Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

[spalco]

Brailsford is a fu*king hater! May 2011, CF=Chris Froome

http://twitpic.com/cvo8va

Pro Conti podium potential...such a hater.

Tip to Digger for RT'ing this and to vetoo for the link.

Try to keep up, this has been discussed a number of times here before. The actual placement of the riders on that graph was made by the Cycle Sport (or whatever magazine it was) journalist who wrote the article, not Brailsford.

 

[Race Radio]

It is certainly possible Sky are doping. But so far we have seen none of what we saw 10 years ago

No teammates, staff, or wives talking about doping
No bags of drugs and syringes being found
No positives
No 6.8 w/kg
No Ferrari......sorry, Leinders does not come close Ferrari
No Bruyneel

It is understandable that Walsh, and others, take this position.

 

[observer]

It is certainly possible Sky are doping. But so far we have seen none of what we saw 10 years ago

No teammates, staff, or wives talking about doping
No bags of drugs and syringes being found
No positives
No 6.8 w/kg
No Ferrari......sorry, Leinders does not come close Ferrari
No Bruyneel

It is understandable that Walsh, and others, take this position.

Anyone with half a brain could look at the mistakes of the past and close out the inner circle so leaks are few and far between. Its probably year 3 of the Sky doping programme if it exists. And that's about the time the leaks started coming out. Now that Wiggins may be on the outer, he may be the weak link, but would he incriminate himself? Probably not, might cost him a knighthood.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Try to keep up, this has been discussed a number of times here before. The actual placement of the riders on that graph was made by the Cycle Sport (or whatever magazine it was) journalist who wrote the article, not Brailsford.

Hence the fat contract extension?

It is certainly possible Sky are doping. But so far we have seen none of what we saw 10 years ago.

So, no riders transformations Armstrong himself would be jealous of?

No teammates, staff, or wives talking about doping
No bags of drugs and syringes being found

Correct.

No positives

Correct.

No 6.8 w/kg

Did you miss the TT's?

But, let me ask you this: is it okay if riders dope to say 6.2w/k, the supposedly magic number"?

No Ferrari......sorry, Leinders does not come close Ferrari.

We all know Leinders excels in saddle sores.

No Bruyneel.

Because, doping started and ended with the downfall of Armstrong and Bruyneel!
Sean Yates approves this message.
Casper Jeppesen too.
Cookson's son too.

It is understandable that Walsh, and others, take this position.

Yes, correct. His fanboy act is a bit strange though.

So, let me ask you a question, why is Kimmage much more suspect of team SKY?

 

[Digger]

Hence the fat contract extension?


So, no riders transformations Armstrong himself would be jealous of?
Correct.
Correct.
Did you miss the TT's?

But, let me ask you this: is it okay if riders dope to say 6.2w/k, the supposedly magic number"?
We all know Leinders excels in saddle sores.

Because, doping started and ended with the downfall of Armstrong and Bruyneel!
Sean Yates approves this message.
Casper Jeppesen too.
Cookson's son too.

Yes, correct. His fanboy act is a bit strange though.

So, let me ask you a question, why is Kimmage much more suspect of team SKY?

Good post - shame so many people think doping went with lance...and that it's now so much better...Wiggins' figures, Nibali's and Froome's figures are not evidence of clean cycling.

 

[Digger]

Hence the fat contract extension?


So, no riders transformations Armstrong himself would be jealous of?
Correct.
Correct.
Did you miss the TT's?

But, let me ask you this: is it okay if riders dope to say 6.2w/k, the supposedly magic number"?
We all know Leinders excels in saddle sores.

Because, doping started and ended with the downfall of Armstrong and Bruyneel!
Sean Yates approves this message.
Casper Jeppesen too.
Cookson's son too.

Yes, correct. His fanboy act is a bit strange though.

So, let me ask you a question, why is Kimmage much more suspect of team SKY?

One other thing - people from the inner circle are talking.
As regards Kimmage, he can see the crap. And I admire him for it. I think in time Walsh will be embarassed by his current position.

 

[spalco]

Hence the fat contract extension?

I'm not saying the placing of Froome on that graph was inaccurate at the time, but it wasn't Brailsford's placing.

 

[Froome19]

One other thing - people from the inner circle are talking.

What does that mean?

 

[JimmyFingers]

It is certainly possible Sky are doping. But so far we have seen none of what we saw 10 years ago

No teammates, staff, or wives talking about doping
No bags of drugs and syringes being found
No positives
No 6.8 w/kg
No Ferrari......sorry, Leinders does not come close Ferrari
No Bruyneel

It is understandable that Walsh, and others, take this position.

This. So far the innuendo on Sky amounts to scotch mist, a fraction of what built over the years with Lance, riders improving against the backdrop of previously top riders like Contador and Schleck in seeming decline (may be premature on Contador). Suspicion is all well and good, but outright condemnation is over the top IMO.

But it will continue, and I'll just continue to swim against the tide

 

[blackcat]

What does that mean?

means, they have their eyes open and are not blind.

Sky are cookin.

like meth in Fresno

 

[blackcat]

This. So far the innuendo on Sky amounts to scotch mist, a fraction of what built over the years with Lance, riders improving against the backdrop of previously top riders like Contador and Schleck in seeming decline (may be premature on Contador). Suspicion is all well and good, but outright condemnation is over the top IMO.

But it will continue, and I'll just continue to swim against the tide

did you see the Armstrong chamois sniffers for the better part of a decade.

Hope Rides Again...

come on.

 

[samerics]

You're calling David Walsh a paid shrill? Where's the respect? The man potentially sacrificed his career to bring down Lance Armstrong and save cycling. I trust his judgment. It rings true with my judgment. With his knowledge it would be very dangerous for a team to have him embedded with them. Sky look to be clean and he's courageous enough to admit it. He wasn't always sure, but now he seems to be - adding to his credibility.

This. You guys are laughable. Walsh is a hero when he brings down Lance after digging the dirt. This time he can't find the dirt, and he's a lot closer than any of us and yet because he doesn't come up with it suddenly he's a shill? Pathetic, you have nothing at all other than half baked theories and prejudices and absolutely no inside knowledge. This is a forum. Even Race Radio, who was highly respected at the time because of his closer insight into Armstrong, is mocked. Read his last post, it simply uses common sense.

 

[King Boonen]

So, let me ask you a question, why is Kimmage much more suspect of team SKY?

Because Kimmage needs to make money too?

 

[mikehammer67]

Because Kimmage needs to make money too?

because kimmage is not compromised by his employment status

 

[JimmyFingers]

did you see the Armstrong chamois sniffers for the better part of a decade.

Hope Rides Again...

come on.

But as was pointed out, things are very different at Sky. Time will judge

 

[Chaddy]

And is he that suspicious? He's right that there are some questions that need to be answered but he's not come out and called anyone a doper which you expect he would.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Kimmage doesn't like Wiggins at all. Been that way ever since Wiggins refused to give him access during the 2010 Tour.

People here will tell you he had something to hide, but given his performance in 2010 the only thing he was hiding was how flipping sh!te he was.

But Kimmage has never made any outright accusations, even saying there's nothing to suggest Wiggins won his TdF by nefarious means, but he has said there are answers needed to the hiring of Leinders in particular, which he certainly is right about.

 

[mikehammer67]

and did walsh ask the questions

about leinders? i doubt it

 

[JimmyFingers]

Have you read his interviews?

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

This. You guys are laughable. Walsh is a hero when he brings down Lance after digging the dirt. This time he can't find the dirt, and he's a lot closer than any of us and yet because he doesn't come up with it suddenly he's a shill? Pathetic, you have nothing at all other than half baked theories and prejudices and absolutely no inside knowledge. This is a forum. Even Race Radio, who was highly respected at the time because of his closer insight into Armstrong, is mocked. Read his last post, it simply uses common sense.

Dont you wonder what Walsh's thoughts were when he saw the Bradster riding alongside the Dopester in the 2009 Tour?

Walsh, and dont forget Ballester, he seems to be forgotten by a lot of peeps, did a good journalistic work on Armstrong. Does that give him a free pass for the rest of his journalistic life?

He looks to be reporting on Sky, instead of the journalistic way he approached Armstrong, perhaps he is convinced from the get to Sky are clean hence his 'fanboyish' writings on them.

Because Kimmage needs to make money too?

Last time I heard, he didnt have a job any more?

 

[doolols]

Don't you think that if Walsh found evidence or heresay about doping on Sky, he would report it? What a story to end all stories. Imagine the book sales: "How I brought down British Cycling". Because that's what it would be, so inextricably linked are Sky and British Cycling. He didn't report anything because there was nothing to report. If he had the guts to confront someone with the power of Armstrong (at the time), he wouldn't think twice about taking on Brailsford.

And my point about Busche? Yes, I did see the race. And the reason for mentioning him was the fact that he was in the breakaway, and presumably working harder than Froome with his whole team around him, so putting 4 seconds into a (presumably tired) breakaway member and an off-colour Contador makes it less of a superhuman feat.

Some clinic members are obviously desperate to find a reason for Sky, and Froome's, success, but they're so blinkered they can't think of anything other than doping. There's no evidence, there's no positives, there's no anonymous gossip (except from uninformed people on here), and there's no superhuman results. But still, it's obvious they're doping, isn't it?

 

[JimmyFingers]

Ah so Walsh joins the list of Sky 'fanboys', whose opinion can be dismissed out of hand as an irrelevance. Either that or he's on the payroll, like a few posters here apparently, me included (as has been accused in the past). You shouldn't have to go to such lengths to counter differing opinions, everyone's is valid, especially a seasoned and experienced journalist like Walsh.

 

[del1962]

Don't you think that if Walsh found evidence or heresay about doping on Sky, he would report it? What a story to end all stories. Imagine the book sales: "How I brought down British Cycling". Because that's what it would be, so inextricably linked are Sky and British Cycling. He didn't report anything because there was nothing to report. If he had the guts to confront someone with the power of Armstrong (at the time), he wouldn't think twice about taking on Brailsford.

And my point about Busche? Yes, I did see the race. And the reason for mentioning him was the fact that he was in the breakaway, and presumably working harder than Froome with his whole team around him, so putting 4 seconds into a (presumably tired) breakaway member and an off-colour Contador makes it less of a superhuman feat.

Some clinic members are obviously desperate to find a reason for Sky, and Froome's, success, but they're so blinkered they can't think of anything other than doping. There's no evidence, there's no positives, there's no anonymous gossip (except from uninformed people on here), and there's no superhuman results. But still, it's obvious they're doping, isn't it?

Aslo he took on Roche in Ireland.

 

[Miburo]

And is he that suspicious? He's right that there are some questions that need to be answered but he's not come out and called anyone a doper which you expect he would.

contador never called anyone a doper, valverde aswell

don't really get your point?

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

You shouldn't have to go to such lengths to counter differing opinions, everyone's is valid, especially a seasoned and experienced journalist like Walsh.

So you have not witnessed a different approach from Walsh towards Sky in comparison to the dopester? Must be just me then.