy watching when they come to Ireland to ride the Ras. I'd also have good time for the vast majority of British pro's.

My only real problem with Team Sky is that they seem to have budgets that no other team can come near. Thats not their fault though and I think you'll get instances of this in every sport (particularly professional sports). If no caps are in place and they can get the funding, I think any team would happily pump the kind of money Sky do, into their team.

And, obviously, its far from the first time this has happened in cycling. At a guess I'd say it started with Tapie with his La Vie Claire team? Though my knowledge of cycling prior to that time is sketchy at best.

Its certainly not a problem caused by the Brits though. Far from it. Doesn't a good portion of Sky's funding come from Italy?

Calls for caps on the amount of money teams should be allowed spend are sensible, but unrealistic. There'll always be talented creative accountants who can work wonders with the 'miscellaneous' column of the balance sheet.

It is what it is. Sky won't be around forever. Someone else will come along (Bahrain, probably), and the same complaints will be leveled at them.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
domination said:
All else fails so have a go at Sky for potentially taking something that is legal. Which as usual has no evidence whatsoever to support it (tweets from amateur conspiracy theorists with "circumstantial and hearsay evidence" does not count).

Really is getting desperate on here.
Breaking the rule of once a year posts. hmmm. :rolleyes:

The sport has not changed. The testing is appalling so how does a team of clean riders DOMINATE the rest that are not clean?

But lambasting the clinic and those who post here points to not having answers how Sky can do this?

The evidence against Sky is not circumstantial and hearsay evidence, which makes the situation all the more pathetic and those that defend it.....
 
Apr 3, 2016
1,508
0
0
Re: Re:

elduggo said:
kwikki said:
"Jeff"":193feoev][quote="tomycs said:
Tbh if the Clinic accepted the everyone dopes = level playing field argument, that [insert fav team/rider here] defenders like to bring every now and then, this would be a very lonely place.
What gets to me with Sky is the greed, very similar to USPS, it seems to me english speaking folk have an obsession with winning the TdF at least 5 times or they don't matter.
Pretty much.

Personally I think this British/English invasion hasnt done cycling any good.
Yes.

Things were so much cleaner before Sky came along. :rolleyes: I just feel sorry for all the lily-white Dutch, French, Belgian, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, American, German, Scandinavian riders who wouldn't have dreamed of cheating until those nasty British came along and made doping obligatory. Before Sky, cycling was pure. Now it's dirty.

I think your use of the word 'invasion' shows exactly where you are coming from.
I'd be a fan of British Cycling (cycling in/from Britain, as opposed to the organisation). I enjoy those Elite series races that are shown on TV from time to time, and I admire teams like JLT, PedalHeaven, etc), and enjoy watching when they come to Ireland to ride the Ras. I'd also have good time for the vast majority of British pro's.

My only real problem with Team Sky is that they seem to have budgets that no other team can come near. Thats not their fault though and I think you'll get instances of this in every sport (particularly professional sports). If no caps are in place and they can get the funding, I think any team would happily pump the kind of money Sky do, into their team.

And, obviously, its far from the first time this has happened in cycling. At a guess I'd say it started with Tapie with his La Vie Claire team? Though my knowledge of cycling prior to that time is sketchy at best.

Its certainly not a problem caused by the Brits though. Far from it. Doesn't a good portion of Sky's funding come from Italy?

Calls for caps on the amount of money teams should be allowed spend are sensible, but unrealistic. There'll always be talented creative accountants who can work wonders with the 'miscellaneous' column of the balance sheet.

It is what it is. Sky won't be around forever. Someone else will come along (Bahrain, probably), and the same complaints will be leveled at them.[/quote]

I agree. I think things are further compounded by a retraction of the businesses willing to sponsor cycling (teams seem to have to have real troubles these days replacing sponsors). If there were loads loads of generous sponsors teams would even out.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Re:

tomycs said:
Tbh if the Clinic accepted the everyone dopes = level playing field argument, that [insert fav team/rider here] defenders like to bring every now and then, this would be a very lonely place.
What gets to me with Sky is the greed, very similar to USPS, it seems to me english speaking folk have an obsession with winning the TdF at least 5 times or they don't matter.
This is also a fallacy. People respond to the various PEDs better than others. Some could take more epo due to lower HcTs than others with higher HcTs.
 
Re: Re:

kwikki said:
elduggo said:
kwikki said:
"Jeff"":27gqxcj7][quote="tomycs said:
Tbh if the Clinic accepted the everyone dopes = level playing field argument, that [insert fav team/rider here] defenders like to bring every now and then, this would be a very lonely place.
What gets to me with Sky is the greed, very similar to USPS, it seems to me english speaking folk have an obsession with winning the TdF at least 5 times or they don't matter.
Pretty much.

Personally I think this British/English invasion hasnt done cycling any good.
Yes.

Things were so much cleaner before Sky came along. :rolleyes: I just feel sorry for all the lily-white Dutch, French, Belgian, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, American, German, Scandinavian riders who wouldn't have dreamed of cheating until those nasty British came along and made doping obligatory. Before Sky, cycling was pure. Now it's dirty.

I think your use of the word 'invasion' shows exactly where you are coming from.
I'd be a fan of British Cycling (cycling in/from Britain, as opposed to the organisation). I enjoy those Elite series races that are shown on TV from time to time, and I admire teams like JLT, PedalHeaven, etc), and enjoy watching when they come to Ireland to ride the Ras. I'd also have good time for the vast majority of British pro's.

My only real problem with Team Sky is that they seem to have budgets that no other team can come near. Thats not their fault though and I think you'll get instances of this in every sport (particularly professional sports). If no caps are in place and they can get the funding, I think any team would happily pump the kind of money Sky do, into their team.

And, obviously, its far from the first time this has happened in cycling. At a guess I'd say it started with Tapie with his La Vie Claire team? Though my knowledge of cycling prior to that time is sketchy at best.

Its certainly not a problem caused by the Brits though. Far from it. Doesn't a good portion of Sky's funding come from Italy?

Calls for caps on the amount of money teams should be allowed spend are sensible, but unrealistic. There'll always be talented creative accountants who can work wonders with the 'miscellaneous' column of the balance sheet.

It is what it is. Sky won't be around forever. Someone else will come along (Bahrain, probably), and the same complaints will be leveled at them.
I agree. I think things are further compounded by a retraction of the businesses willing to sponsor cycling (teams seem to have to have real troubles these days replacing sponsors). If there were loads loads of generous sponsors teams would even out.[/quote]

Which makes the "the other teams have to step up" position rather pointless. They can't 'step up' for what they cannot afford.

I believe Cookson made the same comment, which is rather dire from the President of the UCI but no surprises.
 
Apr 3, 2016
1,508
0
0
Re: Re:

Benotti69 said:
tomycs said:
Tbh if the Clinic accepted the everyone dopes = level playing field argument, that [insert fav team/rider here] defenders like to bring every now and then, this would be a very lonely place.
What gets to me with Sky is the greed, very similar to USPS, it seems to me english speaking folk have an obsession with winning the TdF at least 5 times or they don't matter.
This is also a fallacy. People respond to the various PEDs better than others. Some could take more epo due to lower HcTs than others with higher HcTs.
And of course only Sky know which potential signers will be super responders :rolleyes:
 
Aug 11, 2012
416
0
0
Re: Re:

elduggo said:
kwikki said:
"Jeff"":1i0jkwvf][quote="tomycs said:
Tbh if the Clinic accepted the everyone dopes = level playing field argument, that [insert fav team/rider here] defenders like to bring every now and then, this would be a very lonely place.
What gets to me with Sky is the greed, very similar to USPS, it seems to me english speaking folk have an obsession with winning the TdF at least 5 times or they don't matter.
Pretty much.

Personally I think this British/English invasion hasnt done cycling any good.
Yes.

Things were so much cleaner before Sky came along. :rolleyes: I just feel sorry for all the lily-white Dutch, French, Belgian, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, American, German, Scandinavian riders who wouldn't have dreamed of cheating until those nasty British came along and made doping obligatory. Before Sky, cycling was pure. Now it's dirty.

I think your use of the word 'invasion' shows exactly where you are coming from.
I'd be a fan of British Cycling (cycling in/from Britain, as opposed to the organisation). I enjoy those Elite series races that are shown on TV from time to time, and I admire teams like JLT, PedalHeaven, etc), and enjoy watching when they come to Ireland to ride the Ras. I'd also have good time for the vast majority of British pro's.

My only real problem with Team Sky is that they seem to have budgets that no other team can come near. Thats not their fault though and I think you'll get instances of this in every sport (particularly professional sports). If no caps are in place and they can get the funding, I think any team would happily pump the kind of money Sky do, into their team.

And, obviously, its far from the first time this has happened in cycling. At a guess I'd say it started with Tapie with his La Vie Claire team? Though my knowledge of cycling prior to that time is sketchy at best.

Its certainly not a problem caused by the Brits though. Far from it. Doesn't a good portion of Sky's funding come from Italy?

Calls for caps on the amount of money teams should be allowed spend are sensible, but unrealistic. There'll always be talented creative accountants who can work wonders with the 'miscellaneous' column of the balance sheet.

It is what it is. Sky won't be around forever. Someone else will come along (Bahrain, probably), and the same complaints will be leveled at them.[/quote]Well I wouldnt say it started back then but that team was indeed a dream team. Difference was they pretty much all rode for themselves. In 1986 they had 5 riders in the top 12 of the Tour and after that if went downhill quickly. Back then cycling was different though. Both LeMond and Hinault didnt really need helpers.

I would say Banesto 1991 looks a lot like Sky now, but without the money, just good development.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Re: Re:

kwikki said:
Benotti69 said:
tomycs said:
Tbh if the Clinic accepted the everyone dopes = level playing field argument, that [insert fav team/rider here] defenders like to bring every now and then, this would be a very lonely place.
What gets to me with Sky is the greed, very similar to USPS, it seems to me english speaking folk have an obsession with winning the TdF at least 5 times or they don't matter.
This is also a fallacy. People respond to the various PEDs better than others. Some could take more epo due to lower HcTs than others with higher HcTs.
And of course only Sky know which potential signers will be super responders :rolleyes:
:rolleyes:

They dont. Check Braislford's chart from way back. Froome was not considered a GT winner in Sky by Brailsford.

:rolleyes:
 
Re: Re:

Benotti69 said:
kwikki said:
Benotti69 said:
tomycs said:
Tbh if the Clinic accepted the everyone dopes = level playing field argument, that [insert fav team/rider here] defenders like to bring every now and then, this would be a very lonely place.
What gets to me with Sky is the greed, very similar to USPS, it seems to me english speaking folk have an obsession with winning the TdF at least 5 times or they don't matter.
This is also a fallacy. People respond to the various PEDs better than others. Some could take more epo due to lower HcTs than others with higher HcTs.
And of course only Sky know which potential signers will be super responders :rolleyes:
:rolleyes:

They dont. Check Braislford's chart from way back. Froome was not considered a GT winner in Sky by Brailsford.

:rolleyes:

More to the point, it's the reason why they test the athlete prior to signing them. So, yes, Sky would know which athlete would respond better to a specific program.
 
Apr 3, 2016
1,508
0
0
@thehog

In which case, maybe it is the sponsors who need to step up. Unfortunately, everything about sport gets corrupted by money.
 
Re:

kwikki said:
@thehog

In which case, maybe it is the sponsors who need to step up. Unfortunately, everything about sport gets corrupted by money.

Well no, the governing body has a responsibility to regulate the sport. Similarly in other sports lower ranked teams obtain first draft pick in the following season etc. Additionally there is revenue sharing.

Sponsorship is something very much different than the governing of the sport.
 
Apr 3, 2016
1,508
0
0
Re: Re:

thehog said:
kwikki said:
@thehog

In which case, maybe it is the sponsors who need to step up. Unfortunately, everything about sport gets corrupted by money.

Well no, the governing body has a responsibility to regulate the sport. Similarly in other sports lower ranked teams obtain first draft pick in the following season etc. Additionally there is revenue sharing.

Sponsorship is something very much different than the governing of the sport.
Except in practice it isn't the UCI who calls the shots. It's ASO....
 
Re: Re:

kwikki said:
thehog said:
kwikki said:
@thehog

In which case, maybe it is the sponsors who need to step up. Unfortunately, everything about sport gets corrupted by money.

Well no, the governing body has a responsibility to regulate the sport. Similarly in other sports lower ranked teams obtain first draft pick in the following season etc. Additionally there is revenue sharing.

Sponsorship is something very much different than the governing of the sport.
Except in practice it isn't the UCI who calls the shots. It's ASO....

Well, again, no. The UCI governs the teams. ASO the races.

You're not striking me as you have a grip on any of this... which is concerning.
 
Re:

tomycs said:
Tbh if the Clinic accepted the everyone dopes = level playing field argument, that [insert fav team/rider here] defenders like to bring every now and then, this would be a very lonely place.
What gets to me with Sky is the greed, very similar to USPS, it seems to me english speaking folk have an obsession with winning the TdF at least 5 times or they don't matter.
Ok, all English speakers are greedy for the tour? show me where every English speaker that has won the tour has said they want to win the tour 5 times?

The floor is yours
 
Apr 3, 2016
1,508
0
0
Re: Re:

thehog said:
kwikki said:
thehog said:
kwikki said:
@thehog

In which case, maybe it is the sponsors who need to step up. Unfortunately, everything about sport gets corrupted by money.

Well no, the governing body has a responsibility to regulate the sport. Similarly in other sports lower ranked teams obtain first draft pick in the following season etc. Additionally there is revenue sharing.

Sponsorship is something very much different than the governing of the sport.
Except in practice it isn't the UCI who calls the shots. It's ASO....

Well, again, no. The UCI governs the teams. ASO the races.

You're not striking me as you have a grip on any of this... which is concerning.

The ASO does not govern the races. It governs it's own races, but because it owns the most prestigious races it also carries the upper hand. This is why the UCI dropped it's proposed reforms. ASO threatened to pull out of the WC, which in effect meant ASO would get to decide who races in its races. Sponsorship, or more precisely the lack of sponsorship, was the main concern of the ASO. There isn't the disconnect that you seem to be suggesting.

You're not striking me as you have a grip on any of this... which is concerning
 
Re: Re:

kwikki said:
thehog said:
kwikki said:
thehog said:
kwikki said:
@thehog

In which case, maybe it is the sponsors who need to step up. Unfortunately, everything about sport gets corrupted by money.

Well no, the governing body has a responsibility to regulate the sport. Similarly in other sports lower ranked teams obtain first draft pick in the following season etc. Additionally there is revenue sharing.

Sponsorship is something very much different than the governing of the sport.
Except in practice it isn't the UCI who calls the shots. It's ASO....

Well, again, no. The UCI governs the teams. ASO the races.

You're not striking me as you have a grip on any of this... which is concerning.

The ASO does not govern the races. It governs it's own races, but because it owns the most prestigious races it also carries the upper hand. This is why the UCI dropped it's proposed reforms. ASO threatened to pull out of the WC, which in effect meant ASO would get to decide who races in its races. Sponsorship, or more precisely the lack of sponsorship, was the main concern of the ASO. There isn't the disconnect that you seem to be suggesting.

You're not striking me as you have a grip on any of this... which is concerning
ASO along with RCS agreed to accept the ProTour teams plus 3 wild cards. The UCI decide which teams (under their conditions) form part of the ProTour.

You'll also note that during the Froome incident on Ventoux the UCI race jury made the decision on the time adjustment (with Brailsford but that is another matter) not ASO.

Thus is plainly obvious to see the UCI governs the teams and their conduct.

So, yes, my grip is firmly attached on this one :)
 
Apr 3, 2016
1,508
0
0
So you are citing a race incident being decided by the UCI as an example of team management :confused:

You've not really thought this through.

The point is that the UCI governs by consensus, and the consensus includes the ASO (and RCS obviously) as well as the billionaire team owners/sponsors. Without these people the UCI doesn't exist.
 
Re:

kwikki said:
So you are citing a race incident being decided by the UCI as an example of team management :confused:

You've not really thought this through.

The point is that the UCI governs by consensus, and the consensus includes the ASO (and RCS obviously) as well as the billionaire team owners/sponsors. Without these people the UCI doesn't exist.
Well, again, no the UCI exists to govern the teams & its riders (you deleted that part). Its plain and simple.

The UCI could in practice bar a riders or a team from competing in a ASO race, it does so through doping and other conduct - Yates this year could not compete due to a doping ban issued by the UCI (via CADF) and not via ASO.

That's how simple this is, not sure why you're trying to make it anymore complex than presented.

Further to this point, the reason why there is some calls to have teams "capped" is that a large well budgeted team like Sky can afford to buy riders who then do not make a Tour or GT team. On any other team those riders could be helping in a weaker team (or in theory be a leader). For the overall good of the sport that may not be a good thing.

So thus far you've told us, the teams need to step, the sponsors need to step and ASO now needs to step up, anyone else you need to step up? :lol:
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS