Is Walsh on the Sky bandwagon?

[thehog]

Re: Re:

Does Walsh still have full access to Sky? He has revealed this morning that Sky hired Tony Blairs former PR consultant to try and set up a press conference in which Froome would praise Brailsford but he then failed to do so.

Walsh is on a crusade at the minute which can be summarised as Big Bad Brailsford needs to go now whilst Fantastic Froome is a clean hero. Any story about Sky he writes always seems to try and separate Froome from any wrongdoing.

I'm not sure how Walsh's position is tenable as being the journalist with full access to the team. He has certainly revealed absolutely nothing since the story broke, this despite his Ccomments that Brailsford would regret the day that he allowed him into the team since he knows a lot of people who could tell him things. Walsh has been played for a fool and continues to be so.

Walsh is a tool and a fool. All those years chasing Armstrong he failed. It was Landis and the feds that took Armstrong down. Walsh played little part in it all in the end. But he has cashed in on it and Sky have used that reputation to blind the fans to their UKPostal team dominance of July.

A journalists' job is to inform as he did with sources. Any different to Lawton, is it?

It's like saying Damien Ressiot failed. That was enough for Armstrong's downfall. Journalists can't be blamed for incompetent sports governance that fails to act.

Like Reedie, Cookson, Coe, UKAD and British Cycling. I couldn't agree more.

 

[gooner]

Re: Re:

Does Walsh still have full access to Sky? He has revealed this morning that Sky hired Tony Blairs former PR consultant to try and set up a press conference in which Froome would praise Brailsford but he then failed to do so.

Walsh is on a crusade at the minute which can be summarised as Big Bad Brailsford needs to go now whilst Fantastic Froome is a clean hero. Any story about Sky he writes always seems to try and separate Froome from any wrongdoing.

I'm not sure how Walsh's position is tenable as being the journalist with full access to the team. He has certainly revealed absolutely nothing since the story broke, this despite his Ccomments that Brailsford would regret the day that he allowed him into the team since he knows a lot of people who could tell him things. Walsh has been played for a fool and continues to be so.

Walsh is a tool and a fool. All those years chasing Armstrong he failed. It was Landis and the feds that took Armstrong down. Walsh played little part in it all in the end. But he has cashed in on it and Sky have used that reputation to blind the fans to their UKPostal team dominance of July.

A journalists' job is to inform as he did with sources. Any different to Lawton, is it?

It's like saying Damien Ressiot failed. That was enough for Armstrong's downfall. Journalists can't be blamed for incompetent sports governance that fails to act.

Like Reedie, Cookson, Coe, UKAD and British Cycling. I couldn't agree more.

I agree on them too. Different names from what I'm referring to though.

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

Does Walsh still have full access to Sky? He has revealed this morning that Sky hired Tony Blairs former PR consultant to try and set up a press conference in which Froome would praise Brailsford but he then failed to do so.

Walsh is on a crusade at the minute which can be summarised as Big Bad Brailsford needs to go now whilst Fantastic Froome is a clean hero. Any story about Sky he writes always seems to try and separate Froome from any wrongdoing.

I'm not sure how Walsh's position is tenable as being the journalist with full access to the team. He has certainly revealed absolutely nothing since the story broke, this despite his Ccomments that Brailsford would regret the day that he allowed him into the team since he knows a lot of people who could tell him things. Walsh has been played for a fool and continues to be so.

Walsh is a tool and a fool. All those years chasing Armstrong he failed. It was Landis and the feds that took Armstrong down. Walsh played little part in it all in the end. But he has cashed in on it and Sky have used that reputation to blind the fans to their UKPostal team dominance of July.

A journalists' job is to inform as he did with sources. Any different to Lawton, is it?

It's like saying Damien Ressiot failed. That was enough for Armstrong's downfall. Journalists can't be blamed for incompetent sports governance that fails to act.

Walsh was trying to take Armstrong down. He was doing more than reporting the facts. He failed. He has no problem taking the cash and kudos for it. I dont think Walsh corrects people about who took Armstrong down.

I would not compare Walsh to Lawton. Walsh was Sky's gimp. Now that others have gotten dirt on Sky Walsh feels betrayed. If he didn't let his ego rule his job he would have never embedded with Sky.

 

[gooner]

Re: Re:

Walsh was trying to take Armstrong down. He was doing more than reporting the facts. He failed. He has no problem taking the cash and kudos for it. I dont think Walsh corrects people about who took Armstrong down.

You said he failed regarding Armstrong. How then? He's not in the anti-doping world or sports governance. He's a journalist. I think he helped inform us well enough. A journalist can only do so much.

To say he failed, is revisionism again and an opinion you didn't have prior to his reporting on Sky.

I would not compare Walsh to Lawton. Walsh was Sky's gimp. Now that others have gotten dirt on Sky Walsh feels betrayed. If he didn't let his ego rule his job he would have never embedded with Sky.

Never did compare. I referred to Lawton's reporting on the package based on his source. Will he have failed if it doesn't take down Wiggins and UKAD give all the clear?

It's comparing to what you said about Walsh's work on Armstrong.

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

Walsh was trying to take Armstrong down. He was doing more than reporting the facts. He failed. He has no problem taking the cash and kudos for it. I dont think Walsh corrects people about who took Armstrong down.

You said he failed regarding Armstrong. How then? He's not in the anti-doping world or sports governance. He's a journalist. I think he helped inform us well enough. A journalist can only do so much.

To say he failed, is revisionism again and an opinion you didn't have prior to his reporting on Sky.

I would not compare Walsh to Lawton. Walsh was Sky's gimp. Now that others have gotten dirt on Sky Walsh feels betrayed. If he didn't let his ego rule his job he would have never embedded with Sky.

Never did compare. I referred to Lawton's reporting on the package based on his source. Will he have failed if it doesn't take down Wiggins and UKAD give all the clear?

It's comparing to what you said about Walsh's work on Armstrong.

I dont think i claimed Walsh took down Armstrong. He went after Armstrong with a vengeance. That is plain for all to see. He never let go of the story. He could have plenty of times. Walsh wanted Armstrong caught. That is not revisionism. Walsh wanted more than writing about Armstrong, he wanted him taken down and that is evident in interviews he gave(eg competitor radio) and how he handle himself afterward the Oprah show.

Lawton has stated the what was in the jiffy bag will never be probably never be proven.

I think if Lawton wanted to see Wiggins fall we would see stories about Wiggins transformation in 2009 and he would be looking for evidence (or lack of) asthma/allergies prior to 2009.

 

[sniper]

To say he failed, is revisionism

why? One can think he did a good -or even a great- job going after Lance, but still conclude that he failed to actually bring him down.
And i think that's the point: he didn't bring Lance down, but he seems happy to take credit for bringing him down.

 

[gooner]

The way he's introduced is one thing (fair point), it's another to say he failed in his role as a journalist. He didn't.

 

[gooner]

Re: Re:

I dont think i claimed Walsh took down Armstrong. He went after Armstrong with a vengeance. That is plain for all to see. He never let go of the story. He could have plenty of times. Walsh wanted Armstrong caught. That is not revisionism. Walsh wanted more than writing about Armstrong, he wanted him taken down and that is evident in interviews he gave(eg competitor radio) and how he handle himself afterward the Oprah show.

Yes he did want his downfall, that doesn't mean he failed though as a journalist.

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

I dont think i claimed Walsh took down Armstrong. He went after Armstrong with a vengeance. That is plain for all to see. He never let go of the story. He could have plenty of times. Walsh wanted Armstrong caught. That is not revisionism. Walsh wanted more than writing about Armstrong, he wanted him taken down and that is evident in interviews he gave(eg competitor radio) and how he handle himself afterward the Oprah show.

Yes he did want his downfall, that doesn't mean he failed though as a journalist.

Walsh was being more than a journalist in going after Armstrong. For Walsh it was personal.

 

[Beech Mtn]

Since the "Caption This" thread is dead, Imma put this here.

On topic: which of these guys is Walsh?

 

[Benotti69]

this tells me a lot..........

https://twitter.com/DavidWalshST/status/825718059600052224

 

[Benotti69]

Boy this drip feeding of Sky's use of dope is really a death by a thousand cuts for David Walsh.

But boy does he deserve it for becoming Brailsford's Pinocchio.

 

[thehog]

Re:

Boy this drip feeding of Sky's use of dope is really a death by a thousand cuts for David Walsh.

But boy does he deserve it for becoming Brailsford's Pinocchio.

chief sports writer Sunday Times. From 13 December 2012, author of Seven Deadly Sins.

Note how David states his start time as Chief Sport writer at the Times, after Wiggins Tour win. He now is the author of Seven Deadly Sins but not Inside Sky :lol:

 

[blackcat]

Re:

Boy this drip feeding of Sky's use of dope is really a death by a thousand cuts for David Walsh.

But boy does he deserve it for becoming Brailsford's Pinocchio.

are you blocked from Walsh too? the bastard blocked forearms Van Petegem.

forearms Van Petegem ftw.

follow: http://www.twitter.com/forearms

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

Boy this drip feeding of Sky's use of dope is really a death by a thousand cuts for David Walsh.

But boy does he deserve it for becoming Brailsford's Pinocchio.

chief sports writer Sunday Times. From 13 December 2012, author of Seven Deadly Sins.

Note how David states his start time as Chief Sport writer at the Times, after Wiggins Tour win. He now is the author of Seven Deadly Sins but not Inside Sky :lol:

Wait till we find out Froome's doping. If Walsh is covered in shyte now wait till the Froome stuff hits the fan.

I wonder has Walsh got early onset Dementia or was it just the greed factor as SundayTimes doubled/trebled his salary.....

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

Boy this drip feeding of Sky's use of dope is really a death by a thousand cuts for David Walsh.

But boy does he deserve it for becoming Brailsford's Pinocchio.

are you blocked from Walsh too? the bastard blocked forearms Van Petegem.

forearms Van Petegem ftw.

follow: http://www.twitter.com/forearms

never posted on twitter so no

have the @benotti69 to stop others.

easy to read someones tweets, just log off twitter then you wont be blocked from reading their tweets, not that Walsh's are that interesting, just from the denial and comedy angle they have value.

 

[blackcat]

Re: Re:

Boy this drip feeding of Sky's use of dope is really a death by a thousand cuts for David Walsh.

But boy does he deserve it for becoming Brailsford's Pinocchio.

are you blocked from Walsh too? the bastard blocked forearms Van Petegem.

forearms Van Petegem ftw.

follow: http://www.twitter.com/forearms

never posted on twitter so no

have the @benotti69 to stop others.

easy to read someones tweets, just log off twitter then you wont be blocked from reading their tweets, not that Walsh's are that interesting, just from the denial and comedy angle they have value.

so one different browser, not google chrome, like firefox, will be on twitter without forearms logged in.

Even if google chrome have all those backdoors to see my browsing history.

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

Boy this drip feeding of Sky's use of dope is really a death by a thousand cuts for David Walsh.

But boy does he deserve it for becoming Brailsford's Pinocchio.

are you blocked from Walsh too? the bastard blocked forearms Van Petegem.

forearms Van Petegem ftw.

follow: http://www.twitter.com/forearms

never posted on twitter so no

have the @benotti69 to stop others.

easy to read someones tweets, just log off twitter then you wont be blocked from reading their tweets, not that Walsh's are that interesting, just from the denial and comedy angle they have value.

so one different browser, not google chrome, like firefox, will be on twitter without forearms logged in.

Even if google chrome have all those backdoors to see my browsing history.

not too computer literate. I presume different browsers will allow. Empty your cache history 1st. Simple log off twitter will allow you to read anyones tweets that are not private to only those following, afaik.

 

[Benotti69]

Anyone read the Walsh article today?

He is worse than the Moores, Sloberinghams or a Syeds!

Still protecting Froome, Cookson et al and only going after Brailsfrod, Freeman and Wiggins?

Clown of the highest order.

 

[BYOP88]

Re:

Anyone read the Walsh article today?

He is worse than the Moores, Sloberinghams or a Syeds!

Still protecting Froome, Cookson et al and only going after Brailsfrod, Freeman and Wiggins?

Clown of the highest order.

Is that one of those British awards, just below 'Sir'?

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

Anyone read the Walsh article today?

He is worse than the Moores, Sloberinghams or a Syeds!

Still protecting Froome, Cookson et al and only going after Brailsfrod, Freeman and Wiggins?

Clown of the highest order.

Is that one of those British awards, just below 'Sir'?

:lol:

Yes, court jester to the Sirs and Dames.

Would not surprise me if Walsh was angling for some kind of MBE, CBE or similar. I doubt he thought he would be knighted but maybe Walsh feels* he took down Armstrong so deserves the Damehood!!!!



*Walsh only played a part in taking down Armstrong.

 

[Dan2016]

Somebody somewhere on the international interwebz www.com websites or forums or tweeterzone posted a link to BBC Hardtalk interview with Walsh the other day. He took down Armstrong singlehandedly apparently. So you are wrong. So there.

 

[Benotti69]

Walsh being called out on his 2 versions of Alan Farrell re Wiggins.

Pravda chief sport correspondent being shamed on twitter "delicious" as Uncle Monty would say.

 

[ontheroad]

Walsh stating his belief in Froome again this morning. Is he still working inside Team Sky and if so why has he not quit at this stage? Protection mechanism for Froome.

 

[Electress]

Walsh fully paid up member of the 'few rotten apples' defence team:

"Most frustrating aspect of this TS train wreck is lots of good people inside team with proper ethics are having their reputations tarnished."

"A medical source inside TS told me that in 2012-15 Wiggins was only rider in team with depressed cortisol levels indicating cortisone use."

Funny how this medical source didn't see fit to tell him earlier about those depressed levels for 5 years. Or, if he did, it didn't initiate a spot of further investigation by Walsh...

I think we're past the stage of being able to put too much trust in anything coming out of Team Sky.