Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

Page 98 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
armchairclimber said:
Sure is. The Clinic meeds to restore its own credibility. It has become the personal playground of a comedy troll. The issue of doping takes the baclk seat whilst some peacocks strut their stuff.

That ain't cool, bro.

If the issue of doping is going to be tackled, then tackle it with some intellectual rigour and actually look at what the evidence is that the "other" side are presenting. Then pick it apart instead of trying to score points in a willy jousting exercise.

Just a friggin thought like.
Some free advice. Such posts will work better under a new username rather than 1 long ago outed as a troll account.
 
gooner said:
He has interviewed Brailsford, Wiggins, spoken to Bobby Julich and Tim Kerrison and will interview Froome for this coming issue of The Sunday Times.

Isn't that enough Q and A?
Problem is when he asked Wiggins the Landis question, Wiggo feed him a lie. Walsh bought it and printed it with no fact checking.

Sad for a journalist as esteemed as Walsh.

But I guess he'll make millions of the Wiggins tell all book and that's all that matters.

Journalists write for cash! :rolleyes:

Yay!
 
The Hitch said:
Some free advice. Such posts will work better under a new username rather than 1 long ago outed as a troll account.
Don't be dense Hitch. I'm no more a troll than you are. And, unlike you, I don't just make things up and attribute them to another poster. You, incorrectly, asserted that on these forums I had categorically stated that Froome was clean.
I have stated that Wiggins is clean because I'm in a position to do that. With Froome, not so.
 
JimmyFingers said:
or maybe he's just better informed.

Think Walsh needs defending, considering how quickly he gets thrown on the fire. IT shouldn't be 'you don't agree with us, we will tear you down'.

It's good he has an open mind
On the contrary, Walsh has proved he is far worse informed than many in the clinic considering he has in defense of sky come out with some real bs, like that sky bought all the best riders and therefore should have been expected to dominate the tour like that.

this can and has been disproved by anyone who has paid attention to cycling over the last few years.

Walsh therefore is not being thrown under the bus for changing opinion, he is being rightly criticized for making a very poor case in their favour.

Doesn't matter who you are. If your arguments are weak you should expect to get called out on it.
 
Jan 20, 2013
897
0
0
armchairclimber said:
Don't be dense Hitch. I'm no more a troll than you are. And, unlike you, I don't just make things up and attribute them to another poster. You, incorrectly, asserted that on these forums I had categorically stated that Froome was clean.
I have stated that Wiggins is clean because I'm in a position to do that. With Froome, not so.
Now come on get your terminology correct Wiggins is most likely "cleaner" than Froome. And I say most likely, as how can you know? No one on here does except if Wiggins himself were to pay a visit and tells all.
 
Why is this thread still going on?
Race met porte for lunch and saw he loves the sport...why would someone like that dope?
As for Walsh, he didn't know about the Landis/Wiggins story until shortly before the interview with Wiggins, and also wasn't prepared for the follow up questions when it was clear Wiggins had again lied...other than that he did a super job in that interview...really embarassing.

I must say in all seriousness, Hog takes the p*** a bit, but he is putting most of the rest on here to shame...he is calling it as it is...Sky are a joke right now, and it's a shame that people who went after lance so much are not willing to also call it as it is...
 
Apr 20, 2012
6,321
0
0
Taxus4a said:
I think so.

I have readed this last interview before, and the name of the kenian doctor, This has more sense.

It is not a big mistake misunderstand: I ask at the same time to the doctor... that he asked to the doctor of the blod test of the UCI...but it is a journalist that does not a lot about how cycling works to do that mistake
It only contradicts everything you have written about the bilharzithingie, and Froomes interviews too. So, indeed, no big mistake at all.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
gooner said:
He has interviewed Brailsford, Wiggins, spoken to Bobby Julich and Tim Kerrison and will interview Froome for this coming issue of The Sunday Times.

Isn't that enough Q and A?
It is not the quantity of Q & A it is the quality and Walsh has not produced the quality because he has not properly researched Sky and its personel.
 
Dec 30, 2011
3,547
0
0
Digger said:
Why is this thread still going on?
Race met porte for lunch and saw he loves the sport...why would someone like that dope?
As for Walsh, he didn't know about the Landis/Wiggins story until shortly before the interview with Wiggins, and also wasn't prepared for the follow up questions when it was clear Wiggins had again lied...other than that he did a super job in that interview...really embarassing.

I must say in all seriousness, Hog takes the p*** a bit, but he is putting most of the rest on here to shame...he is calling it as it is...Sky are a joke right now, and it's a shame that people who went after lance so much are not willing to also call it as it is...
I wonder why that is?

And RR meeting Porte for lunch is more useful to this thread than the perceptions of posters who are clearly biased and describe things how they see it with their limited scope of view.
 
Jul 17, 2012
5,303
0
0
Digger said:
Why is this thread still going on?
Race met porte for lunch and saw he loves the sport...why would someone like that dope?
As for Walsh, he didn't know about the Landis/Wiggins story until shortly before the interview with Wiggins, and also wasn't prepared for the follow up questions when it was clear Wiggins had again lied...other than that he did a super job in that interview...really embarassing.

I must say in all seriousness, Hog takes the p*** a bit, but he is putting most of the rest on here to shame...he is calling it as it is...Sky are a joke right now, and it's a shame that people who went after lance so much are not willing to also call it as it is...
You're right, lets throw them all under the bus, anyone that sees things from a different perspective, has a different opinion, despite the fact they are closer and more informed than most or all of the posters on this forum, or that previously they have been champions of the fight against doping in the sport. Clearly they are either delusional or paid for, now blending in with the black and blue of the Sky machine.

We shouldn't have opinions, there is only one truth, the clinic 12 truth, all others should burn, right? Sometimes this place resembles a lynch mob and all the justice that entails.

And hog talks utter rubbish to get a reaction, called a troll by those that agree with the Sky are doping line. Plus he lies repeatedly through his teeth. If he's the one you want as your hero, go for it. Just further devalues this place.
 
JimmyFingers said:
You're right, lets throw them all under the bus, anyone that sees things from a different perspective, has a different opinion, despite the fact they are closer and more informed than most or all of the posters on this forum, or that previously they have been champions of the fight against doping in the sport. Clearly they are either delusional or paid for, now blending in with the black and blue of the Sky machine.

We shouldn't have opinions, there is only one truth, the clinic 12 truth, all others should burn, right? Sometimes this place resembles a lynch mob and all the justice that entails.

And hog talks utter rubbish to get a reaction, called a troll by those that agree with the Sky are doping line. Plus he lies repeatedly through his teeth. If he's the one you want as your hero, go for it. Just further devalues this place.
+100000

They have poor argument sometimes, just try to put pressure with the fact that in the current moment they are more people. I think we are just trying to analize into this sport with arguments.
 
Fearless Greg Lemond said:
It only contradicts everything you have written about the bilharzithingie, and Froomes interviews too. So, indeed, no big mistake at all.
Contradicts?? It has not contradicts anything I said, his bilharzia was discover in november 2010, so It is what I said, and Froome always said the same, just in one of the interviews a journalist could have change a little his words, no more.
 
thehog said:
Problem is when he asked Wiggins the Landis question, Wiggo feed him a lie. Walsh bought it and printed it with no fact checking.


Yay!
If Walsh would be in other opinion, would you say the same?

Wiggins is for me quite naive and crazy. He hate all the doppers, he has been always like that, a freak of antidoping, as well there are freaks of "Star Wars" or the "Lord of the rings", so he did that with Landis and give him zero credibility.

When the evidence with Lance was total, he did the same with him... in Spain, a lot of people as Rubiera, Samu or Contador (he changed his words little bit later) didnt.

Anyway this is a Froome talk only thread, so sorry about, but he mentioned him, so I consider right to clarify my point.
 
Taxus4a said:
If Walsh would be in other opinion, would you say the same?

Wiggins is for me quite naive and crazy. He hate all the doppers, he has been always like that, a freak of antidoping, as well there are freaks of "Star Wash" or the "Lord of the rings", so he did that with Landis and give him zero credibility.

When the evidence with Lance was total, he did the same with him... in Spain, a lot of people as Rubiera, Samu or Contador (he changed his words little bit later) didnt.

Anyway this is a Froome talk only thread, so sorry about, but he mentioned him, so I consider right to clarify my point.
I think Taxus4a should go find a Spanish Clinic and converse in his own 'dopper' 'Star Wash' language.
 
Cycle Chic said:
I think Taxus4a should go find a Spanish Clinic and converse in his own 'dopper' 'Star Wash' language.
Sorry about my typographical error

I use to do it in spanish as well

I will take care on it, but in english I am going to have some mistakes.

But if you understand the message, I hope you write to comment the contents, nor the shape.
 
Taxus4a said:
Sorry about my typographical error

I use to do it in spanish as well

I will take care on it, but in english I am going to have some mistakes.

But if you understand the message, I hope you write to comment the contents, nor the shape.
It's actually an interesting question.

What's the general opinion on Spanish forums of Contador doping and Froome (potential) doping?
 
thehog said:
It's actually an interesting question.

What's the general opinion on Spanish forums of Contador doping and Froome (potential) doping?
I can only speak of Parlamento Ciclista, where the overwhelming majority thinks that Contador is a doper, Sky is a farce and Froome is ridiculous even by Sky's standards.
 
Apr 20, 2012
6,321
0
0
Taxus4a said:
Contradicts?? It has not contradicts anything I said, his bilharzia was discover in november 2010, so It is what I said, and Froome always said the same, just in one of the interviews a journalist could have change a little his words, no more.
Yes, contradicts.

So what is the story?

a: Froome tested by the UCI at the end of 2010 in Kenya
b: Froome tested in Kenya by a doctor
c: Froome tested when he signed a contract for Sky
 
Jan 20, 2013
897
0
0
Taxus4a said:
Sorry about my typographical error

I use to do it in spanish as well

I will take care on it, but in english I am going to have some mistakes.

But if you understand the message, I hope you write to comment the contents, nor the shape.
Taxus4a. Thank you for the post. Your translations is very good. I don't think I could have done the same in Spanish!

As for the content I remain incredulous to the supposed natural talents of Froome. His main transformation has come under Sky/BC banner. How relevant this is I don't fully understand, but have my suspicions.

It appears there may be an unpleasant trend emerging in sport today, where the relatively ordinary can be transformed into world beater. I think this could well be what we are witnessing in the case of Froome.
Froome's level of transformation by anyone's estimations must be viewed, even by the most moderate sceptics amongst us, to be suspicious.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY