Geert Leinders

[red_flanders]

The funny thing about you Mr. Mas.

Is you are running and the forum, pointing fingers, saying link link, you said blue when it was black and calling people trolls to notice that your doing just the same. Your missing out on some very good dicussion.

So on point.

What are your thoughts on Leinders and Sky? Do you think it was nefarious or innocent?

Your opinion nothing else.

Have a try. I'm actually interested to hear your views.

Your views.

If you're interested, I'll take a crack at the thread topic.

I think they hired Leinders knowing exactly who he was. I don't know enough to say they hired him to run a doping program, but it's ridiculous to try and make people believe the rot about them asking him and him telling them he was not involved in doping. I think they heard he was good and though he fit the profile they were looking for. They probably didn't have a ton of clean options for team docs with experience and for whatever reason went with one that had a dodgy past.

Maybe he was trying to work for a clean team and SKY hired him in good faith giving him that opportunity. That they just don't come out and say that makes me feel this isn't the likely answer. The other option is they needed someone who know his way around the doping issues in the peloton, and whether running a clean team or not, he's useful. They can't come out and say this so they don't.

The idea that they hired only people they knew were clean is of course utter ********. They hired a bunch of dodgy people, knew exactly who they were and hung them out to dry when the focus came on these people and the information became so irrefutable to the press and cycling world they had to have an answer. They could have said we hired them but it's not possible to hire a fully clean staff given where the sport has been. They just cut them loose and took no blame.

I don't know if they run a team-wide program. I'm sure some of the riders are and have been fully fueled up, but can't accurately say if it's SKY doing it or SKY looking the other way. It's at least the latter.

They have a long list of dishonest statements in my view, including but not limited to all the declarations about what they know about Julich, Yates and Leinders to name a few. There's a lot of BS and very little transparency coming out of their public declarations. Leinders is but one example.

I don't trust them.

 

[thehog]

If you're interested, I'll take a crack at the thread topic.

I think they hired Leinders knowing exactly who he was. I don't know enough to say they hired him to run a doping program, but it's ridiculous to try and make people believe the rot about them asking him and him telling them he was not involved in doping. I think they heard he was good and though he fit the profile they were looking for. They probably didn't have a ton of clean options for team docs with experience and for whatever reason went with one that had a dodgy past.

Maybe he was trying to work for a clean team and SKY hired him in good faith giving him that opportunity. That they just don't come out and say that makes me feel this isn't the likely answer. The other option is they needed someone who know his way around the doping issues in the peloton, and whether running a clean team or not, he's useful. They can't come out and say this so they don't.

The idea that they hired only people they knew were clean is of course utter ********. They hired a bunch of dodgy people, knew exactly who they were and hung them out to dry when the focus came on these people and the information became so irrefutable to the press and cycling world they had to have an answer. They could have said we hired them but it's not possible to hire a fully clean staff given where the sport has been. They just cut them loose and took no blame.

I don't know if they run a team-wide program. I'm sure some of the riders are and have been fully fueled up, but can't accurately say if it's SKY doing it or SKY looking the other way. It's at least the latter.

They have a long list of dishonest statements in my view, including but not limited to all the declarations about what they know about Julich, Yates and Leinders to name a few. There's a lot of BS and very little transparency coming out of their public declarations. Leinders is but one example.

I don't trust them.

Many thanks for the response. I agree with pretty much everything you said.

The other part for me was having the former Rabo guys already on the team.

They would know exactly why you need a guy like Leinders.

My feeling after a disastrous 2010 Tour and season they needed to get serious. I'm with you I don't think Leinders was hired to implement the program but to ensure no one tested positive. His role was to make sure the program was run well, the riders levels were within passport accepted creteria and no one would test positive. Because that would be the worse possible outcome.

The fact he was pseudo hired for 80 days makes me believe he was never there just to be a doctor with experience about cycling. If they needed that he'd be onboard full time getting to know the riders, going to training camps etc.

I think his role was mostly hands off whereby he was studying blood results etc. from afar and providing consultation on levels etc. he had turned up to the odd race but was never at the Tour and I don't believe the Vuelta in 2011.

He reminds of the Wolf in Pulp Fiction. He was there to ensure no one glowed to bright and if they did he'd clean it up without a trace.

Leinders work at Rabo is renowned. I'd have to go over my history but did anyone ever test positive under his reign there? ie an actual positive from urine/blood? I don't think they did. Dekker was self inflicted.

So yes, Sky knew exactly what they were getting. He was a "safe" hire because at the time his reputation wasn't Ferreri or Fuentes like. He was fairly safe and the British media would have no idea. He was almost off the books with his 80 day hire and Leinders would have known himself expendable if his history became mainstream media public.

Is it coincidence that from his hiring date that Sky, specifically, Wiggins, Froome, Porte (2012) and Rogers went bananas watts was? It is odd.

So he's I agree I don't trust them. Sky keeping shrugging their shoulders over these guys and say "sorry, small mistake, won't happen again" but I think there's much more to it.

A lot more.

 

[red_flanders]

Many thanks for the response. I agree with pretty much everything you said.

The other part for me was having the former Rabo guys already on the team.

They would know exactly why you need a guy like Leinders.

My feeling after a disastrous 2010 Tour and season they needed to get serious. I'm with you I don't think Leinders was hired to implement the program but to ensure no one tested positive. His role was to make sure the program was run well, the riders levels were within passport accepted creteria and no one would test positive. Because that would be the worse possible outcome.

The fact he was pseudo hired for 80 days makes me believe he was never there just to be a doctor with experience about cycling. If they needed that he'd be onboard full time getting to know the riders, going to training camps etc.

I think his role was mostly hands off whereby he was studying blood results etc. from afar and providing consultation on levels etc. he had turned up to the odd race but was never at the Tour and I don't believe the Vuelta in 2011.

He reminds of the Wolf in Pulp Fiction. He was there to ensure no one glowed to bright and if they did he'd clean it up without a trace.

Leinders work at Rabo is renowned. I'd have to go over my history but did anyone ever test positive under his reign there? ie an actual positive from urine/blood? I don't think they did. Dekker was self inflicted.

So yes, Sky knew exactly what they were getting. He was a "safe" hire because at the time his reputation wasn't Ferreri or Fuentes like. He was fairly safe and the British media would have no idea. He was almost off the books with his 80 day hire and Leinders would have known himself expendable if his history became mainstream media public.

Is it coincidence that from his hiring date that Sky, specifically, Wiggins, Froome, Porte (2012) and Rogers went bananas watts was? It is odd.

So he's I agree I don't trust them. Sky keeping shrugging their shoulders over these guys and say "sorry, small mistake, won't happen again" but I think there's much more to it.

A lot more.

I think you make a lot of good points and would not be remotely surprised if all you suggest is/was true, if not worse. Given your point about the Rabo team members (Who were they? No idea myself...) it just makes the lying all the more brazen and makes them all that much more dishonest.

 

[thehog]

I think you make a lot of good points and would not be remotely surprised if all you suggest is/was true, if not worse. Given your point about the Rabo team members (Who were they? No idea myself...) it just makes the lying all the more brazen and makes them all that much more dishonest.

Steven de jongh, Fletcha, Hayman.... etc. etc. etc.

 

[del1962]

My question still is (a number of pages back), does anyone know what is happening to the Belgium criminal investigation against him?

 

[sniper]

My question still is (a number of pages back), does anyone know what is happening to the Belgium criminal investigation against him?

I have a google alert for Geert Leinders and nothing has popped up for weeks in a row.
Also, I see two big sponsors (Rabobank and Sky) with a clear interest in having this investigation disappear.
Perhaps Race Radio knows something but I think he'd have told us already if he did.
So as it stands I think this one is destined to be shoved under the carpet.

question is also: are the Dutch ADA in anyway after him without us knowing? They should, obviously, be after him, considering the damaging testimonies. But again, probably too many parties interested in never hearing the name Geert Leinders again.

 

[Benotti69]

<snip>

Those interviews you demand/comment upon appear in his printed work, which you refuse to read. That renders you in no sensible position to comment, quite clearly.

Now, come on, if that's the best you got, B, that ain't good enough.

So got a link for where Walsh interviewed Michael Rasmussen and Thomas Dekker which was the question I asked?

Yes Walsh has written about Leinders. I know that. Apparently DocMas has the article.

 

[sniper]

Those interviews you demand/comment upon appear in his printed work

link or retract.

which you refuse to read

nice spin/deflection.
nobody refuses to read anything.
some refuse to pay though.

by the way, and this is also for gooner and dr. mas:
it's not a simple "have or haven't read walsh's work".
you don't know who read what and when, period. Some have read only his tweets, some parts of his work, some have read it all, some are reading it as we speak.
No need for sweeping insinuations which only serve deflection.

 

[gheizhwinder]

All of you who don't want to give money to Murdoch but want to read Walsh's articles, I suggest you join your nearest library and use UK Newsstand. It's not that hard.

 

[Ferminal]

My question still is (a number of pages back), does anyone know what is happening to the Belgium criminal investigation against him?

How are Belgian investigations doing into any cyclist?

 

[Benotti69]

All of you who don't want to give money to Murdoch but want to read Walsh's articles, I suggest you join your nearest library and use UK Newsstand. It's not that hard.

And Murdoch doesn't benefit from 'newsstand'? Somehow i doubt that.

 

[Race Radio]

Yes Walsh has written about Leinders.

Walsh has been emphatic about how stupid it was to hire Leinders

ProCycling, October 2013

The Irishman also underlined how SKY has brought suspicion upon themselves with the appointment of former Rabobank doctor Gert Lienders.

"That was ludicrous. A colossally stupid mistake, " Said Walsh. "He many not have been on the same level as Ferrari and Fuentes in terms of what he was doing but he was certainly on the next level down from them. He was centrally involved it what was a very well organized and quite high tech doping programme, a programme that was arguably more complex then what USPS were doing. You have to wonder how SKY didn't investigate Leinders roll at Rabobank. Although Rabobank may have said they released Leinders, they effectively sacked him when his involvement in doping became clear

 

[Race Radio]

My question still is (a number of pages back), does anyone know what is happening to the Belgium criminal investigation against him?

I have heard no updates on this but I would not put too much faith in it. As it is a criminal investigation expect it to take a long time. Given that Johan has been actively been trying to shift his USADA case to the Belgium Fed it is questionable how far they will go with it.

 

[red_flanders]

Walsh has been emphatic about how stupid it was to hire Leinders

ProCycling, October 2013

Thanks for posting that. I'd read it but could not find it or recall where. What strikes me about is that while being emphatic that it was stupid, he's actually buying the Sky story that they didn't know about his past. To ask "how" they didn't investigate assumes you buy that they didn't know exactly who he was. At least that's how I read that.

Again this gets at the heart of people's objections to Walsh when it comes to Sky and in this case, Leinders. He seems to accept the stories they put out without asking the most obvious questions. He comes at everything from the forgone conclusion that they're not involved in doping, which seems questionable at best to me.

 

[sniper]

Thanks for posting that. I'd read it but could not find it or recall where. What strikes me about is that while being emphatic that it was stupid, he's actually buying the Sky story that they didn't know about his past. To ask "how" they didn't investigate assumes you buy that they didn't know exactly who he was. At least that's how I read that.

Again this gets at the heart of people's objections to Walsh when it comes to Sky and in this case, Leinders. He seems to accept the stories they put out without asking the most obvious questions. He comes at everything from the forgone conclusion that they're not involved in doping, which seems questionable at best to me.

this indeed. well said.

(and similar with JTL. According to Walsh Sky hadn't 'learned from the mistakes' they'd made when hiring Leinders. Again buying into, rather than questioning, Sky's presumed ignorance.)

 

[Benotti69]

Walsh has been emphatic about how stupid it was to hire Leinders

ProCycling, October 2013

thankyou RR.

I wonder why Walsh didn't talk to Rasmussen and Dekker to find as much information about Leinders modus operandi to see if he was applying it to Sky.

Yes, I know Leinders was gone by the time Walsh was embedded but that doesn't mean they were not using the same techniques etc.

Ferrari learnt from Conconi. Did Kerrison learn from Leinders?

 

[gooner]

link or retract.


nice spin/deflection.
nobody refuses to read anything.
some refuse to pay though.

by the way, and this is also for gooner and dr. mas:
it's not a simple "have or haven't read walsh's work".
you don't know who read what and when, period. Some have read only his tweets, some parts of his work, some have read it all, some are reading it as we speak.
No need for sweeping insinuations which only serve deflection.

You were caught giving out an opinion on the Walsh piece while admitting later you still hadn't read the article. The posts were provided to show this to be the case with you. I'm entitled to bring this up.

 

[gooner]

thankyou RR.

I wonder why Walsh didn't talk to Rasmussen and Dekker to find as much information about Leinders modus operandi to see if he was applying it to Sky.

Yes, I know Leinders was gone by the time Walsh was embedded but that doesn't mean they were not using the same techniques etc.

Ferrari learnt from Conconi. Did Kerrison learn from Leinders?

What will Rasmussen and Dekker say with regards to Sky?

This is nitpicking now. We know what he was up to at Rabo.

 

[gheizhwinder]

And Murdoch doesn't benefit from 'newsstand'? Somehow i doubt that.

Well, whether they do or not, you wouldn't be contributing directly. It's as much of a grey area as reading a copy that a cafe has bought. Would you object to those circumstances?

 

[sniper]

What will Rasmussen and Dekker say with regards to Sky?

This is nitpicking now. We know what he was up to at Rabo.

your not a very curious person, are you?
i,d be quite curious to hear their stories and get more details, inside stuff, facts and, last but not least, their opinions on leinders.
And if leinders was indeed hired by sky to treat saddle sore, surely rasmussen and dekker could corroborate that account.
win win

 

[Parker]

And if leinders was indeed hired by sky to treat saddle sore, surely rasmussen and dekker could corroborate that account.

Regardless of his doping activity, he's still a doctor with all the relevant qualifications and plenty of experience. I don't think you need Dekker or Rasmussen to tell you he is capable of acting as a normal doctor.

 

[gooner]

your not a very curious person, are you?
i,d be quite curious to hear their stories and get more details, inside stuff, facts and, last but not least, their opinions on leinders.

I would too regarding Rabo but it will reveal nothing with regards to Sky other than what we know already.

And if leinders was indeed hired by sky to treat saddle sore, surely rasmussen and dekker could corroborate that account.
win win

What? Rasmussen has implicated him in aiding his doping.

 

[sniper]

Regardless of his doping activity, he's still a doctor with all the relevant qualifications and plenty of experience. I don't think you need Dekker or Rasmussen to tell you he is capable of acting as a normal doctor.

nope, in your world of good faith there's no need for nothing.

 

[Parker]

nope, in your world of good faith there's no need for nothing.

Thinking someone who is a fully qualified doctor is capable of acting as a doctor isn't good faith, it's common sense.

 

[hrotha]

nope, in your world of good faith there's no need for nothing.

He's right though. A team doctor would take care of a saddle sore just as easily and readily as of a low (or high) hematocrit.

Asking Dekker and Rasmussen would be interesting to explore Leinders and Rabobank's history. For the part that concerns Sky, though, Hayman, Flecha and De Jongh would be far better options (and yes, they'd have to be asked largely about Rabobank).