Is Walsh on the Sky bandwagon?

[hrotha]

To be honest I don't think a doping WT team would hire a doper whose values gave his doping away that easily.

 

[sniper]

To be honest I don't think a doping WT team would hire a doper whose values gave his doping away that easily.

fair point.

but regardless, the "totally irresponsible" and "we should have tested him more properly ourselves rather than depend on another team's test results"-line of defense, that's limited hangout. damage control.

and as long as we don't know, walsh shouldn't sell it as a fact that Sky didn't do their own testing on the guy prior to signing him.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

i don't know. it was an initial thought, and i hope that thought will change.
let's just say that if the sports press does its job, this will indeed be bad PR for Sky.
if, that is.

Which has zero to do with Walsh - in fact I expect the British media in particular to attempt to water down Walshs piece by adding in irrelevant things like JTL being sick etc.

proposed changes:
"pathetic" > "unfortunate"
"have not bothered" > "have not been able"

Nothing that a credit card cannot get past.
This might also explain how you couldn't find the link from the ST regarding JV and you botched what Walsh had written.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

I think it is a good thing Doc Mastercard will provide us with the full text of DW's piece of today. Grazie mille Doc M.

Doc M, did Walsh contact Brian Smith?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I think it is a good thing Doc Mastercard will provide us with the full text of DW's piece of today. Grazie mille Doc M.

Doc M, did Walsh contact Brian Smith?

It is against the rules here to reproduce the full text.

And even if it wasn't, I have no intention of producing the full text from a pay only site. You cannot demand to have 'investigative journalism' which would be costly and then look for a free pass.

I have no idea if DW contacted Smith, he was not mentioned and I can not see why he would be of value to his article.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

I have no idea if DW contacted Smith, he was not mentioned and I can not see why he would be of value to his article.

You cant? Okay, thats not very journalistic of you then. Good thing Benson did contact Smith who put some things into context for those with limited acces.

You cannot demand to have 'investigative journalism' which would be costly and then look for a free pass.

Good thing you put investigative journalism in '', in this case. The term journalism would mean Brian Smith and/or JTL would have been contacted, or not?

Too bad I maxxed out my creditcard

 

[Dr. Maserati]

You cant? Okay, thats not very journalistic of you then. Good thing Benson did contact Smith who put some things into context for those with limited acces.Good thing you put investigative journalism in '', in this case. The term journalism would mean Brian Smith and/or JTL would have been contacted, or not?

Too bad I maxxed out my creditcard

Please stop your trolling.

I am not a journalist and not David Walsh.
Absolutely disgraceful that you are allowed suggest that.

As for CN contacting Smith, what would you expect Smith to say?

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Please stop your trolling.

Pardon me?

I am not a journalist and not David Walsh.

Where did I say that? I only stated you was not very journalistic. You went through all that trouble with Hein Verdruggen's enterprises, when you cant see I quote you 'I can not see why he would be of value to his article' that dissappoints me, given the fact you do have an investigative mind. That's why I mentioned that.

Absolutely disgraceful that you are allowed suggest that.

I did not suggest any of the sorts.

As for CN contacting Smith, what would you expect Smith to say?

I thought the being of a journalist is to hear more sides of a story. Otherwise you are just a reporter.

So, does this article mean Walsh is on the Sky bandwagon or not? It is a newsitem is all I can say.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Pardon me?
Where did I say that? I only stated you was not very journalistic. You went through all that trouble with Hein Verdruggen's enterprises, when you cant see I quote you 'I can not see why he would be of value to his article' that dissappoints me, given the fact you do have an investigative mind. That's why I mentioned that.
I did not suggest any of the sorts.
I thought the being of a journalist is to hear more sides of a story. Otherwise you are just a reporter.

So, does this article mean Walsh is on the Sky bandwagon or not? It is a newsitem is all I can say.

The simple fact that you address me, not what I wrote is trolling. Stop it please.

Bringing in Smith is more yak, and has nothing to do with Walshs article.

 

[TheGame]

Well well well. JTL on trainingcamps in march, may 2012, and around the Worlds. Yet, no blood tests? Yet Sky, Garmin and Endura were happy with his bloodprofile?

I agree now Race, it is looking worse and worse for Brailsfart and his buddies.

British Cycling and Team Sky hold joint training camps. Most of the GB riders have at some point been training with Sky.

 

[hrotha]

So, I read Walsh's piece, and I don't think it was damning for Sky at all. He parroted the zero tolerance policy thing and ignored the many examples other than Leinders where it has been conveniently breached. He painted both affairs as little more than innocent gaffes, really.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

So, I read Walsh's piece, and I don't think it was damning for Sky at all. He parroted the zero tolerance policy thing and ignored the many examples other than Leinders where it has been conveniently breached. He painted both affairs as little more than innocent gaffes, really.

Really?
What "many examples" are there for him to ignore?


Is this an "innocent gaffe"?

But for a team so opposed to doping and averse to being associated with any rider or staff member accused of doping, it might be considered surprising that they signed the British rider. The team had already been through the mill with Dr Geert Leinders, the Belgian doctor who arrived in Manchester in October 2010 for an interview with Team Sky. He was interviewed by Dr Steve Peters and Dr Richard Freeman, two of its backroom staff. “I could have grilled him and grilled but when someone assures you that he has not been involved in doping, that doesn’t seem appropriate,” Peters subsequently said.

 

[hrotha]

Really?
What "many examples" are there for him to ignore?


Is this an "innocent gaffe"?

Yates, Julich, Barry, De Jongh, Rogers.

And yes, he portrays it as such.

 

[The Hitch]

So, I read Walsh's piece, and I don't think it was damning for Sky at all. He parroted the zero tolerance policy thing and ignored the many examples other than Leinders where it has been conveniently breached. He painted both affairs as little more than innocent gaffes, really.

I agree. 2 comments that stand out.

Team Sky have been in the vanguard of the fight against doping in cycling...

...Sky have taken the moral high ground in professional cycling. This hasn’t made them the most popular team in the peloton.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Yates, Julich, Barry, De Jongh, Rogers.

And yes, he portrays it as such.

Again, clearly there in the article:

Late last year two members of Sky’s backroom team, Steven de Jongh and Bobby Julich, admitted past involvement in doping and had to leave the team.

 

[sniper]

Walsh says sky havent learned from the geert leinders affair.
i would argue walsh hasnt.

 

[the sceptic]

Agree. Maybe Walsh should start to connect some dots instead of being such an apologist for everything sky.

 

[hrotha]

Again, clearly there in the article:

Not in the same part where he addresses the zero tolerance policy and Leinders, or Tiernan-Locke being the only Sky rider to have been involved in something like this. And it doesn't address Rogers or Barry, who, as riders, are different from DS's from a time that's perceived as tainted.

edit: I misread, De Jongh and Julich are addressed in the same paragraph as Leinders. The rest of my post stands.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Not in the same part where he addresses the zero tolerance policy and Leinders, or Tiernan-Locke being the only Sky rider to have been involved in something like this. And it doesn't address Rogers or Barry, who, as riders, are different from DS's from a time that's perceived as tainted.

Its in the exact same spot:

Team Sky have been in the vanguard of the fight against doping in cycling and operate a “zero tolerance” policy against anyone with a doping conviction or known to have been involved in doping. Last year the team’s reputation was damaged by the news that they had employed Geert Leinders, a Belgian doctor, not knowing that he had a shady past. He is now fighting charges that he had been involved in doping at the Dutch Rabobank team. There is no suggestion that Leinders was involved in doping at Team Sky but the team’s initial policy had been against employing doctors from within professional cycling. Late last year two members of Sky’s backroom team, Steven de Jongh and Bobby Julich, admitted past involvement in doping and had to leave the team.

If Walsh was to name Yates, Rogers and Barry he would also have to do due diligence and point out that none left the team because of a known positive or involvement with doping at that time- which would actually dilute his article and give rise to him being labeled an apologist.

 

[hrotha]

I edited my post just before you replied.

And I wasn't talking about those guys leaving the team, but about their joining it when their past was pretty obvious - particularly Rogers and Barry's. Similarly, Walsh plainly states that Sky didn't know about Leinders's past, which I find extremely far-fetched.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I edited my post just before you replied.

And I wasn't talking about those guys leaving the team, but about their joining it when their past was pretty obvious - particularly Rogers and Barry's. Similarly, Walsh plainly states that Sky didn't know about Leinders's past, which I find extremely far-fetched.

It certainly was not "obvious" when they joined. Suspicions yes, obvious no.

To the highlighted - sure, because that is what Sky claim, being a responsible journalist he has to add that, but he also pointed out that their policy does not work:

There is no suggestion that Leinders was involved in doping at Team Sky but the team’s initial policy had been against employing doctors from within professional cycling.

 

[the sceptic]

If sky didnt know anything about Leinders past then how did they know about him in the first place? He just showed up one day when they needed a doctor?

 

[hrotha]

It certainly was not "obvious" when they joined. Suspicions yes, obvious no.

To the highlighted - sure, because that is what Sky claim, being a responsible journalist he has to add that, but he also pointed out that their policy does not work:

It was obvious to any Clinician, it sure was obvious to any actual insiders.

"Their policy doesn't work" is a far cry from "They willingly breached their stated policy".

 

[Dr. Maserati]

It was obvious to any Clinician, it sure was obvious to any actual insiders.

"Their policy doesn't work" is a far cry from "They willingly breached their stated policy".

While you are now quoting what I paraphrased (wtf?) as something to do with Walsh -
"Their policy doesn't work", is factual and accurate.
"They willingly breached their stated policy" - is conjecture.

Walsh writes for a Newspaper which is subject to the lovely libel laws of the UK, he wasn't writing anonymously on the internet.

 

[hrotha]

While you are now quoting what I paraphrased (wtf?) as something to do with Walsh -
"Their policy doesn't work", is factual and accurate.
"They willingly breached their stated policy" - is conjecture.

Walsh writes for a Newspaper which is subject to the lovely libel laws of the UK, he wasn't writing anonymously on the internet.

It's not conjecture, it's a fact. Their policy was "no cycling doctors". They changed it to go for a doping doctor using the death of Txema González as a ridiculous excuse.