Is Walsh on the Sky bandwagon?

Page 221 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re: Re:

gooner said:
thehog said:
gooner said:
Robert21 said:
Had to laugh at this, found on the UK time trialling forum. :)

Finally the ST is part of the Murdoch stable, premiership football is the Murdochs' Sky TV's prime asset, and James Murdoch's pet project Team Sky is part of the post-hacking clean branding push, so will the ST be allowed to go after "group assets" even if it has the evidence? Kimmage was booted off the ST staff for doing exactly that and since then Walsh has been a toothless gimp
http://www.timetriallingforum.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=109395&page=3

I had to laugh at this too considering the ST has brought the doping story to the Premiership the last few days.

Even more funny, Walsh had nothing to do with the investigation along with pretending "Britsh Tour de France Cyclist" was never mentioned.

Walsh, King of Avoidence.

My comment had nothing to do with Walsh.

The reference that the ST wouldn't touch these stories has been proven to be a falsehood.

My mistake, you're always supporting Walsh so I apologise.
 
Re: Re:

gooner said:
thehog said:
gooner said:
Robert21 said:
Had to laugh at this, found on the UK time trialling forum. :)

Finally the ST is part of the Murdoch stable, premiership football is the Murdochs' Sky TV's prime asset, and James Murdoch's pet project Team Sky is part of the post-hacking clean branding push, so will the ST be allowed to go after "group assets" even if it has the evidence? Kimmage was booted off the ST staff for doing exactly that and since then Walsh has been a toothless gimp
http://www.timetriallingforum.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=109395&page=3

I had to laugh at this too considering the ST has brought the doping story to the Premiership the last few days.

Even more funny, Walsh had nothing to do with the investigation along with pretending "Britsh Tour de France Cyclist" was never mentioned.

Walsh, King of Avoidence.

My comment had nothing to do with Walsh.

The reference that the ST wouldn't touch these stories has been proven to be a falsehood.

Actually, the comment you were responding to was quite clearly asking whether the ST would be allowed to continue pursuing the story.

Unless you believe the whole Murdoch empire is a closely managed dictatorship where Murdoch reviews every single story in every single newspaper before it is published, then its possible, the quote was suggesting, that now that the Murdoch empire sees their assets in danger they might be more hesitant to support the investigation.

I don't believe that is the case, but that's what the quote you were responding to was saying, so it seems you misread it.
 
Feb 6, 2016
1,213
0
0
As I suggested on the thread in question, Murdoch's newspapers are always anxious to show their independence (whether deliberately or subconsciously I don't know), especially with regards to a comparatively minor issue, and especially now.
 
Sunday Times broke the story - why did Walsh only comment on soccer in his piece about Bonar? Just ignore the cycling angle when he knew full well who the names were - and yes I know he couldn't name anyone.
Also he still hasn't wrote a piece since last summer on Paula - despite him once being her ghostwriter. We all change our views. I do myself. But why is Walsh just ignoring things with Paula?
He's following the same narrative with Sky. Let's give him every credit in the world regarding lance, for the sake of argument, but can even his most fervent supporters say that he's been consistent regarding lance and others (namely Sky, froome and Paula)?
Literally the exact stuff he used to say lance was doping, speeds, improvement, VO2 max, power, he has ignored with Froome.
 
May 14, 2010
5,303
4
0
Re:

Digger said:
Sunday Times broke the story - why did Walsh only comment on soccer in his piece about Bonar? Just ignore the cycling angle when he knew full well who the names were - and yes I know he couldn't name anyone.
Also he still hasn't wrote a piece since last summer on Paula - despite him once being her ghostwriter. We all change our views. I do myself. But why is Walsh just ignoring things with Paula?
He's following the same narrative with Sky. Let's give him every credit in the world regarding lance, for the sake of argument, but can even his most fervent supporters say that he's been consistent regarding lance and others (namely Sky, froome and Paula)?
Literally the exact stuff he used to say lance was doping, speeds, improvement, VO2 max, power, he has ignored with Froome.

Right. So taking all this into account, the only reasonable conclusion one can come to - the conclusion that comports with his behavior and everything he has written - is that he was being paid by someone - probably someone other than his employer - to poke his nose around and do a long-term takedown of Armstrong. And now he is paid by someone, too - his employer, this time - to do the opposite and write long-term hagiography of Team Sky. This latter assignment is meant to be all the more effective because of the reputation for "integrity" and doggedness he built over the years in fulfilling his former assignment.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Re: Re:

Maxiton said:
...
Right. So taking all this into account, the only reasonable conclusion one can come to - the conclusion that comports with his behavior and everything he has written - is that he was being paid by someone - probably someone other than his employer - to poke his nose around and do a long-term takedown of Armstrong. And now he is paid by someone, too - his employer, this time - to do the opposite and write long-term hagiography of Team Sky. This latter assignment is meant to be all the more effective because of the reputation for "integrity" and doggedness he built over the years in fulfilling his former assignment.
that's an intriguing thought.
to your knowledge, has this thought ever before been entertained in the Clinic or elsewhere?
 
May 14, 2010
5,303
4
0
Re: Re:

sniper said:
Maxiton said:
...
Right. So taking all this into account, the only reasonable conclusion one can come to - the conclusion that comports with his behavior and everything he has written - is that he was being paid by someone - probably someone other than his employer - to poke his nose around and do a long-term takedown of Armstrong. And now he is paid by someone, too - his employer, this time - to do the opposite and write long-term hagiography of Team Sky. This latter assignment is meant to be all the more effective because of the reputation for "integrity" and doggedness he built over the years in fulfilling his former assignment.
that's an intriguing thought.
to your knowledge, has this thought ever before been entertained in the Clinic or elsewhere?

Nope. 100% original. :cool:
 
May 14, 2010
5,303
4
0
Re:

The Hitch said:
Ok, but if you had money and wanted to hire someone to take down Armstrong, would you hire an idiot like Walsh or someone more professional?

The pool you have to choose from is sports journalists . . . . :rolleyes:

Edit: Seriously, though, among people qualified to write about the sport and the rider, you'd have to find someone who also had some investigative chops, and who was willing, for pay, to act as your journalistic hitman. And if they worked for a reputable paper, such as the Sunday Times, that would be a huge advantage. (Kimmage would not be a good choice because he has integrity and is his own man. For this you need someone who can take direction, and is willing to go where, and when, you say.)

Recall that Walsh's first book on Armstrong, L.A. Confidential, was co-authored by Pierre Ballester. After that book proved to be a success, in terms of what it exposed, the choice was made to continue in that same vein. Of the two authors, Walsh and Ballester, maybe Walsh was the one willing to continue. Or maybe he was chosen because he writes in English.
 
David Walsh, Sky / British Cycling PR rep speaking on behalf of Shane Sutton in today's Times :rolleyes:


256urfl.jpg


25gb4v7.jpg
 
Really disgraceful how the sky mafia ba r pounced on the sexism allegations as a way to ignore the charges of anti disabled people discrimination and bike fraud.

So what if he isn't big on niceties with women. How does that excuse calling disabled people gimps or even outright theft.

Oh that's right, they will conveniently ignore that.
 
Re:

sniper said:
Walsh defending a known doper and bully.
Say it aint so.


I believe Walsh might have Stockholm syndrome! :cool:

The irony that his ''Sky are clean mantra', he was stating "where are the whistleblowers, there are none". So they come forward, Walsh dismisses them and plays down what they are saying. Sutton is just a maverick. What a nutter Walsh has become.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Re: Re:

thehog said:
sniper said:
Walsh defending a known doper and bully.
Say it aint so.


I believe Walsh might have Stockholm syndrome! :cool:

The irony that his ''Sky are clean mantra', he was stating "where are the whistleblowers, there are none". So they come forward, Walsh dismisses them and plays down what they are saying. Sutton is just a maverick. What a nutter Walsh has become.

There's a new Walsh book coming out.
"It's not about the money" :cool:

TourOfSardinia said:
Where have all the apologists gone?
off eating dust and humble pie :)
 
Re: Re:

sniper said:
thehog said:
sniper said:
Walsh defending a known doper and bully.
Say it aint so.


I believe Walsh might have Stockholm syndrome! :cool:

The irony that his ''Sky are clean mantra', he was stating "where are the whistleblowers, there are none". So they come forward, Walsh dismisses them and plays down what they are saying. Sutton is just a maverick. What a nutter Walsh has become.

There's a new Walsh book coming out.
"It's not about the money" :cool:

TourOfSardinia said:
Where have all the apologists gone?
off eating dust and humble pie :)


I believe it's called "Milking It" ;)

2zdqf0k.jpg
 
Re: Re:

thehog said:
sniper said:
thehog said:
sniper said:
Walsh defending a known doper and bully.
Say it aint so.


I believe Walsh might have Stockholm syndrome! :cool:

The irony that his ''Sky are clean mantra', he was stating "where are the whistleblowers, there are none". So they come forward, Walsh dismisses them and plays down what they are saying. Sutton is just a maverick. What a nutter Walsh has become.

There's a new Walsh book coming out.
"It's not about the money" :cool:

TourOfSardinia said:
Where have all the apologists gone?
off eating dust and humble pie :)


I believe it's called "Milking It" ;)

2zdqf0k.jpg


hahaah i hope you tweeted that pic to him
 
I spat out my coffee when I saw Walsh referring to the Wire in his latest blog piece.

So here's a show which argues that systems cannot be changed as they are inherently rigged. Idealism is doomed to failure, the game is forever the game, drugs are unstoppable, criminals always adapt to any new advances in anti crime technology.

And then you have Walsh who believes that once upon a time everyone took drugs, then Dave Brailsford came along, said - let there be clean cycling, and from that point onward no one used drugs and everyone went faster clean and lived happily ever after.
 
The Hitch said:
I spat out my coffee when I saw Walsh referring to the Wire in his latest blog piece.

So here's a show which argues that systems cannot be changed as they are inherently rigged. Idealism is doomed to failure, the game is forever the game, drugs are unstoppable, criminals always adapt to any new advances in anti crime technology.

And then you have Walsh who believes that once upon a time everyone took drugs, then Dave Brailsford came along, said - let there be clean cycling, and from that point onward no one used drugs and everyone went faster clean and lived happily ever after.


It was a rather bizarre piece from Walsh; for a man who championed the position of Emma O'reilly and Betsy Andreu rallying against the evil Alpha Male Lance Armstrong, he appears to have done a 360 degree turn and state: “there will be less medals’, without the ‘maverick’, ‘Shane Sutton’. “If you need to be told you have a big ass then he will tell you”.

What is even more bizarre is Walsh omits all other details to the paralympians and selling off the tax payer funded team kit from British Cycling.
 
The Hitch said:
I don't think its bizzare. Its what all the others on the Sky payroll have been saying. 5 gets you 10, Brailsford held a meeting and ordered all the journos on the Sky payroll to ignore the Paralympic side of the story.


True and that the David & Shane show both take speaking fees to appear together.... jobs for the boys, nepotism runs deep from Walsh :cool:

Also joining David on the platform was Shane Sutton, the head coach at British Cycling and one of the men responsible for getting the best out of Bradley Wiggins.

The evening was hosted at News International’s rather impressive London offices in Wapping and from the 13th floor, the view, as you can see, was quite marvellous in the glow of a warm summer’s evening. With plenty of free beer on hand, we spent a very enjoyable couple of hours listening to David and Shane’s thoughts on the upcoming Tour, Chris Froome’s prospects of winning, Bradley Wiggin’s health (!), and doping. Lots of talk about doping, especially the ‘bad old days’ of the Lance era but going backward and forward from there.

http://www.muddymoles.org.uk/mutterings/an-evening-with-david-walsh-and-shane-sutton