pastronef said:
Angliru said:
macbindle said:
You are right, of course...but that isn't the point pastronef is making.
I'm sure pastonef will respond and straighten me out.
I know the Tour winner is going to be the biggest story and Sky set it up themselves (here one could open the debate about why THEY NEEDED, in 2010, to come up with all thar PR stuff: to hook the British public...)
anyway, as someone said a few posts before, Sky beat those teams at their own game.
but while claiming clean! so that does not go with the peloton omertá style. better shut up, we know.
(well, Nibali said he´s the flagbearer of clean cycling while riding fo Astana...)
for sure Sky deserves the flak (Froome/Wiggo the most) but I have seen Thomas and Porte insulted, people asking for hospital pictures of Henao after his Suisse crash, people blaming Sky for the Apollonio doping positive of 2015 (3 years after he left Sky) people turning their backs to Kwiato, people sending dollars pictures to Nieve when he signed. and so on. nothing ever seen towards other teams/riders. and many of those people said they were anti-doping, while cheering for anyone, any doper, to beat Sky.
this makes me cheer for them, and hoping that the people who want see their heads on spikes won´t enjoy it fully. and hoping Sky wont crash down in style.
and I´d add, that if Sky crash and folds, the other teams will go on normally, cycling will go on, no problem, with the same mistakes and questions. the Sky (as the Arnstrong) downfall wouldnt save "cycling"
I kind of agree with most of this but have a different take on the oft quoted proclamations of 'new cleanliness' from the outset by Sky. I don't think it was anything to do with hooking the 'British public'. Well not solely or even primarily at least.
See, from the outset, Sky made no secret of their ambitions. They didn't just set out to become a WT team and see how things went from there, as most new teams would. They shouted from the rooftops that they were going to win the TDF, and they had the budget to back up the ambition. One thing they could predict with absolute certainty was that upon achieving those ambitions the doping questions would come thick and fast, the main topic at every press conference they were duty bound to attend when carrying the yellow jersey.
So what they did was simply begin fielding the questions before they were even asked. They decided on attack being the best form of defence. Since day one the questions and accusations of doping continue to flow as predicted. Sky continue to deny them.
I mean really, what else does anyone expect them to do. Is there a team or rider in recent history who doesn't do exactly the same, continue to claim to be clean, until the evidence becomes so overwhelming that they have no choice other than to hold their hands up and resort instead to presenting themselves as 'reformed' and the new voice of clean cycling?
Admittedly most riders just keep their mouths shut and say nothing until asked before denying any wrongdoing. But Sky/Froome arent afforded the luxury of that option. They're asked about it on a daily basis.
Brailsford tried the apporach of banning doping questions from the press. Didn't go down too well. So what do we want....to not mention doping, or to hear BS denials of all things doping related? Because if you want to hear people confess and come clean about doping every time a question is asked then i fear you may be in for a lifetime of disappointment.
So the reason Sky come out with more BS about doping than any other team? They're asked to comment on doping more than any other team. Simple really.
It's just a different direction for the merry go round of BS.