Is Walsh on the Sky bandwagon?

[the sceptic]

Tbf, as hrotha said calling Indurain a doper really wouldn't rank high on faults commuted by Walsh. Other than perhaps the hypocrisy of letting Wiggins off his hero worship of the guy, (while attacking others for the same) he was right on that.

If I was going to choose a guy who Walsh has gone after without proof, it's Horner. Or his comment that the 2012 vuelta organizers allowed doping.

Yeah its just another example of Walsh and skybots being hypocritical when Conconi = evidence but Leinders is not.

Anyway ill let it go now.

 

[Samson777]

Walsh's defense of Sky would be excusable if it came from a naive outsider getting to do a report on "this cycling thing". As a seasoned velo journalist his whole approach and musings on what makes team Sky click is a fat joke. After what he did trying to bring Armstrong down I can't grasp why he has gone full ***, with regards to lack of critical thinking.

Money, money, money.. It's probably not that complicated, in the end. That's not to say that Walsh was ever brilliant, of course.

Agree with the rest of the post.

 

[thehog]

Money, money, money.. It's probably not that complicated, in the end. That's not to say that Walsh was ever brilliant, of course.

Agree with the rest of the post.

I don't think its money with Walsh. It's belonging. He's now part of the cool gang. No longer the outsider. He's not a savy guy. Fairly beige. Now he's riding shotgun in the Jag and dinning with the Dawgs.

But when you read book. Like this excerpt. Read it and let it sink in. Then you realise the guy might very well be stupid.

If he really does believe this as the "one" single statistic is actually real and all that matters then he is stupid. Or mad.

5 minute maximum power? Whilst climbing. Five minute bursts?

I pick stupid.

 

[Ripper]

I don't think its money with Walsh. It's belonging. He's now part of the cool gang. No longer the outsider. He's not a savy guy. Fairly beige. Now he's riding shotgun in the Jag and dinning with the Dawgs.

But when you read book. Like this excerpt. Read it and let it sink in. Then you realise the guy might very well be stupid.

If he really does believe this as the "one" single statistic is actually real and all that matters then he is stupid. Or mad.

5 minute maximum power? Whilst climbing. Five minute bursts?

I pick stupid.

LMAO at that excerpt.

 

[ebandit]

laugh

I don't think its money with Walsh. It's belonging. He's now part of the cool gang. No longer the outsider. He's not a savy guy. Fairly beige. Now he's riding shotgun in the Jag and dinning with the Dawgs.

But when you read book. Like this excerpt. Read it and let it sink in. Then you realise the guy might very well be stupid.

If he really does believe this as the "one" single statistic is actually real and all that matters then he is stupid. Or mad.

5 minute maximum power? Whilst climbing. Five minute bursts?

I pick stupid.

LMAO at this post...............b1tchy!

Mark L

 

[thehog]

LMAO at that excerpt.

Yeah it's crazy talk. That's the most relevant statistic for Walsh?

A statistic that means nothing and it's not even real.

It's like he was looking for one thing that would explain Ventoux. And when he found it he leaped on it. He ignores Grappe once gave Armstrong a pass.

It's beyond belief the criteria Walsh uses to state "Why I believe in Chris Froome".

The man has gone all propaganda on us.

 

[pugdog]

Yeah it's crazy talk. That's the most relevant statistic for Walsh?

A statistic that means nothing and it's not even real.

It's like he was looking for one thing that would explain Ventoux. And when he found it he leaped on it. He ignores Grappe once gave Armstrong a pass.

It's beyond belief the criteria Walsh uses to state "Why I believe in Chris Froome".

The man has gone all propaganda on us.

He was always propaganda. Armstrong was his leg up, now he's in the saddle, but he's forgotten the horse can buck him off.

 

[maltiv]

I don't think its money with Walsh. It's belonging. He's now part of the cool gang. No longer the outsider. He's not a savy guy. Fairly beige. Now he's riding shotgun in the Jag and dinning with the Dawgs.

But when you read book. Like this excerpt. Read it and let it sink in. Then you realise the guy might very well be stupid.

If he really does believe this as the "one" single statistic is actually real and all that matters then he is stupid. Or mad.

5 minute maximum power? Whilst climbing. Five minute bursts?

I pick stupid.

What on earth is he trying to say in the last sentence?

Or in any of the sentences, for that matter. That simply made no logical sense whatsoever.

 

[the sceptic]

What on earth is he trying to say in the last sentence?

Or in any of the sentences, for that matter. That simply made no logical sense whatsoever.

"The variables that makes him look like a doper are eliminated, and there is enough clean data available to draw the conclusion that he is cleans"

 

[thehog]

What on earth is he trying to say in the last sentence?

Or in any of the sentences, for that matter. That simply made no logical sense whatsoever.

Well what's tempo? 52km p/h for 4 hours pre Ventoux? Tempo means nothing. It's not a reference to speed.

What he might mean is that Froome even when 'prestissimo' can then ride his bike up a mountain at maximum power for 5 minutes continuously. Then he can keep doing this over and over again. 5 minutes at FTP?!!

If Walsh thinks that's human then he must be thick.

He then discounts all other variables and statistics and says this is all that matters because it's a baseline?

Huh?

Even Ed Coyle would blush at this analysis.

No wonder Walsh is afraid of Kimmage.

 

[veganrob]

Well obviously Walsh did not get Brailsfrauds announcement that in this new world of clean cycling, led by the inimitable Team Sky, stunts like that of the Dawg aren't possible any more.

Wish they could get their stories straight.

 

[The fridge in the blue trees]

Personally, I don't see the problem if Walsh believes Sky to be clean. If he genuinely believes Sky to be clean and has put pen to paper (or committed characters to word processor, at least) in order to right what he perceives as the unfair criticism they have received, based on what he has seen and what he knows, then that's fair enough. I have plenty of respect for that, and bearing in mind his reputation was built in the cycling community based on his pursuit of Armstrong that made him seen as something of an anti-doping crusader, nailing his colours to the "Sky=clean" mast knowing that many will see it as selling out takes some cojones.

However, I do have a problem with him insulting his readers' intelligence by justifying that position with arguments so weak they are unbecoming for a journalist of his reputation and standing. The arguments presented in order to justify his belief that Sky are clean are not always but often riddled with holes (the most ridiculous of all being "Froome roomed with one of his teammates, what doper would do that?"), and some of the symbolism is so heavy-handed as to be comical (the worst offenders in that regard have been brought up in this thread a long time ago, like the butterfly moment).

I feel that if Sky are not clean, and Walsh has been kept in the dark, it has been a missed opportunity, whereas if he knows and is in on it then he's dishonest and deserves the stick he's getting.

If Sky are clean, then a great opportunity has still been missed, because the flimsy arguments do not succeed in convincing those that doubt them, and so many questions are left unanswered that Walsh could have answered for us that it does Sky a disservice.

Incredible! A sensible post in this thread! Sensible? Excellent post actually.
Maybe a mod should delete it though, thought only lunacy was allowed in here?

 

[the sceptic]

You mean everyone that predicted Walsh would become a sky fanboy were wrong?

 

[neineinei]

Incredible! A sensible post in this thread! Sensible? Excellent post actually.
Maybe a mod should delete it though, thought only lunacy was allowed in here?

It's certainly a delight to read among all the excerpts from Walsh's book. They are making me dizzy and queasy. If some other team are considering embedding a writer, please chose Libertine.

 

[peloton]

RR posted the link in another thread, seems more apt here.

http://competitorradio.competitor.com/2014/01/david-walsh/

 

[the sceptic]

http://www.podiumcafe.com/book-corner/2014/1/14/5307296/inside-team-sky-by-david-walsh

good review.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

http://www.podiumcafe.com/book-corner/2014/1/14/5307296/inside-team-sky-by-david-walsh

good review.

Yes, fair and balanced. In contrast to that comedy book.

 

[The Hitch]

I liked this bit

In Walsh's black and white world of cynics and the faithful - them and us - there is no room for the questions such shades of grey raise

Has Walsh been made aware of this article through twitter?

Will be more difficult to dismiss an actual piece as evil mob haters hating on him.

 

[Bryant4114]

I thought I'd come on here as I finished the book today and was compelled to say something.

My word, I don't think I've ever been so disappointed by a piece of non-fiction. Perhaps disappointed is the wrong word. Embarrassed would be more apt - expectations set reasonably high by the engaging Richard Moore version of events from a few years back, plus I thought Seven Deadly Sins was readable.

But my word, what an utterly awful, self-obsessed, self-indulgent, condescending piece of PR damage-control rubbish.

The review from Podium Cafe could not hit the nail on the head any cleanly. Bizarrely, Walsh seems to take on the role of Armstrong in practically berating readers with flimsy, drawn-out, weak arguments to make them feel silly for even daring to doubt Team Sky. A ludicrous stance not just in 2014, but from a man who took all that he did from Lance.

Although, I have to say what made me most angry was the way in which he disrespectfully mocked and chided Team Saxo Tinkoff from his seat in the Team Sky bus. It's the time of sneering report you would expect from a 13 year old recapping a football match against his rival, not a respected sports journalist.

I agree its not the fact that Walsh believes Sky are clean. That's fine. So do I as it happens. But the way in which he presents his argument is just the height of condescension.

 

[thehog]

http://www.podiumcafe.com/book-corner/2014/1/14/5307296/inside-team-sky-by-david-walsh

good review.

Scary. The Clinic goes prime time.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Bryant4114 or anyone else what does Walsh say about Saxo-Tinkoff?

 

[thehog]

Bryant4114 or anyone else what does Walsh say about Saxo-Tinkoff?

Just the general over tones that Saxo are evil dopers and drawing in religious connotations to make the point - "known criminal".

Not to mention Walsh makes a mistake in regards to Contador positive test calling it a passport discrepancy.

Exhibit a):

My skill set is Sheryl Crow. I'm not familiar with the story of Barabbas. So if anyone wants to fill in the context, please do.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Just the general over tones that Saxo are evil dopers and drawing in religious connotations to make the point - "known criminal"

Not to mention Walsh makes a mistake in regards to Contador positive test calling it a passport discrepancy.

Exhibit a):

My skill set is Sheryl a Crow. I'm not familiar with the story of Barabbas. So if anyone wants to fill in the context, please do.

Can't even get Tinkov's name right. Jesus.(lol )

 

[thehog]

Can't even get Tinkov's name right. Jesus.(lol )

More confusion for the casual fan?

 

[elduggo]

Can't even get Tinkov's name right. Jesus.(lol )

so;

Brailsford = Jesus

and

Froome = Jesus

do I have that right?