• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Is Contador becoming like Armstrong?

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
auscyclefan94 said:
Contador is becoming more and more like armstrong. More and more people dislike him by the day after every victory. He's a little arrogant in my book and i didn't think he was a team player at this years tour but neither was armstrong.

That is completely contrary to his actions during and after the Tour. He took the high road during the Tour by not getting involved in the petty daily comments that Armstrong was making in a feeble attempt to throw him off his game. Only after the Tour did he go public with his version of what he had to endure to reach the top step of the podium. If anything he showed maturity, resolve and class in still winning the Tour convincingly inspite of the obstacles in his path.

As far as the claims by Armstrong that Contador didn't thank his teammates, we heard an entirely different interpretation from Haimar Zubeldia who stated that after every stage Contador went from room to room in the team's hotel thanking his teammates. The fact that he didn't make his every action a thinly disguised pr move like everyone of Armstrong's
twits/public statements simply opened the door for a desparate and pathetic mice of man like LA to try to spin it all in a negative direction in his efforts to
sully Contador's rep.

I personally gained even more respect for Contador this year and my respect for Armstrong has reached a new low. His current efforts to give credit to Contador for being the stronger rider are IMO simply damage control for all of his mean-spirited mind games that failed bear fruit.

If Contador signs with Caisse d'Epargne, its likely his schedule will be altered to occasionally include the Vuelta. I would also think that as ambitious as he is, having the
World Champions stripes on his jersey has to be one of his goals. I find it hard to understand a lack of appreciation for a rider that tries to win almost everyone event he enters and more often than not is successful. His stating that he's won often this season is merely a statement of fact and I didn't take it as arrogance. I would have loved to have seen him in the Vuelta but after the year that he's endured I'm not surprised that he's shut it down for the time being. He's entitled. He's had a immensely successful and trying year. As stated earlier he's focusing on his future and where he'll be riding next year since that is not etched in stone.
 
thehog said:
Truth be told Alberto is nothing like LA. He's had a very difficult season or more way than one. They way he was treated this year by Johan was a very difficult adjustment for Alberto. Lance he expected to treat him poorly> Howeverhe did not expect it from Johan who had made several promises and assurances to him since 2005 that they will go a long way together. Alberto is a trusting man. Probably trusts too much but that’s the sort of guy he is.

Alberto is taking time out of racing and the spotlight to get his mind back in order and spend time with his family; it has little to do with racing like Lance Armstrong.

If Alberto had a team he loved and who loved him he would be racing. One thing for sure is he’ll never speak to Cyclingnews ever again.

I get the impression that you know AC personally.
 
auscyclefan94 said:
Contador is becoming more and more like armstrong. More and more people dislike him by the day after every victory. He's a little arrogant in my book and i didn't think he was a team player at this years tour but neither was armstrong.

More and more people like who? Cadel Evans? In all seriousness, AC seems like a very likable guy. I've yet to hear a series of rumors about how much the peloton dislikes him or him being an a$$ to fans. So is there something specific or is it just a product of his not being named Cadel Evans?
 
Jun 19, 2009
36
0
0
Visit site
"I don't think winning the Tour of France gives a cyclist the right to snub a great number of races in the calendar..."


A professional cyclist has the right to race or not race whatever he wants, as long as his team agrees to it.
 
Jun 22, 2009
10,644
2
0
Visit site
It is a little dissapointing that his season ended in july.
I'd like to see contador challange the classics. I get the feeling all he cares about now is the tour, maybe he wants to beat LA's record?
 
craig1985 said:
But the thing is up until the 2003 Tour de France LA did do this. He would line up at the Ardennes classics (in all honesty if he rode with his brain and not his legs he would of won L-B-L) and place fairly highly (where he came second to Erik Dekker at the 2001 Amstel Gold). In 2002 he even lined up at MSR, RVV, Classica San Sebastian, and the Championship of Zurich He finished 3rd IIRC).

It was disappointing that he rode Tour of Gila instead of the Tour of Romandie, where for him results in Gila would mean nothing compared to a local rider.

Granted but he was still very slim in what he gave back to the cycling fans from year to year. And riding a couple of classics a couple of years is hardly the stuff of a generous champ. Whereas he never even rode the Giro during his Tour streak. Weak, very weak.

And the comment about riders riding for money is just stupid. They all ride for cash, but there's a difference in style between somebody like Armstrong who road for the money and someone like Hinault who did likewise.

I just don't think Armstrong really cared anything for being tested in various conditions and races throughout the year. He may have won one less Tour, but perhaps he would have picked up a Giro, some classics and another Worlds. He simply felt those weren't essential to his career, but only the Tour. And in the end his career, as a whole, became more one-dimensional. For the true fans at least who follow the sport from Feb. to Oct. and not just in July.
 
rhubroma said:
Don't agree. Lance was a an ungenerous champion. And the sport isn't just the Tour. A guy like LA should have tried to win a few classics and the Giro, another Worlds at the very least.

That he had the "right" to race the races as he saw fit, is such an American perspective (where most of the fan base only gets to watch, or even knows about the Tour and thinks rather shawlowly of the sport purely in terms of that race) that simply doesn't fly in Europe. Cycling made Lance, not the otherway around. And there's something here, in Europe, called class and honoring tradition and this very beautiful and priviledged profession of cycling. So for the majority of Europeans, LA was a Tour champion. No more. And certainly can't be even considered among the likes of Merckx, Hinault, Coppi, Anquetil, etc. So it's not just about a corporate mentality of maximising your investment, to get the greatest return on it as LA did by attempting to win only the Tour. It's seen as shallow and means that he did more than any other single rider in the history of the sport, to kill the romance in it.

Real cycling fans, not the bandwagon crew back in the States, want to see great champions combating in different terrain throughout the season within reason. So at the top of his game, Lance, to honor his profession and demonstrate a certian class and generosity to the fans, should have tested himself also at LBL, Flanders, Roubaix (perhaps not all in the same year) and the Giro against others to win them at the very least.
All that may be true but still does not begin to explain how LA (or AC, or any other cyclist) does not have the right to choose to race the way they do and in the races of their choosing.

Whether it's politically expedient to skip certain races, or bad for the sport, or bad for his reputation, etc., are all separate issues, and upon which I'm not commenting at this time. My only point is that every cyclist has the right to skip whatever race he chooses to skip (as long as it's not a violation of his contract, of course).

You say you "don't agree". So, you think cyclists don't have the right to skip whatever race they choose to skip (and are not contractually obligated to ride)? I'm sorry, but whether you realize it or not, you're suggesting slavery. After all, if a cyclist does not have this right, that means he can be forced to participate against his will. That's indentured servitude.

Careful how you throw around the word "right".
 
Jul 13, 2009
144
0
0
Visit site
Danilot said:
Well, he doesn't from the moment he's paid to work. Okay, I'll work on Tuesdays and Thursdays, but I think I'm going to snub Monday and Friday. On Wednesday I'm going to get some pocket money from Grandad. :rolleyes:

Why should he have more rights than any regular worker?

Because he is not a regular worker he is an elite athlete. If you could just as easily replace him with another cyclist who could win like he does that would be regular.

Professional athletes get paid out of proportion to their contribution to society.
 
psychlist said:
Professional athletes get paid out of proportion to their contribution to society.
Interesting statement. How did you figure that out? Seriously.

What scale are you using to measure and compare the value of what they are paid to the value of what they are contributing?

This begs a bigger question. How we determine the value of what anyone contributes to society?

What is the value of the contribution of a hard worker in a factory producing widgets that are ultimately proven to be poorly designed (through no fault of this worker) and useless to everyone in society?

What is the value of the contribution of the guy who invented the glue used for "Sticky Notes"?

What is the value to society of the contribution of the heart doctor who prolongs the life of mostly retired people?

What is the value of songs and performances produced by Michael Jackson?

In each case, how do you compare what they are paid to the value of their contribution to society?
 
Aug 17, 2009
99
0
0
Visit site
AC

Publicus said:
More and more people like who? Cadel Evans? In all seriousness, AC seems like a very likable guy. I've yet to hear a series of rumors about how much the peloton dislikes him or him being an a$$ to fans. So is there something specific or is it just a product of his not being named Cadel Evans?

Auscyclefan94 is an obvious Evans fanboy worse than some of the LA fanboys on this forum. It must of hurt bad getting beaten by Spaniards so many times recently and possibly the Dauphine was a real sore point.

AC is the complete opposite of LA does the entertaining on the bike and keeps his mouth shut. Rides big races to win everything he enters. He has no chance on the cobbles so cant see that happening but could win the hilly classics.

He does no training races aside from the Dauphine this year. Trying to win everything must take it out of you. He races about as much as anyone else and was impressive winning both the vuelta and Giro last year.

Most importantly he respects his opponents and cycling itself. Being good and choosing not to get involved in stupid spin diverting attention away from racing is to be admired.

Is great to see riders like him and Andy Schleck fighting out races in the next few years. Hopefully the excitement of racing will return to what it was in the 80s
 
Aug 3, 2009
32
0
0
Visit site
m

in some ways he is like armstrong but contador has a longer season starting march and finshing in l8 july. he could decide to ride the vuelta and would probably be a fave.

also with a kick like his i dont undertsand why he doesnt race amstel, fleche walllone and liege while he is on good form early in the season
 
Jun 16, 2009
19,654
2
0
Visit site
cyclingmad said:
Auscyclefan94 is an obvious Evans fanboy worse than some of the LA fanboys on this forum. It must of hurt bad getting beaten by Spaniards so many times recently and possibly the Dauphine was a real sore point.

AC is the complete opposite of LA does the entertaining on the bike and keeps his mouth shut. Rides big races to win everything he enters. He has no chance on the cobbles so cant see that happening but could win the hilly classics.

He does no training races aside from the Dauphine this year. Trying to win everything must take it out of you. He races about as much as anyone else and was impressive winning both the vuelta and Giro last year.

Most importantly he respects his opponents and cycling itself. Being good and choosing not to get involved in stupid spin diverting attention away from racing is to be admired.

Is great to see riders like him and Andy Schleck fighting out races in the next few years. Hopefully the excitement of racing will return to what it was in the 80s

Shut your trap. Don't start crapping on!I would of liked to see him win the dauphine but it was due to the collusion of the spainiards that he lost. It didn't really hurt because he had good form going into the tour except didn't carry it through to the tour :(. I don't like AC as he is not much of a team player and doesn't seem to recognise the teams efforts. Even though their were arguements in the team i think a bit more acknowledgment wouldn't go astray.
 
Ninety5rpm said:
All that may be true but still does not begin to explain how LA (or AC, or any other cyclist) does not have the right to choose to race the way they do and in the races of their choosing.

Whether it's politically expedient to skip certain races, or bad for the sport, or bad for his reputation, etc., are all separate issues, and upon which I'm not commenting at this time. My only point is that every cyclist has the right to skip whatever race he chooses to skip (as long as it's not a violation of his contract, of course).

You say you "don't agree". So, you think cyclists don't have the right to skip whatever race they choose to skip (and are not contractually obligated to ride)? I'm sorry, but whether you realize it or not, you're suggesting slavery. After all, if a cyclist does not have this right, that means he can be forced to participate against his will. That's indentured servitude.

Careful how you throw around the word "right".

Well, if you read my post, I never questioned a rider's "right" to race the events as he sees/saw fit. And my "disagreeing" was in regards to how LA chose to exercise his "right" wasn't good for cycling because it showed little respect for the sport which made him, nor the fans.

As is usual in these matters, it boils down to a question of style. One, of course, may choose to comport themselves however one wishes when it's within their "rights," though that doesn't necessarily make such a comportment in good taste. At times, quite to the contrary...
 
cyclingmad said:
Auscyclefan94 is an obvious Evans fanboy worse than some of the LA fanboys on this forum. It must of hurt bad getting beaten by Spaniards so many times recently and possibly the Dauphine was a real sore point.

AC is the complete opposite of LA does the entertaining on the bike and keeps his mouth shut. Rides big races to win everything he enters. He has no chance on the cobbles so cant see that happening but could win the hilly classics.

He does no training races aside from the Dauphine this year. Trying to win everything must take it out of you. He races about as much as anyone else and was impressive winning both the vuelta and Giro last year.

Most importantly he respects his opponents and cycling itself. Being good and choosing not to get involved in stupid spin diverting attention away from racing is to be admired.

Is great to see riders like him and Andy Schleck fighting out races in the next few years. Hopefully the excitement of racing will return to what it was in the 80s

+1...Bravo!
 
Jun 16, 2009
19,654
2
0
Visit site
Publicus said:
More and more people like who? Cadel Evans? In all seriousness, AC seems like a very likable guy. I've yet to hear a series of rumors about how much the peloton dislikes him or him being an a$$ to fans. So is there something specific or is it just a product of his not being named Cadel Evans?

Not many riders speak out of their dislike of other riders unless they have tested positive for drugs. I don't think AC is that liked. People have only grown fond of him because he stuck it up to Armstrong. AC does have skeletons in his closet which haven't yet been fully unfolded. I wonder how his name got in OP. He said that his name got 'mixed up' with Jorrg Jachse. He also had a codename AC in the puerto scandal. You should have a look at some forums about drugs and AC and then you''ll see how much he's liked.

On the Cadel Evans situation not being liked, the way the media turned on him was pretty dogish. People said he was a little angry man becos he punched a microphone. If you had just had crashed and had ebrasions on your left side which you struggle to sleep on and then rode 160km up the Tourmalet and Hautacam into the Yellow Jersey, you would not liked to be wacked and grabbed on your sore spots. He got a bad go in that tour by the press. He also does a lot for charity also which goes un heard. I'm not just saying this from a Cadel fan but from a reasonable persons point of view.
 
Berzin said:
I don't know if you've noticed, but cycling has evolved in the last 15 years.

Riders and teams don't ride for "glory", prestige or to show respect to the sport. They never did. Those romantic notions are held by fans and spectators who have the luxury of seeing cycling as a hobby.

At the end of the day cycling is a job, and very few can ever boast of making great money at it. Part of Armstrong's legacy is his mercenary attitude towards winning the biggest payday on the calendar when he began winning the Tour.

What a load of crapola. Cycling has changed, but for the worse. Real fans see this. It has become more corporate, like everything else in the capitalist world. And the more corporate mentality comes in to cycling, the more humanity goes out of the sport. LA has been the flagship for the corporate approach to being "a champion" in our sport, forgetting that "perfection" and maximizing one's "investment" all towards the goal of winning one event, no matter how prestigious, has rendered the sport as a whole more anemic.

That such thoughts are considered by you as old-fashioned or "romantic," demonstrates how little regard for the sport you actually have. Sport, at its best, should be romantic. It's what makes it entertaining and that's what the athletes are paid to do: entertain us (so that we will support their teams' sponsors by buying their products). Perhaps many a cycling fan who has only come to the sport during the Armstrong era, and so has been fed on a much more shallow interpretaion of the cycling calendar than in the past, hasn't got a clue as to what I'm talking about. That's sad and is their problem.

That cyclists of the past only did it for the money is a bunch of bull. Sure in some cases, that has been the case. But many a rider with true class, did it as much for the true love of the sport. And in Europe that meant honoring it by going for wins in the classics, the grand tours and the Worlds. And these riders were loved in return. It was simply a culture that someone like Mr. Armstrong has felt he was above and that he simply couldn't have been bothered with. He choose certainty over risk and, in sport, their is nothing heroic in that.
 
Jun 16, 2009
19,654
2
0
Visit site
rhubroma said:
What a load of crapola. Cycling has changed, but for the worse. Real fans see this. It has become more corporate, like everything else in the capitalist world. And the more corporate mentality comes in to cycling, the more humanity goes out of the sport. LA has been the flagship for the corporate approach to being "a champion" in our sport, forgetting that "perfection" and maximizing one's "investment" all towards the goal of winning one event, no matter how prestigious, has rendered the sport as a whole more anemic.

That such thoughts are considered by you as old-fashioned or "romantic," demonstrates how little regard for the sport you actually have. Sport, at its best, should be romantic. It's what makes it entertaining and that's what the athletes are paid to do: entertain us (so that we will support their teams' sponsors by buying their products). Perhaps many a cycling fan who has only come to the sport during the Armstrong era, and so has been fed on a much more shallow interpretaion of the cycling calendar than in the past, hasn't got a clue as to what I'm talking about. That's sad and is their problem.

That cyclists of the past only did it for the money is a bunch of bull. Sure in some cases, that has been the case. But many a rider with true class, did it as much for the true love of the sport. And in Europe that meant honoring it by going for wins in the classics, the grand tours and the Worlds. And these riders were loved in return. It was simply a culture that someone like Mr. Armstrong has felt he was above and that he simply couldn't have been bothered with. He choose certainty over risk and, in sport, their is nothing heroic in that.

"Pot calling the kettle Black"
 
Aug 17, 2009
99
0
0
Visit site
Appropriate

auscyclefan94 said:
Not many riders speak out of their dislike of other riders unless they have tested positive for drugs. I don't think AC is that liked. People have only grown fond of him because he stuck it up to Armstrong. AC does have skeletons in his closet which haven't yet been fully unfolded. I wonder how his name got in OP. He said that his name got 'mixed up' with Jorrg Jachse. He also had a codename AC in the puerto scandal. You should have a look at some forums about drugs and AC and then you''ll see how much he's liked.

On the Cadel Evans situation not being liked, the way the media turned on him was pretty dogish. People said he was a little angry man becos he punched a microphone. If you had just had crashed and had ebrasions on your left side which you struggle to sleep on and then rode 160km up the Tourmalet and Hautacam into the Yellow Jersey, you would not liked to be wacked and grabbed on your sore spots. He got a bad go in that tour by the press. He also does a lot for charity also which goes un heard. I'm not just saying this from a Cadel fan but from a reasonable persons point of view.

If you can view things neutrally just remember that press and coverage you will see and public opinion in Australia will not be the same as the rest of the world. AC is well liked.

On the view of respecting team mates and being a team player how would you explain Vuelta a Castilla y Leon. Contador was designated team leader and chose to ride for Levi instead because he personally felt he was the stronger rider. Levi didn't agree but accepted ACs decision.

On the Col de Columbiere Kloden was completely and uterly dead on a bike and no faster than many of the amateurs riding the climb earlier. That is why he lost a min to Armstrong in the last km. LAs comments were spin to try and mentally break AC. I would like to see any comment Kloden had to make on the same incident I am willing to bet he himself would not have criticised the move

If you believe that Evans lost the Dauphine was collusion of spaniards and that is your reason for try and denigrate them I kinda get it. If you can look at the same race and wonder why did Evans let Valverde get over 2 mins up the road on Mont Ventoux you will understand why Evans never wins anything.

This thread was not in the clinic so don't bring up OP. If you read some of the notes in the clinic without going I dont like this rider you will see that he is in the same position as Alan Davis who gets no flack about this
 
Jun 16, 2009
19,654
2
0
Visit site
cyclingmad said:
If you can view things neutrally just remember that press and coverage you will see and public opinion in Australia will not be the same as the rest of the world. AC is well liked.

On the view of respecting team mates and being a team player how would you explain Vuelta a Castilla y Leon. Contador was designated team leader and chose to ride for Levi instead because he personally felt he was the stronger rider. Levi didn't agree but accepted ACs decision.

On the Col de Columbiere Kloden was completely and uterly dead on a bike and no faster than many of the amateurs riding the climb earlier. That is why he lost a min to Armstrong in the last km. LAs comments were spin to try and mentally break AC. I would like to see any comment Kloden had to make on the same incident I am willing to bet he himself would not have criticised the move

If you believe that Evans lost the Dauphine was collusion of spaniards and that is your reason for try and denigrate them I kinda get it. If you can look at the same race and wonder why did Evans let Valverde get over 2 mins up the road on Mont Ventoux you will understand why Evans never wins anything.

This thread was not in the clinic so don't bring up OP. If you read some of the notes in the clinic without going I dont like this rider you will see that he is in the same position as Alan Davis who gets no flack about this

I thought AC could of acknowledged his team a bit more for the effort they put in. It seems to be the Contador Show and not about his team but that is just my opinion.

I agree Evans loss in the Dauphine was partly lost on the Mont Ventoux climb by not chasing like Alpe D huez but the AC's chasing of evans down was partly to do with why he lost as well.

I agree that Alan Davis has as much to be answered for as AC and they both have questions to answer before they are free of suspicion.

What about AC's attack on Arcalis where he had an unplanned attack with his team unaware of the situation. That doesn't seem like a team player to me

Read some doping formus and then tell me that he is that popular!
 
One of the main reasons Armstrong is disliked by so many, is that he was only "viewable" for a very small proportion of the season.
If Contador does the same, and his season does suggests, that is the direction he is heading, it won't be appreciated by the majority of cycling fans.

OK, fine, so he is maximising his earnings, in terms of appearance fees etc, but he does so by not promoting the sport to the full.

If all the top riders were in a position to be so selective, then we would see far fewer races on the calander. Many would wither and die, for the want of a few headliners.
All this, while the web has given access to all, to watch races throughout the season, not just for 3 weeks, every July.

If I were a corporate sponsor, I would expect more for my money.

All this, plus the inevitable speculation that accompanies a rider who produces such exceptional performances, having appeared from months in seclusion.
 
Aug 12, 2009
3,639
0
0
Visit site
auscyclefan94 said:
I thought AC could of acknowledged his team a bit more for the effort they put in. It seems to be the Contador Show and not about his team but that is just my opinion.

I agree Evans loss in the Dauphine was partly lost on the Mont Ventoux climb by not chasing like Alpe D huez but the AC's chasing of evans down was partly to do with why he lost as well.

I agree that Alan Davis has as much to be answered for as AC and they both have questions to answer before they are free of suspicion.

What about AC's attack on Arcalis where he had an unplanned attack with his team unaware of the situation. That doesn't seem like a team player to me

Read some doping formus and then tell me that he is that popular!

Define 'acknowledge your team'. Do you mean giving a press conference or talking to the media in english in a race taking place in a non-english speaking nation? Sucking up to the linguistic vampires and sprouting ones personal glory? What Contador says behind the scenes to his teammates is not your or my business. You've already been told on this thread that Zubeldia acknowledged Contador had thanked his teammates daily back at the team hotel.

Not goint to talk about AC and Davis here. Wrong forum, wrong thread.

Contadors attack on Arcalis? Use your brain. He was the favourite to win the tour. Was he supposed to win, which was the team directive, or hold onto Lance, Levi and Kloden and pull them up the entire mountain? AC did what he had to do to win the tour. Simple. Let me guess, Cadel shouldn't have attacked on Arcalis either, because it might have ****ed Marc Seargeant and the Belgian money off that Jurgen Van den Broucke was over looked by his superior team mate? Arcalis and Stage 17 showed two things. Bruyneel is a lackey and Armstrong pulls the main strings. He can't match AC so he complains through JB. I'm personally glad he stood up to Armstrong who thought gives the impression he has a divine birthright to be in yellow.

I also noticed earlier in the thread auscyclefan94 that you mentioned Cadel and the media turning on him. Can you please inform the forum who it was that instigated the "Don't touch me" high pitched squeel from Cadel. I'll give you a clue if you didn't know already, you saw their face everyday at the start of live coverage in Australia. Because of this incident and the person responsible for tapping Evans, Cadel's funny new behaviour went largely unnoticed and unreported in Australia. Europeans and Americans got to see it all but we had it filtered. Quite the opposite in fact from what you earlier suggested, that the media turned against Evans. Heck it happened this year with what was going on with his team after the TTT. Half truths and incomplete pictures painted about the team dynamics.
 
Jul 22, 2009
754
1
0
Visit site
You guys are beating a dead horse with this popularity thing. AC and LA are into cycling to win stages and tours. Whether they make more enemies than friends is irrelevant.

If you do not believe me just ask yourself this: Do you remember Hinault or Anquetil for winning multiple tours or for being an a-hole?
 
auscyclefan94 said:
Shut your trap. Don't start crapping on!I would of liked to see him win the dauphine but it was due to the collusion of the spainiards that he lost. It didn't really hurt because he had good form going into the tour except didn't carry it through to the tour :(. I don't like AC as he is not much of a team player and doesn't seem to recognise the teams efforts. Even though their were arguements in the team i think a bit more acknowledgment wouldn't go astray.

What exactly are you basing this on? LA's ****s during and after the TdF? The fanciful tale that AC attempting to drop the Schlecks on Stage 17 cost Astana a podium spot (it didn't, but let's not rehash that)? This year's TdF was, in my mind, a very unique and limited situation (regardless of how you view the incidents).

How about this, excluding this year's TdF, what evidence do you have to suggest that he is not a team player and doesn't recognise the teams efforts?