Is Walsh on the Sky bandwagon?

[fmk_RoI]

not sure which is worse. An idiot or a pr guy posing as a "journalist".

Go back to PDM's Intralipid problem, Kelly & co coming down with food poisoning + recall Walsh's response: nothing to see here, not doping, move along now, move along. Even two years later Walsh was complaining that "armchair enthusiasts" were leaping to conclusions just because a needle was involved.

When Walsh believes something, he believes heart and soul. And he expects you to believe too.

 

[jens_attacks]

Loera might be intelligent but most criminals are not and Brailsford certainly isn't.

If you find Brailsford's 1990's omerta intelligent then I don't imagine there is much that doesn't impress you.

He does the same thing as Brunyeel did, as Armstrong did. Says he is clean because there hasn't been a positive test, emphasizes that they train really really hard and claims to have unspecified scientific advantages.

All of those things Armstrong was saying a decade ago. There is nothing particuarly intelligent about Armstrong, or Brunyeel, as they have shown over the last few years.

People always like to romanticize criminals as intelligent, because that's how they appear in the movies, and because they feel better thinking the world only rewards success to people with talent.

The truth is, even the succesful ones are 99% of the time they are no different to any other 2 bit criminal who is willing to go to any lenghts to get what he wants and doesn't care who he hurts in the process.

a very forced comparison from my part. a lil bit of fun
if i'd be guzman i would make the most batshiit crazy cycling team in sport's history. froomey would be dropped on the first bump in the road.

 

[ebandit]

Lol

Loera might be intelligent but most criminals are not and Brailsford certainly isn't.

If you find Brailsford's 1990's omerta intelligent then I don't imagine there is much that doesn't impress you.

He does the same thing as Brunyeel did, as Armstrong did. Says he is clean because there hasn't been a positive test, emphasizes that they train really really hard and claims to have unspecified scientific advantages.

All of those things Armstrong was saying a decade ago. There is nothing particuarly intelligent about Armstrong, or Brunyeel, as they have shown over the last few years.

People always like to romanticize criminals as intelligent, because that's how they appear in the movies, and because they feel better thinking the world only rewards success to people with talent.

The truth is, even the succesful ones are 99% of the time they are no different to any other 2 bit criminal who is willing to go to any lenghts to get what he wants and doesn't care who he hurts in the process.

LOL no wonder I read 'dont believe ALL you read on forums'

so DB is not very clever.............still seems to have achieved great success

while team sky may be compared with USPS in some areas DB does so much more his way

nice to think criminals ALL get caught because they lack brains forgetting the ones that remain unknown

and yes! i'm posting here further proving one does not need to be clever to do so

Mark L

 

[elduggo]

according to an ad in today's ST Walsh will be making himself available for Q+A at preview screenings of the Froome Lie (Armstrong lie, whatever) in Ireland this week.

Details as follows;

Jan 28th at 6:30pm in the LightHouse Cinema, Dublin
Jan 28th at 6:30pm in the Omniplex Cinema, Cork

(and no thats not a typo by me. The ad gives the same date and time for both screenings/Q+A sessions - Froome and Brailsford must have imparted some sort of omnipresence ability to Walsh for him to be able to pull this one off).

Anyway, whatever the dates/times, if anyone can be arsed to head along and ask the 'difficult' questions, heres an opportunity.

Tickets to be gotten at http://www.thesundayclub.ie (enter the code ARMSTRONG)

 

[The Hitch]

Well digger lives in Ireland I think

I want video feed if that happens.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

If Digger turns up to a Walsh Q & A I don't think there will be any softball questions to open the night up. It will be more like the Canucks & Flames last night. 2 seconds, punch-up.

 

[Bexon30]

If Digger turns up to a Walsh Q & A I don't think there will be any softball questions to open the night up. It will be more like the Canucks & Flames last night. 2 seconds, punch-up.

Now that made me laugh earlier.... What a way to start a Hockey game!! I'd rather a few awkward questions before the raucous started.

 

[the sceptic]

Kimmage and Digger would make a dynamic duo there.

 

[gooner]

The Omniplex in Cork is one of two cinemas I go to normally as it's not far away from me. It's in my plans to go there again on the 31st for the general release. If I could get a ticket I would like to go to this myself but it seems in the link above you have to be a member of the Sunday club to avail of booking it there. I checked the Omniplex site and it still says nothing about this so there maybe trouble in acquiring one.

 

[ferryman]

The Omniplex in Cork is one of two cinemas I go to normally as it's not far away from me. It's in my plans to go there again on the 31st for the general release. If I could get a ticket I would like to go to this myself but it seems in the link above you have to be a member of the Sunday club to avail of booking it there. I checked the Omniplex site and it still says nothing about this so there maybe trouble in acquiring one.

Gooner, it would be good if you could get a ticket and report back as one of the regulars on here. I'm sure it would lead to much more 'healthy' debate Go for it

 

[Netserk]

I'm sure it would lead to much more 'healthy' debate

Do you think it's currently 'ill'?

 

[ferryman]

Do you think it's currently 'ill'?

No, it's just a saying. The written word is not the best medium at times.

 

[Netserk]

I know it's just a saying. A saying that in this context insinuates that the debate here isn't currently (or at times) 'healthy'.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

No, it's just a saying. The written word is not the best medium at times.

Inverted commas around single words are used to indicate sarcasm. Your statement

I'm sure it would lead to much more 'healthy' debate

reads like

I'm sure it would lead to even more unhealthy debate

 

[ferryman]

I know it's just a saying. A saying that in this context insinuates that the debate here isn't currently (or at times) 'healthy'.

Reading too much in to it Net. As I said the written word...I bet, if say, 5 random members were sat around a table having a few drinks talking cycling, let`s say you, Gooner, Martin V, Bro D and Hitch, you would get on like a house on fire. The differences of opinion would be debated obviously but I've no doubt in a good way.

 

[gooner]

Gooner, it would be good if you could get a ticket and report back as one of the regulars on here. I'm sure it would lead to much more 'healthy' debate Go for it

I registered on the link elduggo provided and it's only a competition to enter to be in with a chance of winning a couple of tickets to it. Knowing this, I quickly unsubscribed.

This will probably be advertised in the local paper sometime during the week like they normally do for preview screenings here. I will keep an eye out on the Omniplex website too in the coming days where I can do a booking if I come across it. Saying all this, I think it could be like goldust to get my hands on one. The two showings in different locations at the same time suggests Walsh must be doing this Q&A by video link.

 

[pmcg76]

Just going to comment on the Kimmage/Walsh debate. I do find the current brand of Walsh justification for believing in SKY as banality at it's worst.

However I cannot figure out why Kimmage would destroy a 30+ year friendship because of a disagreement on this subject. There would be several legit reasons for ending a long friendship but 'believing in SKY' would not be one of them, for me this brings into doubt the mindset of Kimmage. He really does seem OTT.

Also Kimmage has shown a certain amount of belief in Dan Martin, cheering for him at L-B-L and interviewing him and his parents. It seem's Kimmage's belief in Martin is based on nothing more than these meetings and maybe some info from JV. Why is it ok for Kimmage to believe in Martin and not ok for Walsh to believe in SKY having spent 8 weeks with them(even though I don't agree with Walsh). Seems to be a double standard there.

I also find it funny that Kimmage is seen as rightfully bitter because he had his career destroyed by dopers yet Greg LeMond was winning Tours clean in the same era, indeed there are other guys like Hampsten, Bauer, Mottet who are viewed as clean. Did Kimmage really lose his career because of doping or was he merely not good enough? Rough Ride was the first book I ever read about ProCycling and even then it was clear that Kimmage didn't have the mindset to be a pro. He could have been a domestique with Roche up until 91 at least but couldn't handle being average and as he had a nice option, he took it.

I admire Kimmage for many things and he has been a lone voice in many instances but he is far from the idol he is viewed as around here.

 

[the sceptic]

Also Kimmage has shown a certain amount of belief in Dan Martin, cheering for him at L-B-L and interviewing him and his parents. It seem's Kimmage's belief in Martin is based on nothing more than these meetings and maybe some info from JV. Why is it ok for Kimmage to believe in Martin and not ok for Walsh to believe in SKY having spent 8 weeks with them(even though I don't agree with Walsh). Seems to be a double standard there.

I think this is simply because its much easier to make a credible case of Martin being clean than Froome.

Im sure Kimmage is also considering things like how his career has developed, his performances and things like that.

I would have no problem with Walsh cheering on Martin as a clean rider, as long as his reasoning makes sense to me.

 

[pmcg76]

I think this is simply because its much easier to make a credible case of Martin being clean than Froome.

Im sure Kimmage is also considering things like how his career has developed, his performances and things like that.

I would have no problem with Walsh cheering on Martin as a clean rider, as long as his reasoning makes sense to me.

I agree that Martin appears more believable than Froome but for someone who is the arch skeptic, surely if Kimmage believed Martin to be clean based on performance then that means there may be a lot of riders at Martin's level who are clean. I have heard Kimmage show faith in only Martin which shows that his thinking is based on his personal contact with Martin, the same as Walsh's personal contact with SKY despite its faults.

 

[The Hitch]

Just going to comment on the Kimmage/Walsh debate. I do find the current brand of Walsh justification for believing in SKY as banality at it's worst.

However I cannot figure out why Kimmage would destroy a 30+ year friendship because of a disagreement on this subject. There would be several legit reasons for ending a long friendship but 'believing in SKY' would not be one of them, for me this brings into doubt the mindset of Kimmage. He really does seem OTT.

Also Kimmage has shown a certain amount of belief in Dan Martin, cheering for him at L-B-L and interviewing him and his parents. It seem's Kimmage's belief in Martin is based on nothing more than these meetings and maybe some info from JV. Why is it ok for Kimmage to believe in Martin and not ok for Walsh to believe in SKY having spent 8 weeks with them(even though I don't agree with Walsh). Seems to be a double standard there.

I also find it funny that Kimmage is seen as rightfully bitter because he had his career destroyed by dopers yet Greg LeMond was winning Tours clean in the same era, indeed there are other guys like Hampsten, Bauer, Mottet who are viewed as clean. Did Kimmage really lose his career because of doping or was he merely not good enough? Rough Ride was the first book I ever read about ProCycling and even then it was clear that Kimmage didn't have the mindset to be a pro. He could have been a domestique with Roche up until 91 at least but couldn't handle being average and as he had a nice option, he took it.

I admire Kimmage for many things and he has been a lone voice in many instances but he is far from the idol he is viewed as around here.

Personally, (as my posts on the first page of the thread will show) I had nothing against Walsh believing in SKy.
Its when he started insulting the doubters by saying they were all Armstrong fans, calling us a mob, saying we are bitter, that Walsh crossed the line.

 

[pmcg76]

Personally, (as my posts on the first page of the thread will show) I had nothing against Walsh believing in SKy.
Its when he started insulting the doubters by saying they were all Armstrong fans, calling us a mob, saying we are bitter, that Walsh crossed the line.

I don't disagree Hitch, I remembering hearing one of his interviews on Irish radio one morning and I was falling about laughing at the absolute banality of some of the things he was coming up with.

I guess Kimmage hasn't started with any rubbish on Martin and it's his personal belief, like Walsh but without the banality. But then Kimmage has never been questioned about his belief in Martin the same way Walsh has about SKY.

I would love to do an interview with Kimmage and ask him about his own career and beliefs.

 

[elduggo]

However I cannot figure out why Kimmage would destroy a 30+ year friendship because of a disagreement on this subject. There would be several legit reasons for ending a long friendship but 'believing in SKY' would not be one of them, for me this brings into doubt the mindset of Kimmage. He really does seem OTT.

I don't think its stretch to expect that theres more to this than was in the public domain. I was at one of those Kimmage/Walsh talks about a year back and Kimmage commented on Sky that night. His comments were consistent with those hes come out with since, mostly that he doesn't know if they're doping but they DO have questions to answer. Their friendship was fine for a good while after that (based on the fact that there were many more of those talks). It seems to me, on the face of it, that the only thing thats changed is Walsh getting more and more into bed with Sky. Hence I think it wrong to simply assume it was Kimmage that ended the friendship with Walsh, or that there wasn't more to this than meets the eye.

Also Kimmage has shown a certain amount of belief in Dan Martin, cheering for him at L-B-L and interviewing him and his parents. It seem's Kimmage's belief in Martin is based on nothing more than these meetings and maybe some info from JV. Why is it ok for Kimmage to believe in Martin and not ok for Walsh to believe in SKY having spent 8 weeks with them(even though I don't agree with Walsh). Seems to be a double standard there.

wouldn't Kimmage know the Martin family going back years? I would expect Kimmage's opinion on Dan is based on far more than you suggest.

I admire Kimmage for many things and he has been a lone voice in many instances but he is far from the idol he is viewed as around here.

The beauty of this is that Kimmage doesn't seek to be viewed as an idol. Hes driven by his own passion and his own desire for justice. He doesn't give a flying fcuk what people think of him and he has my utmost admiration for this.

 

[Digger]

I don't think its stretch to expect that theres more to this than was in the public domain. I was at one of those Kimmage/Walsh talks about a year back and Kimmage commented on Sky that night. His comments were consistent with those hes come out with since, mostly that he doesn't know if they're doping but they DO have questions to answer. Their friendship was fine for a good while after that (based on the fact that there were many more of those talks). It seems to me, on the face of it, that the only thing thats changed is Walsh getting more and more into bed with Sky. Hence I think it wrong to simply assume it was Kimmage that ended the friendship with Walsh, or that there wasn't more to this than meets the eye.



wouldn't Kimmage know the Martin family going back years? I would expect Kimmage's opinion on Dan is based on far more than you suggest.



The beauty of this is that Kimmage doesn't seek to be viewed as an idol. Hes driven by his own passion and his own desire for justice. He doesn't give a flying fcuk what people think of him and he has my utmost admiration for this.

This........

 

[Benotti69]

This........

Exactamundo.

Not many idolise Kimmage. Most respect him for his passion for the truth. Big difference.

 

[pmcg76]

I don't think its stretch to expect that theres more to this than was in the public domain. I was at one of those Kimmage/Walsh talks about a year back and Kimmage commented on Sky that night. His comments were consistent with those hes come out with since, mostly that he doesn't know if they're doping but they DO have questions to answer. Their friendship was fine for a good while after that (based on the fact that there were many more of those talks). It seems to me, on the face of it, that the only thing thats changed is Walsh getting more and more into bed with Sky. Hence I think it wrong to simply assume it was Kimmage that ended the friendship with Walsh, or that there wasn't more to this than meets the eye.



wouldn't Kimmage know the Martin family going back years? I would expect Kimmage's opinion on Dan is based on far more than you suggest.



The beauty of this is that Kimmage doesn't seek to be viewed as an idol. Hes driven by his own passion and his own desire for justice. He doesn't give a flying fcuk what people think of him and he has my utmost admiration for this.

Well thats the problem with not giving a **** what other people think, don't expect people to give a flying fcuk what you think either. Works both ways.

I doubt very much that Kimmage knows the Martin family well, when? where? after all Dan's mother is a Roche so I doubt they had much contact through the years and Neil raced on the British scene that Kimmage detested so much. I don't think Kimmage spends much time around the Irish scene so the idea of him having much contact with the British domestic scene is even less likely.

It's only in the last 7/8 years that Dan has been involved with Ireland. Also the Martin's live in Girona year round, the place that is still viewed as a major doping hub by some here so what does that say. I would bet that whatever time Kimmage has spent with the Martin's does not add to up to the 8 weeks that Walsh spent with SKY.

Doesn't the fact that Kimmage have a certain belief in D.Martin jive with the notion that nothing has changed in pro cycling. That would mean Kimmage has faith in a guy who won L-B-L, Cataluyna, a Tour mountain stage and is ranked Top 10 in the world. If Kimmage believes that, then it is clear that there has to have been a monumental shift in the doping culture yet we never hear Kimmage say that. Kimmage can tweet his joy at seeing Martin winning L-B-L without questioning how he beat known dopers. That is the kind of stuff Walsh gets crucified for.


How is it ok for Kimmage to believe in Martin based on limit personal time spent with his family whilst Walsh is not allowed to believe in SKY based on his personal experience with them.