Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

Anyone who seriously believes there's no incentive for an investigative journalist to go after SKY in Britain is beyond mental. As I've said many times, Murdoch is arguably one of the most hated men in Britain. His media empire only stretches so far, and there are serious rivals in both broadcast (BT, BBC) and print (Mail, Mirror, Guardian) as well as independents (Huffington Post) who have every incentive and would benefit directly from an expose. Even the political class would love to see News Corp undermined in any way possible.

When you talk about cycling as a niche sport and say 'people don't care about it' you have a point, but not the one you think. No media outlet (except sky) would do anything to protect cycling's reputation if it thought they could make even the smallest amount of capital by being the ones to crack Team Sky. They've seen Lance, they know Walsh and Kimmage came out of that with a triumphant validation of their persistence in the face of a well resourced and well connected protagonist. Again, it's against all logic that none of these outlets would want to hurt SKY, Murdoch and News Corp. It would undermine all of their sport business, which is a huge part of their company. I don't think you can underestimate how big - if they are - a doping or systemic attempt to cheat ANY sport directly would hurt SKY's brand.

You do know that cycling is basically a minor sport at best. Some media rival of Murdoch isn't going to waste manpower and money on cycling when others have already proven that cycling is like all the other sports, a cesspool of PED's, shady and dodgy happenings etc etc. It hasn't changed since Murdoch got involved in the sport and it hasn't changed since Cookson rode in to town, as the band Talking Heads said in their song, Once In A lifetime:

Same as it ever was...
Same as it ever was...
Same as it ever was...
Same as it ever was...

Yep. Same as it ever was..

Heppelt is blowing the doors of Russian doping, IAAF doping/corruption and we have the FIFA corruption being exposed and most of the world is going meh! Why would anyone give 2 figs about a sport everyone thinks is full of dope!!!

 

[argel]

I don't think you're grasping what I'm saying there - yes, cycling as a sport is small fry. I agreed with that.

But James Murdoch, the heir to the Murdoch empire, is the driving force behind Team Sky. Associating him directly with a systematic attempt to cheat in Amy sport - and associating a brand that makes billions from sport - is a big prize for some. You also seriously underestimate the nature of the hatred of the Murdoch family here. People detest them, people protest and attack them at any opportunity. It doesn't matter if they were fiddling the world championship of tiddlywinks, it matters that it would be more tangible evidence that the Murdoch media empire was a force for ill - and the potential benefits of breaking their sporting monopoly are huge to BT, the BBC and other broadcasters and newspapers.

 

[BYOP88]

Re:

I don't think you're grasping what I'm saying there - yes, cycling as a sport is small fry. I agreed with that.

But James Murdoch, the heir to the Murdoch empire, is the driving force behind Team Sky. Associating him directly with a systematic attempt to cheat in Amy sport - and associating a brand that makes billions from sport - is a big prize for some. You also seriously underestimate the nature of the hatred of the Murdoch family here. People detest them, people protest and attack them at any opportunity. It doesn't matter if they were fiddling the world championship of tiddlywinks, it matters that it would be more tangible evidence that the Murdoch media empire was a force for ill - and the potential benefits of breaking their sporting monopoly are huge to BT, the BBC and other broadcasters and newspapers.

Murdoch seemed to survive that phone hacking scandal. If that didn't take him down, his son being the driving force behind a sports team in a sport that is full of doping isn't going to bring him down.

 

[pastronef]

power, money, whistleblowers, dangers, public opinion etc etc

wow
I almost wished good boys Nibali/Aru or Quintana won this Tour, not to hear about all those baaad things.

 

[The Principal Sheep]

Re: Re:

I don't think you're grasping what I'm saying there - yes, cycling as a sport is small fry. I agreed with that.

But James Murdoch, the heir to the Murdoch empire, is the driving force behind Team Sky. Associating him directly with a systematic attempt to cheat in Amy sport - and associating a brand that makes billions from sport - is a big prize for some. You also seriously underestimate the nature of the hatred of the Murdoch family here. People detest them, people protest and attack them at any opportunity. It doesn't matter if they were fiddling the world championship of tiddlywinks, it matters that it would be more tangible evidence that the Murdoch media empire was a force for ill - and the potential benefits of breaking their sporting monopoly are huge to BT, the BBC and other broadcasters and newspapers.

Murdoch seemed to survive that phone hacking scandal. If that didn't take him down, his son being the driving force behind a sports team in a sport that is full of doping isn't going to bring him down.

Exactly, of all the skeletons hanging in Rupert's walk in closet the doping of sky won't cost him a blink of sleep.

 

[Benotti69]

Why would you take on Murdoch over something so tiny as cycling that the general public only get to read when there is a doping story?

Also James Murdoch is not the face of TeamSky and he can easily claim that he has nothing to do with the team apart from giving them sponsor money.

This too,

Exactly, of all the skeletons hanging in Rupert's walk in closet the doping of sky won't cost him a blink of sleep.

 

[Benotti69]

power, money, whistleblowers, dangers, public opinion etc etc

wow
I almost wished good boys Nibali/Aru or Quintana won this Tour, not to hear about all those baaad things.

So sorry to hear that you are forced to read the clinic. Boy you must have done some bad stuff to suffer that

 

[pastronef]

power, money, whistleblowers, dangers, public opinion etc etc

wow
I almost wished good boys Nibali/Aru or Quintana won this Tour, not to hear about all those baaad things.

So sorry to hear that you are forced to read the clinic. Boy you must have done some bad stuff to suffer that

I was ironic, forgot to put those: and so on eheh

I dont suffer at all. I´ll have a beer like the Dawg a few minutes ago

 

[argel]

Re: Re:

I don't think you're grasping what I'm saying there - yes, cycling as a sport is small fry. I agreed with that.

But James Murdoch, the heir to the Murdoch empire, is the driving force behind Team Sky. Associating him directly with a systematic attempt to cheat in Amy sport - and associating a brand that makes billions from sport - is a big prize for some. You also seriously underestimate the nature of the hatred of the Murdoch family here. People detest them, people protest and attack them at any opportunity. It doesn't matter if they were fiddling the world championship of tiddlywinks, it matters that it would be more tangible evidence that the Murdoch media empire was a force for ill - and the potential benefits of breaking their sporting monopoly are huge to BT, the BBC and other broadcasters and newspapers.

Murdoch seemed to survive that phone hacking scandal. If that didn't take him down, his son being the driving force behind a sports team in a sport that is full of doping isn't going to bring him down.

Exactly, of all the skeletons hanging in Rupert's walk in closet the doping of sky won't cost him a blink of sleep.

But it did. He was forced to close one if his biggest brands (NOTW) and go before MPs to explain his role. His company came under massive scrutiny and people went to jail. Yes, they will go on as a company, but every small scale scandal hurts their image, turns public opinion against them and opens them up to further scrutiny.

The point isn't the direct consequence of being exposed, even if JM wriggled out (as let's be honest, he would). It'd be the potential consequences for SKY as a brand, being directly implicated as a sponsor of chetaing in sports would be disastrous. It might seriously give impetus to put greater restrictions on SKY's monopolisation of various sports.

Anyway regardless, it's just an unbelievably selective and biased argument to think that nobody would want to take down SKY or Murdoch or anyone involved with this, given their number of openly hostile enemies in the public eye. There is plenty of incentive for people to do so.

Oh and Ross Tucker is a blowhard.

 

[argel]

I work in a capacity where I analyse Ross Tucker's output on the NFL. He is a blowhard.

Anyway, I didn't say one person testing positive in sky, I said evidence of a systemic doping attempt. Thats what is constantly levelled at them from the clinic. You're now making excuses why people don't want to do a proper investigation despite massive skepticism from within and outside of cycling, the same type of skepticism that provoked numerous rumours, investigations and outright accusations against Lance

 

[BYOP88]

Re:

I work in a capacity where I analyse Ross Tucker's output on the NFL. He is a blowhard.

Anyway, I didn't say one person testing positive in sky, I said evidence of a systemic doping attempt. Thats what is constantly levelled at them from the clinic. You're now making excuses why people don't want to do a proper investigation despite massive skepticism from within and outside of cycling, the same type of skepticism that provoked numerous rumours, investigations and outright accusations against Lance

If you look at all the recent busts in cycling, Festina, OP, Oil for Drugs none of these were by the UCI or the national anti-doping bodies, they were operations by the police, hell the UCI weren't going to do anything regarding Armstrong it took the feds to bring him down.

Lets not forget that when Dirty Bertie was informed of his positive, the head of the UCI told him to not say anything and it would get sorted, luckily some journalists didn't want to keep the story quiet.

EDIT:Remind me when Cofidis stuff happened was that the (French)anti doping authorities or was it the police? I remember Millar being taken away by the French police.

 

[Poursuivant]

Re: Osymetric Chain Ring

Froome's literally unbelievable performance once again this year has lured me out of retirement. I'm sorry if this point has been discussed to death in my absence, but I have searched the forum and can't find anything on it. My curiosity was piqued yesterday by Paul Sherwen's commentary about Froome's use of the elliptical chain ring, describing the advantages it offers and saying it was "banned by the sponsors" and that no one else in the peloton but Froome was "allowed" to use it. If this is true (and I suspect it is), why does Chris get THIS special treatment? I know the Osymetric chain ring probably adds only yet another "marginal gain," but I was amused to see his relatively ineffective pedaling today on Geraint's conventional bike.

Thanks. Nice to see y'all again.

Susan

Oh dear.

 

[Poursuivant]

Re:

Well the descent should make people angry.

He got 5% of his total time advantage in this tour from 1 descent, yet sky's entire PR machine has been mobilised to pretend that Froome has always ridden half Armstrongs speed up mountains and has won all 3 tours by simply being valentino rossi on a bicycle.

But why would that make anyone angry?

 

[Poursuivant]

Re: Re:

Anyone who seriously believes there's no incentive for an investigative journalist to go after SKY in Britain is beyond mental. As I've said many times, Murdoch is arguably one of the most hated men in Britain. His media empire only stretches so far, and there are serious rivals in both broadcast (BT, BBC) and print (Mail, Mirror, Guardian) as well as independents (Huffington Post) who have every incentive and would benefit directly from an expose. Even the political class would love to see News Corp undermined in any way possible.

When you talk about cycling as a niche sport and say 'people don't care about it' you have a point, but not the one you think. No media outlet (except sky) would do anything to protect cycling's reputation if it thought they could make even the smallest amount of capital by being the ones to crack Team Sky. They've seen Lance, they know Walsh and Kimmage came out of that with a triumphant validation of their persistence in the face of a well resourced and well connected protagonist. Again, it's against all logic that none of these outlets would want to hurt SKY, Murdoch and News Corp. It would undermine all of their sport business, which is a huge part of their company. I don't think you can underestimate how big - if they are - a doping or systemic attempt to cheat ANY sport directly would hurt SKY's brand.

In the sporting world Froome is a small fish. In the sporting world Lance was a small fish. For Walsh and Kimmage it was personal. For Kimmage this was the sport he loved. For Walsh it was because Armstrong claimed Walsh was going after him for a deceased son. Kimmage still calls the doping out. But his paper is not going to fund an in depth long investigation to go after an athlete who must dont really care about and when asked are they clean or not, would probably answer, not.

Also, whistleblowers dont get rich blowing the whistle and the little money they make does not compensate for the hardship they endure.

If someone wanted to make their name busting dopers there are much bigger sports to go after. The general public, bar UK Sky fans already think the sport is full of doping.

Lance was always a "big" fish, to claim he was just some athlete is top class revisionism. He transcended the sport, because of his 'personality."

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

Anyone who seriously believes there's no incentive for an investigative journalist to go after SKY in Britain is beyond mental. As I've said many times, Murdoch is arguably one of the most hated men in Britain. His media empire only stretches so far, and there are serious rivals in both broadcast (BT, BBC) and print (Mail, Mirror, Guardian) as well as independents (Huffington Post) who have every incentive and would benefit directly from an expose. Even the political class would love to see News Corp undermined in any way possible.

When you talk about cycling as a niche sport and say 'people don't care about it' you have a point, but not the one you think. No media outlet (except sky) would do anything to protect cycling's reputation if it thought they could make even the smallest amount of capital by being the ones to crack Team Sky. They've seen Lance, they know Walsh and Kimmage came out of that with a triumphant validation of their persistence in the face of a well resourced and well connected protagonist. Again, it's against all logic that none of these outlets would want to hurt SKY, Murdoch and News Corp. It would undermine all of their sport business, which is a huge part of their company. I don't think you can underestimate how big - if they are - a doping or systemic attempt to cheat ANY sport directly would hurt SKY's brand.

In the sporting world Froome is a small fish. In the sporting world Lance was a small fish. For Walsh and Kimmage it was personal. For Kimmage this was the sport he loved. For Walsh it was because Armstrong claimed Walsh was going after him for a deceased son. Kimmage still calls the doping out. But his paper is not going to fund an in depth long investigation to go after an athlete who must dont really care about and when asked are they clean or not, would probably answer, not.

Also, whistleblowers dont get rich blowing the whistle and the little money they make does not compensate for the hardship they endure.

If someone wanted to make their name busting dopers there are much bigger sports to go after. The general public, bar UK Sky fans already think the sport is full of doping.

Lance was always a "big" fish, to claim he was just some athlete is top class revisionism. He transcended the sport, because of his 'personality."

Armstrong was a big fish in a tiny sport. I was talking about the world of sport. Armstrong was a small fish.

 

[Poursuivant]

Re:

I work in a capacity where I analyse Ross Tucker's output on the NFL. He is a blowhard.

Anyway, I didn't say one person testing positive in sky, I said evidence of a systemic doping attempt. Thats what is constantly levelled at them from the clinic. You're now making excuses why people don't want to do a proper investigation despite massive skepticism from within and outside of cycling, the same type of skepticism that provoked numerous rumours, investigations and outright accusations against Lance

Don't you know? Sky gave Froome their secret doping drug that they gave to Wiggins, even though they were going to not offer him a contract in 2011? Lol, rofl, rolleyes etc, you poor deluded soul. Also, even though he was leaving the team, and he was a donkey, they gave him this secret drug, but then after that was a roaring success, they then gave him a motor, didn't you see his attack up Ventoux, the YouTube sensation?! (Disclaimer: he climbs Ventoux slower than The likes of Kreuziger in 2009, but he was doped off the scale)

 

[SeriousSam]

The Guardian view on Chris Froome: clean cycling’s calm champion
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jul/24/guardian-view-chris-froome-tour-de-france-win
Probably penned by Sky cheerleader Fotheringham.

Even today, with cyclists allowed to compete again after drugs bans, it is hard to have absolute confidence in what one is seeing

Either passing the tests today is strong evidence of cleanliness, in which case all athletes now passing the tests must be believed to be clean, including those coming back from a ban, or passing the tests is not strong evidence of cleanliness, in which case appointing Froome leader of the clean cycling is an article of faith as opposed to based on evidence.

Froome’s dignity and politeness make him a role model for clean cycling in a sport that needed one.

lol

 

[Poursuivant]

Re:

The Guardian view on Chris Froome: clean cycling’s calm champion
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jul/24/guardian-view-chris-froome-tour-de-france-win
Probably penned by Sky cheerleader Fotheringham.

Even today, with cyclists allowed to compete again after drugs bans, it is hard to have absolute confidence in what one is seeing

Either passing the tests today is strong evidence of cleanliness, in which case all athletes now passing the tests must be believed to be clean, including those coming back from a ban, or passing the tests is not strong evidence of cleanliness, in which case appointing Froome leader of the clean cycling is an article of faith as opposed to based on evidence.

Froome’s dignity and politeness make him a role model for clean cycling in a sport that needed one.

lol

Ah Serious Sam, one of the smarter, wittier, more interesting posters on the forum. Actually quite knowledgeable too.

Which climb this year that Froome did, made you lol? What was it this year that defied your belief?

 

[tretiak]

Re: Re:

I work in a capacity where I analyse Ross Tucker's output on the NFL. He is a blowhard.

Anyway, I didn't say one person testing positive in sky, I said evidence of a systemic doping attempt. Thats what is constantly levelled at them from the clinic. You're now making excuses why people don't want to do a proper investigation despite massive skepticism from within and outside of cycling, the same type of skepticism that provoked numerous rumours, investigations and outright accusations against Lance

Don't you know? Sky gave Froome their secret doping drug that they gave to Wiggins, even though they were going to not offer him a contract in 2011? Lol, rofl, rolleyes etc, you poor deluded soul. Also, even though he was leaving the team, and he was a donkey, they gave him this secret drug, but then after that was a roaring success, they then gave him a motor, didn't you see his attack up Ventoux, the YouTube sensation?! (Disclaimer: he climbs Ventoux slower than The likes of Kreuziger in 2009, but he was doped off the scale)

Break down the Ventoux climb in parts instead. That's more interesting in my view.

 

[Poursuivant]

Re: Re:

I work in a capacity where I analyse Ross Tucker's output on the NFL. He is a blowhard.

Anyway, I didn't say one person testing positive in sky, I said evidence of a systemic doping attempt. Thats what is constantly levelled at them from the clinic. You're now making excuses why people don't want to do a proper investigation despite massive skepticism from within and outside of cycling, the same type of skepticism that provoked numerous rumours, investigations and outright accusations against Lance

Don't you know? Sky gave Froome their secret doping drug that they gave to Wiggins, even though they were going to not offer him a contract in 2011? Lol, rofl, rolleyes etc, you poor deluded soul. Also, even though he was leaving the team, and he was a donkey, they gave him this secret drug, but then after that was a roaring success, they then gave him a motor, didn't you see his attack up Ventoux, the YouTube sensation?! (Disclaimer: he climbs Ventoux slower than The likes of Kreuziger in 2009, but he was doped off the scale)

Break down the Ventoux climb in parts instead. That's more interesting in my view.

Which one?

 

[tretiak]

Cracked Contador and out of saddle attack past Quintana. That part is amazing.

 

[Night Rider]

Re:

I work in a capacity where I analyse Ross Tucker's output on the NFL. He is a blowhard.

Anyway, I didn't say one person testing positive in sky, I said evidence of a systemic doping attempt. Thats what is constantly levelled at them from the clinic. You're now making excuses why people don't want to do a proper investigation despite massive skepticism from within and outside of cycling, the same type of skepticism that provoked numerous rumours, investigations and outright accusations against Lance

They are talking about this Ross Tucker http://sportsscientists.com/

Not this one http://www.rosstucker.com/

 

[Poursuivant]

Re:

Cracked Contador and out of saddle attack past Quintana. That part is amazing.

Contador crashed and was a shadow of what he would have been. As for Quintana he was getting dropped by all and sundry, to be fair, compared to last year he was a complete mess.

 

[popular jams]

Re: Re:

Anyone who seriously believes there's no incentive for an investigative journalist to go after SKY in Britain is beyond mental. As I've said many times, Murdoch is arguably one of the most hated men in Britain. His media empire only stretches so far, and there are serious rivals in both broadcast (BT, BBC) and print (Mail, Mirror, Guardian) as well as independents (Huffington Post) who have every incentive and would benefit directly from an expose. Even the political class would love to see News Corp undermined in any way possible.

When you talk about cycling as a niche sport and say 'people don't care about it' you have a point, but not the one you think. No media outlet (except sky) would do anything to protect cycling's reputation if it thought they could make even the smallest amount of capital by being the ones to crack Team Sky. They've seen Lance, they know Walsh and Kimmage came out of that with a triumphant validation of their persistence in the face of a well resourced and well connected protagonist. Again, it's against all logic that none of these outlets would want to hurt SKY, Murdoch and News Corp. It would undermine all of their sport business, which is a huge part of their company. I don't think you can underestimate how big - if they are - a doping or systemic attempt to cheat ANY sport directly would hurt SKY's brand.

In the sporting world Froome is a small fish. In the sporting world Lance was a small fish. For Walsh and Kimmage it was personal. For Kimmage this was the sport he loved. For Walsh it was because Armstrong claimed Walsh was going after him for a deceased son. Kimmage still calls the doping out. But his paper is not going to fund an in depth long investigation to go after an athlete who must dont really care about and when asked are they clean or not, would probably answer, not.

Also, whistleblowers dont get rich blowing the whistle and the little money they make does not compensate for the hardship they endure.

If someone wanted to make their name busting dopers there are much bigger sports to go after. The general public, bar UK Sky fans already think the sport is full of doping.

Lance was always a "big" fish, to claim he was just some athlete is top class revisionism. He transcended the sport, because of his 'personality."

Armstrong was a big fish in a tiny sport. I was talking about the world of sport. Armstrong was a small fish.

Huh? Armstrong was a megastar with the recognition and endorsements to prove it. Not following your logic here.

 

[AlbineVespuzzio]

Re: Re:

Armstrong was a big fish in a tiny sport. I was talking about the world of sport. Armstrong was a small fish.

Huh? Armstrong was a megastar with the recognition and endorsements to prove it. Not following your logic here.

Still small fish. you can't possible imagine the real superstars from the real sports that move real money being chased. Ronaldo, Messi and Iniesta and their clubs are completely safe. So are the NBA stars.