Is Walsh on the Sky bandwagon?

[elduggo]

so what's the endgame here? The leak has happened and we can probably assume nothing else is going to come out about Bradley or Froome. The British public are experiencing shock levels ranging from not-that-much to meh - I honestly don't get the sense they care at all to be honest.

Brad has said his bit, nonsensical and inane as it was, but I'm sure that'll be that from him. Brailsford will, surely, at some point, say something equally as inane then tell us all to move along.

Wiggins can't have his titles take from him (except the knighthood, maybe). I can't see any way that could be the outcome, so what is the best/worst outcome here? That a doctor or 2 get a slap on the wrist? That we find out that Sky are just like every other team (which will be a shock to precisely no-one)?

I despise Sky's hypocracy, and always have, but I just see this as another in the long line of examples of how they haven't really got a clue what they're at when it comes to PR and/or optics.

It would kind of make you fear that every cyclists autobiography from here out is going to be even more tame and mind-numbingly awful than they already are.

 

[elduggo]

As for Kimmage and Walsh. Today's rant was in the context of a newspaper review slot on Off the Ball. I never got the impression (any time recently, anyway) that Kimmage ever lost too much sleep over the spat. If anything I reckon he regrets that he didn't see Walsh for what he was, sooner. I don't feel Kimmage is inclined to waste time with Walsh, including criticising him. People who know about cycling are quite capable of seeing him for what he is.

What was interesting was that, only last year, Walsh was still referring to Kimmage as 'my good friend, Paul Kimmage', whereas Kimmage has been quite definitive about how Walsh is dead to him.

Reading Walsh's piece today made me wonder if he sat down with Sky during the week to discuss how to spin this, and that was the best they could come up with. Hang bradley, but have a massive headline suggesting we're questioning Sky as a whole. It's pretty pathetic to be honest. I'm wondering how angry its making bradley, and what, if any, his reaction/retaliation, will be.

 

[Franklin]

Re: Re:

Walsh had several witness accounts that enabled him to legitimately call out Armstrong. Professional journalists actually need evidence of wrong-doing. It's not like the clinic.

Uhm yes... but becoming the inhouse writer does not compromise credibility in your eyes?

Walsh has truly been bought.

That's not hyperbole, it's a factual description of the position of Walsh in the team. The succes of the team is a direct contribution to his bottom line. And if he now has to say that it was actually a sham he loses both an employer as his complete credibility.

Walsh lost his journalistic creds when he became the inhouse cheerleader of Sky.

 

[fmk_RoI]

Re:

It would kind of make you fear that every cyclists autobiography from here out is going to be even more tame and mind-numbingly awful than they already are.

Or the opposite. Think. How do you stop a reviewer (me) saying a book is so bland it's clearly hiding truth? You go like totally indiscrete about a team-mate's BO, a rival's philandering, a jounalist's 'sinus' problems. Always look for the upside. Because sutobiogs made even more bland - even more like GT's - could kill. Me.

 

[Electress]

Re:

so what's the endgame here? The leak has happened and we can probably assume nothing else is going to come out about Bradley or Froome. The British public are experiencing shock levels ranging from not-that-much to meh - I honestly don't get the sense they care at all to be honest.

Brad has said his bit, nonsensical and inane as it was, but I'm sure that'll be that from him. Brailsford will, surely, at some point, say something equally as inane then tell us all to move along.

Wiggins can't have his titles take from him (except the knighthood, maybe). I can't see any way that could be the outcome, so what is the best/worst outcome here? That a doctor or 2 get a slap on the wrist? That we find out that Sky are just like every other team (which will be a shock to precisely no-one)?

I despise Sky's hypocracy, and always have, but I just see this as another in the long line of examples of how they haven't really got a clue what they're at when it comes to PR and/or optics.

It would kind of make you fear that every cyclists autobiography from here out is going to be even more tame and mind-numbingly awful than they already are.

I live in hope that this is part of a narrative shift. We've been living with a post-London-2012 'sporting-heroes' narrative for too long. Hopefully, the story becomes 'corruption and collusion at high level'. Nothing like the media for ripping down what it built up if that's what sells the papers.

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

so what's the endgame here? The leak has happened and we can probably assume nothing else is going to come out about Bradley or Froome. The British public are experiencing shock levels ranging from not-that-much to meh - I honestly don't get the sense they care at all to be honest.

Brad has said his bit, nonsensical and inane as it was, but I'm sure that'll be that from him. Brailsford will, surely, at some point, say something equally as inane then tell us all to move along.

Wiggins can't have his titles take from him (except the knighthood, maybe). I can't see any way that could be the outcome, so what is the best/worst outcome here? That a doctor or 2 get a slap on the wrist? That we find out that Sky are just like every other team (which will be a shock to precisely no-one)?

I despise Sky's hypocracy, and always have, but I just see this as another in the long line of examples of how they haven't really got a clue what they're at when it comes to PR and/or optics.

It would kind of make you fear that every cyclists autobiography from here out is going to be even more tame and mind-numbingly awful than they already are.

I live in hope that this is part of a narrative shift. We've been living with a post-London-2012 'sporting-heroes' narrative for too long. Hopefully, the story becomes 'corruption and collusion at high level'. Nothing like the media for ripping down what it built up if that's what sells the papers.

It will probably get ripped down when Murdoch has no more use for it.

 

[Benotti69]

Kimmage's piece, which shows Walsh for the shill he is.

http://www.independent.ie/sport/other-sports/paul-kimmage-so-many-questions-not-asked-so-many-questions-remain-unanswered-35076219.html

 

[ontheroad]

Today just reiterated my belief that Kimmage is the finest cycling journalist around. Doesn't suffer fools and the one thing that he will always have in his favour is the pursuit of the truth. If the last 10 days has seen a shift in the perception of sky to the wider public, I think it has also seen Paul Kimmage at his best. That piece of radio is top quality, the man is so passionate about the sport.

 

[gooner]

How many close friends has Saint Paul lost over the years due to his attitude?

Some things are worth more than friendship. As Kimmage himself once said in a Sam Abt interview:

"I love this sport. It was from love of the sport that I took the decision to write the book. Because it would have been easy to take a job on the paper, say nothing, and be buddy-buddy and pally-wally with everyone. But what service would I have done to the kids who were coming into the game?"

FMK, that was some years later after the release of Rough Ride. I don't think that was his objective when writing the book. I think he was still hoping to remain friends with Roche and Kelly, with the former in particular who he praised incessantly. It was more the system he went after.

I can think of many reasons why I would fall out with friends and say my relationship is "dead" with them. This would be far from it, but then I have perspective even with the sports I love. He can still disagree and critique Walsh's reporting. Walsh on the other hand has never said a bad word about him in the aftermath of the fall-out.

Today he personalised it. Not for the first time with Walsh. And that's making the story about himself. Remember he told Walsh to stop reporting on Armstrong as he felt it was affecting his family and wasn't worth it. Yet in the past says he's prepared to strain family relationships and friendships on this issue.

I have seen Kimmage over the years on TV/radio discussing non-doping issues in other sports and his fiery character has been seen and heard when people disagree with him. The O'Driscoll affair was a further insight.

 

[gooner]

Re: Re:

I'd imagine the answer to your questions is that Wiggins hasn't given Brailsford et al permission to speak about his medical records. The same thing prevents anyone from the governing bodies commenting on the specific issue.

You raise an important point that many have chosen to overlook: this is confidential information, it's only in the public domain becuase of an illegal hack.

However, I choose to disagree with you: what is to be gained by Brailsford et al speaking? Will they change minds? No. Will they prolong the debate? Yes. Wiggins going on a non-sporting respected mainstream programme fronted by a heavyweight interviewer, that calms the millions in the middle, the millions who CGAS about doping. It is easy to forget this, but we who shout and scream and moan about doping and the hypocrisy associated with doping, we're in the minority. We are not the audience here.

This I agree with.

 

[sniper]

Re:

Kimmage's piece, which shows Walsh for the shill he is.

http://www.independent.ie/sport/other-sports/paul-kimmage-so-many-questions-not-asked-so-many-questions-remain-unanswered-35076219.html

He was on fire in the offtheball interview too.
And I think Molloy was (deliberately?) adding some fuel to the fire by trying to see things from Walsh's perspective.
Kimmage couldn't say it this bluntly, but he knows Walsh is a sell out, objectively. It's not a matter of perspective.
As Kimmage said, the most suspicious thing about Walsh is that he's *certain* that Froome is clean. In procycling you cannot be certain, unless you get paid to pretend you are certain.

 

[Mr.38%]

How many close friends has Saint Paul lost over the years due to his attitude?

Some things are worth more than friendship. As Kimmage himself once said in a Sam Abt interview:

"I love this sport. It was from love of the sport that I took the decision to write the book. Because it would have been easy to take a job on the paper, say nothing, and be buddy-buddy and pally-wally with everyone. But what service would I have done to the kids who were coming into the game?"

FMK, that was some years later after the release of Rough Ride. I don't think that was his objective when writing the book. I think he was still hoping to remain friends with Roche and Kelly, with the former in particular who he praised incessantly. It was more the system he went after.

I can think of many reasons why I would fall out with friends and say my relationship is "dead" with them. This would be far from it, but then I have perspective even with the sports I love. He can still disagree and critique Walsh's reporting. Walsh on the other hand has never said a bad word about him in the aftermath of the fall-out.

Today he personalised it. Not for the first time with Walsh. And that's making the story about himself. Remember he told Walsh to stop reporting on Armstrong as he felt it was affecting his family and wasn't worth it. Yet in the past says he's prepared to strain family relationships and friendships on this issue.

I have seen Kimmage over the years on TV/radio discussing non-doping issues in other sports and his fiery character has been seen and heard when people disagree with him. The O'Driscoll affair was a further insight.

I agree that the Kimmage piece about Walsh sounds bitter. But. The title is absolutely excellent because this is what separates Kimmage from most others, he is asking the right questions. And he is doing it loud - which pisses off a lot of people frequently. Is it too loud or bitter sometimes? Maybe. But does this change the validity of his questions? Does it change the correct answers? Not a bit.

Cancer vs. chair, man Kimmage got a pair of balls.

 

[sniper]

^Agreed.

And by all means if there is bitterness it is justified and understandable.
Whilst Paul got his ass fired from the Sunday Times, Walsh was celebrating himself and taking all the plaudits for exposing Lance whilst going on Sky-funded candytrips.
Walsh showed the character he is and it retrospectively makes one doubt Walsh's motives for going after Lance back in the days. Did he get private funding for that, too?

Has somebody tried to get Pierre Ballester's opinion on Walsh 2.0? Or are they still in a legal battle?

 

[Rollthedice]

Where is Brailsford?

 

[Lyon]

Re:

Where is Brailsford?

Hiding on Mt Teide.

 

[Mr.38%]

Re: Re:

Where is Brailsford?

Hiding on Mt Teide.

Hiding on Mt Teide, working on the next masterplan [of course!]

 

[sniper]

Re:

Where is Brailsford?

 

[simoni]

Re: Re:

Walsh had several witness accounts that enabled him to legitimately call out Armstrong. Professional journalists actually need evidence of wrong-doing. It's not like the clinic.

Uhm yes... but becoming the inhouse writer does not compromise credibility in your eyes?

Walsh has truly been bought.

That's not hyperbole, it's a factual description of the position of Walsh in the team. The succes of the team is a direct contribution to his bottom line. And if he now has to say that it was actually a sham he loses both an employer as his complete credibility.

Walsh lost his journalistic creds when he became the inhouse cheerleader of Sky.

Walsh and Moore were interviewed on fivelive in GB yesterday lunchtime. I was in my car so didn't pick up everything but, from what I recall, Walsh was far from defending Sky.

Link here, should be good for another few days - poss geo restricted, http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07wmgkx - relevant discussion should be on from maybe 5mins onwards.

 

[fmk_RoI]

How many close friends has Saint Paul lost over the years due to his attitude?

Some things are worth more than friendship. As Kimmage himself once said in a Sam Abt interview:

"I love this sport. It was from love of the sport that I took the decision to write the book. Because it would have been easy to take a job on the paper, say nothing, and be buddy-buddy and pally-wally with everyone. But what service would I have done to the kids who were coming into the game?"

FMK, that was some years later after the release of Rough Ride. I don't think that was his objective when writing the book. I think he was still hoping to remain friends with Roche and Kelly, with the former in particular who he praised incessantly. It was more the system he went after.

Well it's his word against yours. I wonder which has more weight.

FWIW I think his Sindo article yesterday was - while not incorrect in the things it said - the wrong thing to write at this time. For sure, you can see how it'll have please some. But pleasing them is easy. And this should not be about pleasing them.

 

[WildspokeJoe]

Really interesting podcast.
http://www.newstalk.com/podcasts/Off_The_Ball/Off_The_Ball_Highlights/159159/Sunday_Paper_Review_Kimmage__OToole_on_TUEs

They ask really simple questions that Wiggins and Walsh would have a tough time answering. Really like how they say that Wiggins won the Tour of California during the height of the hay fever season but he didn't need a TUE.

 

[Benotti69]

So typical of Walsh

Keith McCormack ‏@Keith_MC 3h3 hours ago
@DavidWalshST what about Froome? Are his TUEs in the same league as wiggins, if so why isn't he getting similar attention??

David Walsh ‏@DavidWalshST

@Keith_MC Keith, if you do any reading up on the subject, you will soon find the answer to your question.

If you read 4 autobiographies on Wiggins you'd know little about his medical issues!

If read Froome's you wouldn't know he had asthma either and Walsh wrote it!!!

Still dancing to the tune of Sky.

 

[Irondan]

Re:

So typical of Walsh

Keith McCormack ‏@Keith_MC 3h3 hours ago
@DavidWalshST what about Froome? Are his TUEs in the same league as wiggins, if so why isn't he getting similar attention??

David Walsh ‏@DavidWalshST

@Keith_MC Keith, if you do any reading up on the subject, you will soon find the answer to your question.

If you read 4 autobiographies on Wiggins you'd know little about his medical issues!

If read Froome's you wouldn't know he had asthma either and Walsh wrote it!!!

Still dancing to the tune of Sky.

Is Walsh for real?

 

[hrotha]

Froome's TUEs aren't nearly as blatant and obvious as Wiggins's. That is a fact.

 

[Benotti69]

Re:

Froome's TUEs aren't nearly as blatant and obvious as Wiggins's. That is a fact.

True, but his performance and transformation was greater than Wiggins.

Walsh knows Froome never mentioned asthma for the book.

 

[Benotti69]

Walsh went on newstalk but not the sports program to talk abut TUE/Wiggins. The sports guys on newstalk's 'off the ball' program know their stuff so Walsh avoiding them again speaks of avoiding the hard questions.