Is Walsh on the Sky bandwagon?

Page 43 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
If you guys honestly think Walsh has done his job well this year, if that's what you claim (not sure), why is it that his efforts have left Kimmage spitting fire and that, as Kimmage himself admitted, their friendship has greatly suffered?
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
sniper said:
you can't just continue saying everybody's wrong and just hope it sticks.
you actually need arguments, doc.
Digger here is spot on.
I have disagreed with Digger before, but I actually respect his view because unlike you we are arguing about Walsh, so you can stop with the personal baiting and trolling.
 
Dec 13, 2012
1,859
0
0
gooner said:
Walsh only referred to the laughter in the press room after Sestriere. He always pointed to Lance's treatment of Bassons as the turning point. He has been entirely consistent on this and it was no surprise to him unfairly ridiculed for him saying so after Froome's performance on AX3 Domaines. He says this exact thing before his time at Sky in SDS.
Ironic that DW's turning point on LA was how he treat Bassons - a clean rider. However the fact that Sky knowingly hired a doping doctor and many riders connected to doping seemingly had no effect on how he thought of the team.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
Dr. Maserati said:
i haven't disagreed with digger alot. that's because he's mostly spot on like in this case. sorry, don't mean to tag team against you. i just think you're seriously violating occam's razor by clinging on to disclaimers while ignoring the compelling bigger picture which includes not just one or two but in fact a whole series of pro-sky statements by walsh, where you'd simply expect a man of his calibre to be more cautious, knowing the history of the sport and the how widespread doping, lying and cheating is.

imo, you're actually offending walsh by suggesting he really believes what he writes about sky.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Digger said:
Re: asking or not asking i made it clear he needed to say he asked, if he did ask.
I never said the medical records would show doping - so that's strawman.
Hold on - dont go all sniper on me, I never said that you said they would show doping. Just they won't so getting them is not the most critical thing.


Digger said:
Qualified his thoughtso n Froome - by saying we would all be proved wrong by thinking he doped.


The pineappple thing should not have been mentioned by walsh as it's been done for years (most people would not consider mentioning it as it's been used by their teams - it's so common, but Walsh had a narrative and was so badly informed, he didn't even know this...that clear enough?...so to say it is an example of attention to detail is folllowing a narrative that this team is always looking for the smaller details - and in the context of that particular article which yes i did read, there were other examples cited...even Kimmage said on Irish radio it was nonsenical of Walsh to mention it.
Again, regarding the pineapple thing - yes, it is fluff but its the ST, they like fluff. And while I agree with PK what he said on Irish radio was "thats not new, thats not inventing the wheel" - which of course Walsh never claimed it was, real simple.

Digger said:
Re: Walsh on Sestriere - doesn't matter whether he laughed...i never saw anywhere that he laughed himself...he said he knew from that point though...and if that's not enough..he used speeds to ascertain that Ras and AC were doping in 2007.
No, again he has qualified his remarks and stated it had as much to do with Bassons and what LA had said in interviews as it was on Setriere.
Again, it is the attempt to simplify and expect the same results while ignoring other issues.
As an example Walsh had written about Ras at the start of that Tour about him asking a friend to unwittingly bring in his gear in a shoebox. So his AC comment was not going solely on speed.
 
Mar 25, 2013
5,389
0
0
Digger said:
If you guys honestly think Walsh has done his job well this year, if that's what you claim (not sure), why is it that his efforts have left Kimmage spitting fire and that, as Kimmage himself admitted, their friendship has greatly suffered?
First of all, I don't think this is worth falling out over. It should be just a difference of opinion. I think the whole thing is pathetic if it really has come to that.

On this, I have found it strange how Kimmage in his Irish Indo video peice say an embedded journalism is a great way of showing transparency and contrasted his own experiences with Sky and Garmin. No issue with that and he entitled to flag that up, but why then does he dismiss it with Walsh who has been with Sky much longer as he took in the Giro and training camps. He told Walsh not to go in and around Sky's inner circle but yet he was happy to want to do so in 2010 himself.

Plus in his Second Captains interview which Kimmage criticised Walsh's piece on Froome, he said Walsh has never addressed Leinders. This is untrue.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Digger said:
If you guys honestly think Walsh has done his job well this year, if that's what you claim (not sure), why is it that his efforts have left Kimmage spitting fire and that, as Kimmage himself admitted, their friendship has greatly suffered?
It doesn't take much to get Paul spitting fire, but Walsh's comments about how the mob were wrong was dumb - so I can see why Kimmage (as indeed I did) would object to that.

But it is also understandable - because as we have seen even here people are ignoring or twisting what Walsh has actually written (if they have even read anything he has written in the first instance) and constantly dismiss what he says as being part of Sky PR.

Ultimately - do I think Walsh will write a piece about Sky if something pops up, yes. And the JTL piece shows that.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
gooner said:
...
Plus in his Second Captains interview which Kimmage criticised Walsh's piece on Froome, he said Walsh has never addressed Leinders. This is untrue.
walsh has bought into brailsford astonishing claim that they didn't know about leinders' past. brailsford may have fooled walsh, and walsh may have fooled you + dr. mas, but you can't fool kimmage.
 
Mar 25, 2013
5,389
0
0
sniper said:
walsh has bought into brailsford astonishing claim that they didn't know about leinders' past. brailsford may have fooled walsh, and walsh may have fooled you + dr. mas, but you can't fool kimmage.
Kimmage said he never addressed it in his columns. Is this true or not?
 
SundayRider said:
Ironic that DW's turning point on LA was how he treat Bassons - a clean rider. However the fact that Sky knowingly hired a doping doctor and many riders connected to doping seemingly had no effect on how he thought of the team.
It's like ten thousand spoons, when all you need is a knife. . .
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
gooner said:
Kimmage said he never addressed it in his columns. Is this true or not?
If you don.t get what kimmage meant, then i certainly wont be able to explain it to you.
 
Mar 25, 2013
5,389
0
0
sniper said:
If you don.t get what kimmage meant, then i certainly wont be able to explain it to you.
Yes or no will do. If you don't want to answer with one of those, don't respond.
 
sniper said:
walsh has bought into brailsford astonishing claim that they didn't know about leinders' past. brailsford may have fooled walsh, and walsh may have fooled you + dr. mas, but you can't fool kimmage.
You should read Walsh, like many have said. But you should read Kimmage too, I´d like to add. Considering your obsession with Vaughters, what do you think of Kimmage and Vaughters relationship? Kimmage view is about 180 degrees different compared with your own comments about Vaughters, so was Kimmage fooled in this case?
And you should also read how incredible hard it was publish his interview with Landis, after three weeks of wrestling with ST lawyers, everything was taken out. Later Kimmage said about this." The piece was absolutely utterly worthless." Point being - one thing is speculate in Clinic, another thing is publish smth under your own name.
 
Dr. Maserati said:
It doesn't take much to get Paul spitting fire, but Walsh's comments about how the mob were wrong was dumb - so I can see why Kimmage (as indeed I did) would object to that.

But it is also understandable - because as we have seen even here people are ignoring or twisting what Walsh has actually written (if they have even read anything he has written in the first instance) and constantly dismiss what he says as being part of Sky PR.

Ultimately - do I think Walsh will write a piece about Sky if something pops up, yes. And the JTL piece shows that.
I have read it all and spent an hour on the phone going back and forth on this.
And I know that there is far more than the mob reference which has made Kimmage annoyed/angry. Basically his whole soft approach from the start of the year.
 
Dr. Maserati said:
Hold on - dont go all sniper on me, I never said that you said they would show doping. Just they won't so getting them is not the most critical thing.




Again, regarding the pineapple thing - yes, it is fluff but its the ST, they like fluff. And while I agree with PK what he said on Irish radio was "thats not new, thats not inventing the wheel" - which of course Walsh never claimed it was, real simple.


No, again he has qualified his remarks and stated it had as much to do with Bassons and what LA had said in interviews as it was on Setriere.
Again, it is the attempt to simplify and expect the same results while ignoring other issues.
As an example Walsh had written about Ras at the start of that Tour about him asking a friend to unwittingly bring in his gear in a shoebox. So his AC comment was not going solely on speed.
One line from Walsh re: Ras and AC - 'the speeds at which these two are going is illogical.' So I would like to know what speeds he feels are logical...speeds that are the some of the fastest every ridden up a mountain? Which he still hasn't addressed.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
Von Mises said:
You should read Walsh, like many have said. But you should read Kimmage too, I´d like to add. Considering your obsession with Vaughters, what do you think of Kimmage and Vaughters relationship? Kimmage view is about 180 degrees different compared with your own comments about Vaughters, so was Kimmage fooled in this case?
And you should also read how incredible hard it was publish his interview with Landis, after three weeks of wrestling with ST lawyers, everything was taken out. Later Kimmage said about this." The piece was absolutely utterly worthless." Point being - one thing is speculate in Clinic, another thing is publish smth under your own name.
valid points/questions.
i don't think kimmage believes hesjedal won the giro clean.
that doesn't mean he and vaughters cannot be good friends.
vaughters does strike me as a very charismatic guy, and lets face it, kimmage needs a few friends here and there. Without vaughters, he'd be fully isolated. Vaughters has given him a place in the race again. I honestly don't really know how candid/earnest vaughters' intentions were when he invited kimmage to the tour. it's an intriguing question.

I know vaughters will easily say sky are clean.
Kimmage won't. But what vaughters really believes remains more clouded, at least to me.
He's an intriguing character, as is Kimmage.
But unlike vaughters/kimmage, the case of Walsh really is a no-brainer.
Anyway, would be interesting to hear more and more directly from Kimmage.
 
Jul 21, 2012
9,860
0
0
Digger said:
One line from Walsh re: Ras and AC - 'the speeds at which these two are going is illogical.' So I would like to know what speeds he feels are logical...speeds that are the some of the fastest every ridden up a mountain? Which he still hasn't addressed.
The problem with Walsh is that he always fails to ask the obvious follow up questions, which makes it look like he is just there to sugarcoat all the difficult issues.

I would rather read Jimmyfingers 5000 word essays on why he is not sure about Froome than anything Walsh has to say about sky.
 
Digger said:
One line from Walsh re: Ras and AC - 'the speeds at which these two are going is illogical.' So I would like to know what speeds he feels are logical...speeds that are the some of the fastest every ridden up a mountain? Which he still hasn't addressed.
This is the core of the issue. His failure to address the speeds when it suited him makes makes him a joke. Doesn't mean he didn't do good work in the past, he just found it way less stressful to lack integrity now. It may say a lot about the kind of person he is too.

In fact when addressing the speeds in the past he noted heavy breathing, apparently a sign a rider is clean or a reporter sold out...
 
Apr 20, 2012
6,321
0
0
Dr. Maserati said:
Ultimately - do I think Walsh will write a piece about Sky if something pops up, yes. And the JTL piece shows that.
Good thing Novitsky et all didnt have this approach.
This is the core of the issue. His failure to address the speeds when it suited him makes makes him a joke. Doesn't mean he didn't do good work in the past, he just found it way less stressful to lack integrity now.
This is basicly the core. He basicly went from ''hey, that performance is only achievable through doping'' [and he was right] to ''great ride by Froomey on Ventoux today, he is one hell of a specimen!''. I call that double standards. Or he is just a fan with a typewriter.
 
JRTinMA said:
In fact when addressing the speeds in the past he noted heavy breathing, apparently a sign a rider is clean or a reporter sold out...
Maybe he is smarter now and knows that breathing, body language, facial expressions etc are not signs to detect doping.
 
the sceptic said:
The problem with Walsh is that he always fails to ask the obvious follow up questions, which makes it look like he is just there to sugarcoat all the difficult issues.

I would rather read Jimmyfingers 5000 word essays on why he is not sure about Froome than anything Walsh has to say about sky.
I'd agree, and I often enjoy being challenged by the opposite views to my own
That's why internet forums are popular:)

We can all have our opinions and get about the rest of our lives in peace.
But we don't really KNOW
And we don't have to do this for a living, or worry about being sued for what we say
 
Digger said:
If you guys honestly think Walsh has done his job well this year, if that's what you claim (not sure), why is it that his efforts have left Kimmage spitting fire and that, as Kimmage himself admitted, their friendship has greatly suffered?
The issue for me is - what is Walsh's job?

If he was hired (and paid) to be part of Sky's media team and advertise the team then his articles should indicate the he is a paid by Sky.

If he was invited by Sky and his not paid then he open to more freedom to what he writes.

The lines are even more blurred with his tweets. Is it David Walsh the person? Or David Walsh employed by the Sunday Times or David Walsh paid by Sky PR rep? The "ST" suggests its David Walsh Sunday Times.

Concerning for me Walsh's tweets at the Giro. With his exclusive access to the Sky team he was making some very endearing tweets towards Wiggins. Even though the wheels had fallen off Wiggins we really got no insight into this. We were only told how amazing Wiggins was when clearly everything wasn't amazing.

It would be better for all if we knew the exact nature of the arrangement with Sky. Then we'd know what weight to place on his words. If he is paid to be there then I wouldn't place much emphensis on anything Walsh writes. It would be just PR. Which is fine of course. It would just be good to know.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
thehog said:
The issue for me is - what is Walsh's job?

If he was hired (and paid) to be part of Sky's media team and advertise the team then his articles should indicate the he is a paid by Sky.

If he was invited by Sky and his not paid then he open to more freedom to what he writes.

The lines are even more blurred with his tweets. Is it David Walsh the person? Or David Walsh employed by the Sunday Times or David Walsh paid by Sky PR rep? The "ST" suggests its David Walsh Sunday Times.

Concerning for me Walsh's tweets at the Giro. With his exclusive access to the Sky team he was making some very endearing tweets towards Wiggins. Even though the wheels had fallen off Wiggins we really got no insight into this. We were only told how amazing Wiggins was when clearly everything wasn't amazing.

It would be better for all if we knew the exact nature of the arrangement with Sky. Then we'd know what weight to place on his words. If he is paid to be there then I wouldn't place much emphensis on anything Walsh writes. It would be just PR. Which is fine of course. It would just be good to know.
Which of course he has addressed - in the Sunday Times:
“We were too defensive,” he says. “ I see that now and we’re going to try to change that. How would you like to come and live with the team?”

“What do you mean?”

“You join the team any time you like, for as long as you like. You live in the hotel, eat with us, attend our meetings. Everything. Access to all areas and that doesn’t mean you see what we want to show you. You want to go to a doctor’s bedroom and see what he is carrying with him, you knock on the door. He won’t have a problem.”

“The riders?”

“You speak to who you want, when you want, but try not to p*** them off. That’s my only issue. Link up with the team any time you like; when we’re on a training camp, when we’re at a race, we’ll find a room. If we’re short of a room, our doctor says you can share with him, and we will carry on doing exactly what we’d normally do. Who you want to talk to, that’s entirely up to you.”

“Why are you offering this?”

“Because we don’t have anything to hide and we want people to see that.”
As well as through twitter;
2 Feb
Three months ago Dave Brailsford made an offer I couldn't refuse. "Come and live inside Team Sky anytime you like, for as long as you like."

2 Feb
I asked how much access I'd get? "Total access," he said, "speak to whoever you want, races or training camps for as long as you want."

2 Feb
I asked why he was offering this? "Because we don't have anything to hide, and I'd like you to see that. We want to lead this sport."
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY