Kimmage on Wiggins, Sky

[gooner]

For those looking for hard hitting, remember the Lawyers will have read the piece and pulled anything they think might see them in court over it.

Newspapers cannot afford to go to court these days especially when they are millions in debt as the Independent Newsgroup is.

That Froome claims to have not known that Sky's public policy was no TUEs. I guess he never bothered to read anything written by Sky or about Sky conveniently.

This was sprawled across two broadsheet pages and it was still just under half of the three hours he was interviewed. There is a lot more to it tomorrow and that to me doesn't look like this was watered down.

 

[deeno1975]

This was sprawled across two broadsheet pages and it was still just under half of the three hours he was interviewed. There is a lot more to it tomorrow and that to me doesn't look like this was watered down.

Fair point, not watered down but not hard hitting. Maybe the hard nosed Kimmage got defused by the charm offensive of Froome and Cound?

 

[Benotti69]

This was sprawled across two broadsheet pages and it was still just under half of the three hours he was interviewed. There is a lot more to it tomorrow and that to me doesn't look like this was watered down.

How would you know if sections were pulled by lawyers?

Did you read the Landis interview Kimmage did? The edited version published by Sunday times and the unedited released by velocitynation?

They have subeditors to make the articles work.

 

[stutue]

No it wasn't. It was trolling.:

If you post claims on the internet don't start crying or throwing insults when your claims get dissected and exposed.

 

[argyllflyer]

maybe not chris, but michelle does

there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that he knew about the sky TUE policy

Who says it's the Sky policy? One maverick speaking to David Walsh doesn't set policy. Unless that person was stating that with the full agreement of the team's set-up.

 

[stutue]

How would you know if sections were pulled by lawyers? .

How would you know? After all, it is you trying to devalue Kimmage's interview with this claim...

 

[gooner]

How would you know if sections were pulled by lawyers?

Did you read the Landis interview Kimmage did? The edited version published by Sunday times and the unedited released by velocitynation?

They have subeditors to make the articles work.

Yes I did and it was in the magazine section as a small article. He was on his old Setanta Ireland programme the Friday before it was going to print and he said he spent 7 hrs with Landis. The piece was pathetic and no way one that was done over 7 hrs.

This is 3 hrs with around half of it so far gone to print and it was spread across two broadsheet pages. This doesn't look like it was pulled in sections. Funny you don't use that for other journos.

You're the one speculating about lawyer talk. The onus is more on you to substantiate in relation to this article, otherwise it's baseless.

 

[Benotti69]

Yes I did and it was in the magazine section as a small article. He was on his old Setanta Ireland programme the Friday before it was going to print and he said he spent 7 hrs with Landis. The piece was pathetic and no way one that was done over 7 hrs.

This is 3 hrs with around half of it so far gone to print and it was spread across two broadsheet pages. This doesn't look like it was pulled in sections.

You're the one speculating about lawyer talk. The onus is more on you to substantiate in relation to this article, otherwise it's baseless.

So you dont know whether the lawyers pulled anything. Thanks.

Give me a moment to ring the Indo's lawyers to get the full story and i'll get back to you.

Oh by the way, tis a forum and speculation is part of that

 

[Benotti69]

Who says it's the Sky policy? One maverick speaking to David Walsh doesn't set policy. Unless that person was stating that with the full agreement of the team's set-up.

It has been published many places that this is Sky's policy and i think it was mentioned by Brailsford in Kimmage's interview with him back in the early days of Sky.

If Sky have any ZTP, TUEs that give an unfair advantage seem to go against a so called 'clean' teams idea of fair play and anti doping. After all Brailsford did tell Kimmage that is was important to do the right thing and not be seen to be doing the right thing.

 

[gooner]

So you dont know whether the lawyers pulled anything. Thanks.

Give me a moment to ring the Indo's lawyers to get the full story and i'll get back to you.

Oh by the way, tis a forum and speculation is part of that

You're deflecting with the baseless lawyer talk without even reading the piece.

 

[stutue]

So you dont know whether the lawyers pulled anything. Thanks.

Incredible.

It is YOU making an unsubstantiated allegation that the interview has been watered down, and now you are berating Gooner for not providing evidence to disprove YOUR claim.

Oh by the way, tis a forum and speculation is part of that

...and can be dismissed out of hand unless supported by evidence.

 

[Digger]

Yes I did and it was in the magazine section as a small article. He was on his old Setanta Ireland programme the Friday before it was going to print and he said he spent 7 hrs with Landis. The piece was pathetic and no way one that was done over 7 hrs.

This is 3 hrs with around half of it so far gone to print and it was spread across two broadsheet pages. This doesn't look like it was pulled in sections. Funny you don't use that for other journos.

You're the one speculating about lawyer talk. The onus is more on you to substantiate in relation to this article, otherwise it's baseless.

just to clarify here, are you saying that you've read the full kimmage landis transcript and that you are saying they didn't speak for seven hours?

That setanta show you refer to was on Sundays.

 

[Hawkwood]

So you dont know whether the lawyers pulled anything. Thanks.

Give me a moment to ring the Indo's lawyers to get the full story and i'll get back to you.

Oh by the way, tis a forum and speculation is part of that

So what's the point continuing an argument about a piece in a newspaper that may have been gutted by lawyers, rejigged by sub-editors, and might even include misquotes by Kimmage? Many years ago I was asked by the Sunday Times for information and quotes for a story, the construction of the Channel Tunnel of all things, what came out the other end bore no resemblance to what I'd said. And yes speculation is a huge part of this forum.

 

[gooner]

just to clarify here, are you saying that you've read the full kimmage landis transcript and that you are saying they didn't speak for seven hours?

No. I clear it up.

From reading the article in the magazine section, I thought at the time there was no way that was the result of 7 hrs work. It would have to be a lot more detailed like the nyvelocity one with more length to it if he spent that time with Landis. As a result, I sensed it was pulled and edited significantly by lawyers especially after the way he hyped up the interview a couple of days previously on TV. That piece was a big let down.

Comparing it with this, no way do I see a hugely edited interview in the same shape as the Landis one.

EDIT: That was the iTalksport one which ended up only on Sundays, before they had it on Fridays. That time he was a guest and not a presenter as he was still employed with the Sunday Times. Ger Gilroy and a guy involved with the Irish rugby team backroom staff were also alongside him. Eoin McDevitt was presenting. I remember it well.

 

[Benotti69]

So what's the point continuing an argument about a piece in a newspaper that may have been gutted by lawyers, rejigged by sub-editors, and might even include misquotes by Kimmage?

I am not continuing...

Many years ago I was asked by the Sunday Times for information and quotes for a story, the construction of the Channel Tunnel of all things, what came out the other end bore no resemblance to what I'd said. And yes speculation is a huge part of this forum.

I too have experience with Lawyers, subs and final pieces.

So many posters ignore that this is 'merely' a forum.......

 

[stutue]

Many years ago I was asked by the Sunday Times for information and quotes for a story, the construction of the Channel Tunnel of all things, what came out the other end bore no resemblance to what I'd said. And yes speculation is a huge part of this forum.

Anybody who has had any dealings with the media will recognise what you say.

It is why organisations have PR departments to deal with the media.

Of course, this can't be why Sky are choosy about who they speak to. Oh no.

 

[stutue]

So many posters ignore that this is 'merely' a forum.......

So couple this with your comment about being allowed to speculate and we can conclude that you feel you can make wild specualtions without being able to back them up.

Not only does that devalue the discussion, but it also causes you grief when you are called to account and fail to provide any sort of reason why what you say should be treated with the merest modicum of credibility.

I suggest, politely, that you need to rethink your approach. I've seen the poster The Hitch bemoaning being tarred with the same brush. He's right. I may not agree with everything he says but he provides his reasoning.

 

[Granville57]

Cound says...

Ughhh. She just had to be a part of this.

Not. Interested.

 

[The Hitch]

Ughhh. She just had to be a part of this.

Not. Interested.

The newspaper messed up big time. The headline should have been - The investigation: Paul Kimmage finally interviews Michelle Cound.

 

[Eriana]

Just read the interview. Sky and his representatives advised Froome against the interview.

At the end of the article it says the full 3 hour interview will put up their website tomorrow. The paper had an hour and 20 mins of it.

Please, can you post a link to the website?

Thanks!

 

[the sceptic]

Im not reading through all these bot vortexing, can someone give me a quick summary of the interview?

 

[AICA ribonucleotide]

How would you know if sections were pulled by lawyers?

Did you read the Landis interview Kimmage did? The edited version published by Sunday times and the unedited released by velocitynation?

They have subeditors to make the articles work.

He might be able to say much more in the Irish Sunday Independent than in the British Sunday Times. Different libel laws and all that. And Froome is never going to start suing like Armstrong did.

 

[Race Radio]

That Froome claims to have not known that Sky's public policy was no TUEs. I guess he never bothered to read anything written by Sky or about Sky conveniently.

I can't image how this could be true.

Some trolls here have babbled about Sky getting dozens of Tue's but their strategy is just the opposite, to push the limits of what can be used Out of Competition without a TUE, like Cortisone use 8 days prior to competition.

Froome knows exactly how many TUE's he has had, he says 2 in the interview, and they were both for Prednisone. The 2nd one was after Romandie. Interesting to see how well he dodges Kimmage's question for more detail on this. Very skilled deflection.

Reporters have been pushing Froome on his TUE's for years. Here is what he said last year at the Tour

“TUEs are a rather personal issue, but I am able to say I do not have any TUEs during this Tour,” Froome said. “Hopefully I will not have any.”

Even Lienders knew the policy. From Walsh's piece last week

The team, said Peters, had decided they would not apply for TUEs to allow a rider to stay in a race but under pressure from a rider, another member of the medical staff had applied for a TUE to enable the rider to finish a race.

It was Leinders who rang Peters and complained about this decision, saying it was a breach of the team’s medical ethics.

With all the questioning about TUE's the last 2 years he has to know what is, and is not, allowed. No way the riders do not know the policy. They have to know the policy so they can push the limits of it.......or maybe they are like most here, they think that anything SKY tells the media does not really mean anything.

 

[Fzotrlool]

Is this interview really that important? Cycling's Frost/Nixon?

 

[deeno1975]

Is this interview really that important? Cycling's Frost/Nixon?

Not even close, looks like Kimmage was the victim of a charm offensive... Tame stuff.