Is Walsh on the Sky bandwagon?

[Dr. Maserati]

So we can continue to expand the vortex.

My post made sense to the non pedantic. I will leave it at that. You continue to troll my posts.

Emma O'Reilly felt the need to question Walsh. Go get pedantic on her if you dare.

You made something up.
That Team troll tried to come in and help you out does not hide that.

To the blue- I read it, and good that she did.
Questioning Walsh is correct and proper, but she didn't make up something to do so. You could learn something from that.

 

[Benotti69]

You made something up.
That Team troll tried to come in and help you out does not hide that.

To the blue- I read it, and good that she did.
Questioning Walsh is correct and proper, but she didn't make up something to do so. You could learn something from that.

Give it a rest. Take of your 'I hate Benotti69' hat and get over it.

I didn't post anything incorrect. Your interpretation is incorrect.

I will not respond to you again as it will result in a warning or ban!

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Give it a rest. Take of your 'I hate Benotti69' hat and get over it.

I didn't post anything incorrect. Your interpretation is incorrect.

I will not respond to you again as it will result in a warning or ban!

I am not asking you to respond to me - I am asking you to back up your claim, or withdraw it.

At any time you can show where DW 'admitted' please do so.

And I am surprised at the anger and that you think I hate you, as you said you didn't have an internet ego. Oh well.

 

[Netserk]

How can one's own interpretation be 'made up'?

 

[spetsa]

Give it a rest you two - you know who I mean. Attacking the messenger is not on....keep it up and you'll miss the next exciting instalment of the dawg and pony show

And two pages later......

 

[gooner]

Of course one team is being fixated on. They are leading the Tour, and an extremely impressive opening mountain stage - all while making grand announcements about how clean they are.

Do you want him asking Euskaltel why they aren't falling off their bikes as much as usual?

I don't disagree with Sky being mainly questioned. It's obvious that this is going to be case when they are in yellow after the Pyrenness. I already said that I hope Paul carries on this. The point about being too fixated on Sky is that I feel this questioning is done at the expense of not doing it to other teams at the moment. You can still question Sky and still do it other teams as well. With the PR campaign that Sky came into the sport on, that still doesn't mean other that other teams should be left off lightly with questioning on the dodgy doctors that they have. If a team has one they deserved to questioned and judged similarly as others that have one and even more so if they are still currently employed in the team.

You can't be serious on this.
The guy has two arms two legs one mouth like everyone else, so cannot be in five places at the same time.
A man courting five women at once won't be fair to any single one of them. Better to love one lady and treat her right.
A scientist doing superficial research on five different topics won't yield any results. If you want to progress, you do in-depth research on one topic.

And how do you think going after multiple teams/doctors at the same time would work out for Paul? He's already an outcast.

It's sad enough that Paul is still the only one out there doing his job.

Kimmage found time to go to the Garmin's press conference last week. I have heard Kimmage on numerous interviews on radio, CN, Velonation and the majority of his focus is mainly on Sky. He constantly goes on about Leinders and rightly so but I never hear him going on about the dodgy doctors that other teams are still currently employing. Yet he still is on the case with Leinders even though he has been ditched in the process.

Your point that Kimmage is the only one asking questions of Sky and Froome doping is frankly rubbish. Kimmage mentioned a French journalist last night(name I'm after forgetting) that pulled Froome up and asked him a question on doping after he left the podium to collect his yellow jersey. Kimmage said he normally doesn't ask doping related questions. John Leicester with the Associated Press also did this on Saturday as well. Regarding Leinders, Walsh has questioned Brailsford on this already and so has Daniel Benson. In the case of Benson, Kimmage praised him for once again asking the tough questions on this.

And you say I can't be serious for my expressing my point and yet you called Dan Martin a doper yesterday.

Embedded is a term used for journalists and photogrpahers who go to war zones where they live full time (24/7) with the troops for months. Walsh has not done that. He has flown in and out of Sky camps and races. Anything untoward could easily be hidden from Walsh.

Interesting you say this when Walsh said exactly the same thing only last week.

"They say they're clean. I've seen nothing to make me suspicious that they're telling a lie when they say they're clean, though that doesn't mean that things couldn't be happening behind my back.

"The conclusion I've come to given the time I've spent with them is that they certainly don't have an organized doping program within the team."

 

[Benotti69]

Interesting you say this when Walsh said exactly the same thing only last week.

Ah, but I am not on twitter PRing Sky nor do i discount that they dont have a systematic doping program on Team sky for the GT teams.

Walsh announced his intentions via twitter when he was to travel so gave Sky plenty of notice.

 

[gooner]

Ah, but I am not on twitter PRing Sky nor do i discount that they dont have a systematic doping program on Team sky for the GT teams.

Walsh announced his intentions via twitter when he was to travel so gave Sky plenty of notice.

You can't say this now and then be up in arms last year when Kimmage told Shane Stokes that Sky backtracked when they wouldn't allow him to follow the team for the entire Tour in 2010.

Even if Kimmage was allowed in it would have been planned in advance also.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I don't disagree with Sky being mainly questioned. It's obvious that this is going to be case when they are in yellow after the Pyrenness. I already said that I hope Paul carries on this. The point about being too fixated on Sky is that I feel this questioning is done at the expense of not doing it to other teams at the moment. You can still question Sky and still do it other teams as well. With the PR campaign that Sky came into the sport on, that still doesn't mean other that other teams should be left off lightly with questioning on the dodgy doctors that they have. If a team has one they deserved to questioned and judged similarly as others that have one and even more so if they are still currently employed in the team.




Kimmage found time to go to the Garmin's press conference last week. I have heard Kimmage on numerous interviews on radio, CN, Velonation and the majority of his focus is mainly on Sky. He constantly goes on about Leinders and rightly so but I never hear him going on about the dodgy doctors that other teams are still currently employing. Yet he still is on the case with Leinders even though he has been ditched in the process.

Your point that Kimmage is the only one asking questions of Sky and Froome doping is frankly rubbish. Kimmage mentioned a French journalist last night(name I'm after forgetting) that pulled Froome up and asked him a question on doping after he left the podium to collect his yellow jersey. Kimmage said he normally doesn't ask doping related questions. John Leicester with the Associated Press also did this on Saturday as well. Regarding Leinders, Walsh has questioned Brailsford on this already and so has Daniel Benson. In the case of Benson, Kimmage praised him for once again asking the tough questions on this.

And you say I can't be serious for my expressing my point and yet you called Dan Martin a doper yesterday.



Interesting you say this when Walsh said exactly the same thing only last week.

The Kimmage stuff is all straw.
He is fixated on anti-doping, not Sky. They say they are doing it clean, yet it looks and they have acted suspiciously.

How many times have ordinary people asked you in the last couple of years, is Wiggins doping, Froome doping or Sky doping?
How often have the same people mentioned someone from Astana, Radioshack etc?

And I did a quick look at your last 25 posts here on CN, spot the subject that you are fixated on?

Is Walsh on the Sky Bandwagon - 6
Tour de France Stage 10 - 1
Sky - 1
Froome Talk only - 1
JV talks, sort of - 1
Tennis - 1
What are happening in Brazil, why? - 1
Eurosport commentary - 1
The Real Football thread - 1
Somethings beginning to sink - 2
Frank Schleck - 1
Ted King - 1
Where will Richie Porte finish on GC - 1

And thats not a criticism or anyway negative, its an observation.

But a lot of posts were in The Clinic, and almost all of those were in relation to Sky. Again, I see that as normal as obviously this is an English seeking forum, and Sky are the biggest team.

 

[Benotti69]

You can't say this now and then be up in arms last year when Kimmage told Shane Stokes that Sky backtracked when they wouldn't allow him to follow the team for the entire Tour in 2010.

Even if Kimmage was allowed in it would have been planned in advance also.

Kimmage advised Walsh, in front of the Whistleblowers audience, not to embed saying he would learn nothing.

When Sky backtracked was 2010 and comparing that with 2013 is not possible.

They are different times.

 

[Benotti69]

anyone want to get pedantic on Walsh when he states that,

David Walsh ‏@DavidWalshST 7 Lug

Regarding overall question: anyone who thinks Froome 2013 comparable with Armstrong 1999 wasn't watching closely in '99.

First mountain stage and both has blown away opposition and had commentators decrying the race already over.

If we are talking personalities, well then chalk and cheese and not comparable, but when talking about bike racing and the possibilty of doping, when does personality become the deal breaker.

 

[gooner]

The Kimmage stuff is all straw.
He is fixated on anti-doping, not Sky. They say they are doing it clean, yet it looks and they have acted suspiciously.

How many times have ordinary people asked you in the last couple of years, is Wiggins doping, Froome doping or Sky doping?
How often have the same people mentioned someone from Astana, Radioshack etc?

And I did a quick look at your last 25 posts here on CN, spot the subject that you are fixated on?


And thats not a criticism or anyway negative, its an observation.

But a lot of posts were in The Clinic, and almost all of those were in relation to Sky. Again, I see that as normal as obviously this is an English seeking forum, and Sky are the biggest team.

This is in relation to other posts where I counter other poster's arguments. You should know all about that. The Sky topics/threads are the hot ones and I respond in kindly to them and lots of various opinions in them is what drives the debate more. You will find little debate going on with other teams like Movistar, Europcar and Saxo for example. There's a more general consensus on the forum regarding them. Notice also how I said I understand that Sky should get mainly questioned than others in their current position but not totally at the expense of other teams in the process. Leinders was asked again, now why wasn't other dodgy doctors who are currently still employed by teams also getting questioned? There is a difference with one team being mainly questioned than others and a fixation. Mainly leaves room for others to get questioned. A fixation means it's done solely on one thing.

I'm not fixated on Sky at all. Cycling isn't even my biggest sport for the record. I have bigger interests in sport. Those interests are more admittedly a fixation for me. If Sky get busted, I won't lose any sleep. I'll express my opinion but still move on as I have more important things in my life than to get bogged down in any of this.

 

[gooner]

Kimmage advised Walsh, in front of the Whistleblowers audience, not to embed saying he would learn nothing.

When Sky backtracked was 2010 and comparing that with 2013 is not possible.

They are different times.

So why was Kimmage not happy then?

It seemed grand for him at the time but not now for Walsh. Walsh in and around Sky is no different to Kimmage wanting to do it in 2010. No difference.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

This is in relation to other posts where I counter other poster's arguments. You should know all about that. The Sky topics/threads are the hot ones and I respond in kindly to them and lots of various opinions in them is what drives the debate more. You will find little debate going on with other teams like Movistar, Europcar and Saxo for example. There's a more general consensus on the forum regarding them. Notice also how I said I understand that Sky should get mainly questioned than others in their current position but not totally at the expense of other teams in the process. Leinders was asked again, now why wasn't other dodgy doctors who are currently still employed by teams also getting questioned? There is a difference with one team being mainly questioned than others and a fixation. Mainly leaves room for others to get questioned. A fixation means it's done solely on one thing.

I'm not fixated on Sky at all. Cycling isn't even my biggest sport for the record. I have bigger interests in sport. Those interests are more admittedly a fixation for me. If Sky get busted, I won't lose any sleep. I'll express my opinion but still move on as I have more important things in my life than to get bogged down in any of this.

Firstly, I wasnt saying you are fixated on Sky per se - but the posts are accurate.
As I said it is understandable - yet you cannot seem to give the same courtesy to Kimmage?

As for asking other teams about dodgy Docs, they are not denying it in the same way as Sky.
"Mr Vinokourov, does your team have a zero tolerance policy to ex dopers still being involved with the team?"

 

[Zam_Olyas]

Firstly, I wasnt saying you are fixated on Sky per se - but the posts are accurate.
As I said it is understandable - yet you cannot seem to give the same courtesy to Kimmage?

As for asking other teams about dodgy Docs, they are not denying it in the same way as Sky.
"Mr Vinokourov, does your team have a zero tolerance policy to ex dopers still being involved with the team?"

doc, that was funny.

 

[Benotti69]

So why was Kimmage not happy then?

It seemed grand for him at the time but not now for Walsh. Walsh in and around Sky is no different to Kimmage wanting to do it in 2010. No difference.

A lot has changed since then. Kimmage interviewed Brailsford prior to the TdF and that was when he was invited, iirc, but since then we know about Leinders and Sky's PR smokescreen.

Not going to learn anything in an environment that has been sterilised prior to arrival. Back in 2010 Kimmage had the chance to put difficult questions to Wiggins about Armstrong while Armstrong was in the same race. Now all the riders have been put through their PR paces. Train harder, attention to details yada yada.....

I think Brailsford and Sky were surprised that they would be scrutinised as heavily as they have been. Otherwise they would've been more careful over who they hired publicly. I think they were not expecting Armstrong to be finally found out and the knock on effect that has had throughout the sport.

 

[gooner]

Firstly, I wasnt saying you are fixated on Sky per se - but the posts are accurate.
As I said it is understandable - yet you cannot seem to give the same courtesy to Kimmage?

As for asking other teams about dodgy Docs, they are not denying it in the same way as Sky.
"Mr Vinokourov, does your team have a zero tolerance policy to ex dopers still being involved with the team?"

I already said I understand why Kimmage is hugely on Sky's case. Between the various platforms that he's been on I have never heard him mentioning another dodgy doctor that is still employed by other teams in the sport now.

Even the PR that Sky used, it still doesn't mean other teams should be let of lightly if they do choose to employ them. A dodgy doctor is still a dodgy doctor no matter what team they're on.

 

[BYOP88]

Wait, if he isn't on the bandwagon who's driving the bus?

 

[The Hitch]

Read on twitter tat Walsh said on itv today that it would be great if the UCI would give their experts to assess Sky's data and conclude they are clean so that everyone could finally believe.

But that Walsh said before that the UCI cannot be trusted so its strange to see him take that position

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7zPq3I80Kg&feature=youtu.be

 

[thehog]

Read on twitter tat Walsh said on itv today that it would be great if the UCI would give their experts to assess Sky's data and conclude they are clean so that everyone could finally believe.

But that Walsh said before that the UCI cannot be trusted so its strange to see him take that position

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7zPq3I80Kg&feature=youtu.be

Cookson for the layup - and scores!

 

[The Hitch]

Digger says walsh did an interview in 2007 saying that both Contador and Rasmussen are doping because the speeds were illogical.

Anyone know what interview this might be?

 

[gooner]

Digger says walsh did an interview in 2007 saying that both Contador and Rasmussen are doping because the speeds were illogical.

Anyone know what interview this might be?

I remember this.

http://www.macleans.ca/canada/features/article.jsp?content=20070727_150415_8508

 

[Cyivel]

Digger says walsh did an interview in 2007 saying that both Contador and Rasmussen are doping because the speeds were illogical.

Anyone know what interview this might be?

http://www.macleans.ca/canada/features/article.jsp?content=20070727_150415_8508

 

[The Hitch]

I remember this.

http://www.macleans.ca/canada/features/article.jsp?content=20070727_150415_8508

Thanks a million. No idea how you found it so fast.

Looking at it, i find it hard to take any position other than that David Walsh has changed his position 180 degrees.

DW: Why is it sad? They’re cheating. It’s sad that they cheat, but it’s good news when they get caught. What is sad is that the guy who’s wearing the yellow jersey now, Alberto Contador, is definitely cheating.

M: How can you tell he’s cheating?

DW: Michael Rasmussen went up the Gourette-Col d'Aubisque faster than Lance Armstrong ever went up it. Alberto Contador was alongside him the whole way. I’ve been at that race since the early 80s and I know what speeds they go up that mountain. The speeds the leaders go up at today are just illogical.

 

[the sceptic]

http://www.tdfblog.com/2007/07/walsh-contador-.html

googling is easy Hitch

Guess we have to wait for Froome to beat all of Armstrongs times on one climb before Walsh can be sure he is doping