Kimmage on Wiggins, Sky

[martinvickers]

Awesome thread development here!

May I suggest another place to amuse yourselves?

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=21913

Excellent suggestion. If a wandering mod would be so kind as to ship this drivel across there, I'd be most obliged.

 

[Granville57]

Look up

............

 

[martinvickers]

Huh?

(evil queen, huntsman, snow white and seven dwarfs)

 

[Afrank]

I don't see this discussion going anywhere worthwhile. So Drop the insults everyone and let's get back on topic. If you must continue the discussion take it to the sidebar thread, but not here.

 

[The Hitch]

Awesome thread development here!

Like the good ol days

Maybe this is what Mellow Velo was romanticizing about.

It really isn't - it pretty clearly follows the part I bolded.

You haven't bolded anything, and what you wrote clearly was not a response to my post, which asked for clarification on a sentence you wrote.

But I see this has gotten way off course, and isn't coming back so I'll leave it be.

 

[martinvickers]

Like the good ol days

Maybe this is what Mellow Velo was romanticizing about.



You haven't bolded anything, and what you wrote clearly was not a response to my post, which asked for clarification on a sentence you wrote.

But I see this has gotten way off course, and isn't coming back so I'll leave it be.

Last thirteen words of the quote inthis post are clearly bolded.

Further discussion can go to the sidebar thread as suggested.

 

[Afrank]

I've moved a number of posts to the sidebar thread in case anyone is wondering.

 

[gooner]

In your head!!

Once more not addressing the points in my post, maybe you have something in common with Team Sky after all.

 

[RobbieCanuck]

I've moved a number of posts to the sidebar thread in case anyone is wondering.

Its about time. And in spite of your admonitions even Gooner cannot resist a last jab. Is the Clinic losing credibility or is it already lost.

 

[Digger]

Once more not addressing the points in my post, maybe you have something in common with Team Sky after all.

You said months ago you were done with the Walsh Sky thing.

By the way do you think they are clean?

Walsh has been in the game 30 plus years, what has he exposed, in comparison to Kimmage? Did good work on Lance. But ultimately he didn't get that far...a book. Without Landis it would have been nothing.
Roche yes although he sat on the Kelly positives and defended him.

 

[Digger]

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/1...n-Wiggins-and-Team-Sky-over-transparency.aspx

“I don’t recognise the Wiggins now, compared to the guy I interviewed in 2007 to when he was sent out of the Tour,” he said. “I can’t compare these two guys as their responses are completely the opposite. I don’t understand what has happened. I don’t know how you can lead the Tour de France and not speak out about doping, yet speak out in the past so openly. There’s also a completely about-turn from Wiggins on his response to Armstrong, when compared to his previous stance on anti-doping.

 

[Benotti69]

this bit is particularly hitting the nail on the head

“When asked about doping, the answers from Wiggins now sound the same as with Armstrong and Floyd.”

Read more: http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/1...Team-Sky-over-transparency.aspx#ixzz2vVMCjrpI

 

[Parker]

Walsh has been in the game 30 plus years, what has he exposed, in comparison to Kimmage? Did good work on Lance. But ultimately he didn't get that far...a book. Without Landis it would have been nothing.

You seem to think that Walsh and Kimmage are some sort of law enforcement or WADA officials. They're not. They're just sportswriters, and their bread and butter is just writing about the match. Walsh knows this and gets on with it, Kimmage doesn't seem to. He appears to think everything has to be a major opus. Even Woodward and Bernstein spent 90% of their careers writing about mundane crap.

 

[Digger]

You seem to think that Walsh and Kimmage are some sort of law enforcement or WADA officials. They're not. They're just sportswriters, and their bread and butter is just writing about the match. Walsh knows this and gets on with it, Kimmage doesn't seem to. He appears to think everything has to be a major opus. Even Woodward and Bernstein spent 90% of their careers writing about mundane crap.

Aren't you the chap who released my address and got banned for ignoring the mod warning on it by doing it again?

 

[Parker]

Aren't you the chap who released my address and got banned for ignoring the mod warning on it by doing it again?

You seem to be obsessed with people being banned? Why? It's irrelevant to anything.

You bleat about people being 'personal', but it's your first port of call.

 

[Digger]

You seem to be obsessed with people being banned? Why? It's irrelevant to anything.

You bleat about people being 'personal', but it's your first port of call.

No but I was curious as to why you would post that - get it deleted - and then post it again and get banned...any reason?

 

[Parker]

No but I was curious as to why you would post that - get it deleted - and then post it again and get banned...any reason?

I didn't post it twice. And it was only the town, not the address.

 

[sniper]

this bit is particularly hitting the nail on the head

thanks for the reminder

a nice lad, this wiggins guy

“I’m troubled by Wiggins’ change in attitude. He rants about these Tweeters, the people on Twitter. In fact, I was the subject from abuse from him on Twitter. In the race he finished fourth in, he wrote ‘where is Paul Kimmage, missed his cheery little face on the Tour this year.’

“That was the 2009 Tour, when Armstrong had come back. I had to leave the race as all of the pieces I had written on Armstrong had been rejected by the newspaper [Kimmage wrote for the Sunday Times at that point – ed.]. That is why I wasn’t on the race – I had left the race early. My reward for this was that snarky little remark from Wiggins.

 

[Digger]

I didn't post it twice. And it was only the town, not the address.

ok fair enough - why do it at all may I ask?

 

[Digger]

The disgusting one for me about Wiggins has always been his words about Landis...something he knew full well was the truth yet he attacked him...went personal...and afterwards tried to justify it by saying it was gang mentality.

If he really wanted to play politics, say nothing.

 

[Afrank]

Take it to PM's, let's keep the thread on topic.

 

[Digger]

Anyway now that I am done messing around...Hitch made a valid point last night along with someone else...about why Sky are getting more attention than say Quick Step.

One, their dominance over such a prolonged period. And in the biggest stage races out there.

Two, one aspect which is annoying is the fans. The Johnny come lately's are almost identical to the USP ones. Naivety is amazing.

Three, the complicit media.

Four, it's so blatant in some instances to be literally laughable. Froome.

Five, the arrogance of them trying to convince us it's because of marginal gains.


Do I focus on others outside of Sky? Yes I do and always have...do I give way more attention to Sky than others...absolutely yes. Because I honestly feel it could not be more clear.

 

[Granville57]

Five, the arrogance of them trying to convince us it's because of marginal gains.

Vande Velde said having an organized doping program wasn't the only reason the Postal Service team excelled. "To put it concisely, the biggest thing was that we were going to train harder than everybody else, we were going to have a better diet than everybody else and we were going to dope better than everybody else." -Cycle of Lies

You see, Digger? It's not just the doping.

 

[Parker]

ok fair enough - why do it at all may I ask?

Because in the world of social media there are a lot of people making out to be more than they actually are - particularly if they are part of a group soliciting money for a cause as you did, before giving it to another anonymous tweeter.
If someone who has built a social media profile don't you think that 'transparency' dictates that their status as an absolute nobody should be public, particularly when they have been involved in collecting 100k and then 'losing' it.

 

[Granville57]

Because in the world of social media there are a lot of people making out to be more than they actually are - particularly if they are part of a group soliciting money for a cause as you did, before giving it to another anonymous tweeter.

So distorting the facts entirely is...what?