Leinders interview April 2011

[thehog]

Re: Re:

i may be off target but my
thought remains........'what job was leinders paid to do

at team sky?'.........

Mark L

Explore grey area techniques in my view.

I'm interested in Alan Farrell. Last year near the end of the Tour and after he left the team, he wrote a column in the ST and said he was open to discuss with journalists any questions they want answered. This column was one directed to the doubters.

I would like to know has anyone taken up on that or is even remotely interested in doing so.

This is the Leinders thread. If you're interested in Farrell, open a thread. Not sure why you attempt to clog up threads with meaningless information. Pure deflection as per the norm.

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

i may be off target but my thought remains........'what job was leinders paid to do

at team sky?'.........

Mark L

Explore grey area techniques in my view.

While running a doping program for the Sky GT team.

 

[gooner]

Re: Re:

i may be off target but my
thought remains........'what job was leinders paid to do

at team sky?'.........

Mark L

Explore grey area techniques in my view.

I'm interested in Alan Farrell. Last year near the end of the Tour and after he left the team, he wrote a column in the ST and said he was open to discuss with journalists any questions they want answered. This column was one directed to the doubters.

I would like to know has anyone taken up on that or is even remotely interested in doing so.

This is the Leinders thread. If you're interested in Farrell, open a thread. Not sure why you attempt to clog up threads with meaningless information. Pure deflection as per the norm.

A guy who was the team doctor is meaningless information. Did you even read the piece that he wrote?

I don't think Leinders will do an interview. Farrell has offered himself up to one. Someone could easily ask about these grey areas. None of that deflects from the disaster of hiring Leinders. On this with Leinders, is this anything new. Froome more or less admitted in the Kimmage interview they knew. Wiggins shortly after the Tour in 2012, said similar in his book and then ridiculously said "We need guys like Geert Leinders".

Instead we get more of the same nonsense from you looking for conflict over the next three weeks and why I have come to hate this joyless event nowadays.

 

[sniper]

Leinders was not a disaster.

Which grey areas? "Grey area" is a red herring. These guys are ordinary dopers.
Why wouldn't they be? You think they're gonna test positive under Cookson? Think twice.
And Leinders was not known for "grey area" stuff. He was known for his expertise in ordinary (blood) doping and flying below the radar. So whence this idea that Leinders was hired for grey area stuff?

Is this interview anything new?
Well, to Brailsford ("he was really very antidoping") and the likes of Moore, Swart and Walsh, yes it is.

 

[thehog]

Re:

Leinders was not a disaster.

Which grey areas? "Grey area" is a red herring. These guys are ordinary dopers.
Why wouldn't they be? You think they're gonna test positive under Cookson? Think twice.
And Leinders was not known for "grey area" stuff. He was known for his expertise in ordinary (blood) doping and flying below the radar. So whence this idea that Leinders was hired for grey area stuff?

Is this interview anything new?
Well, to Brailsford ("he was really very antidoping") and the likes of Moore, Swart and Walsh, yes it is.

Leinders was an excellent choice. He was extremely well connected into the UCI and the lastest methods of doping to avoid detection. He was a "consultant" for good reason. If I ran a high budget & high profile cycling team, I'd have him in the background to make a phone call or two to make things go away or check in when testing might take place etc.

Money well spent. 2011 Wiggins looked super good at the Tour & then Froome found his form. What are the chances? :surprised:

 

[gooner]

Sniper, I do know that Leinders was a doping doc.

I was responding to The Spud's point of grey areas which has been well discussed on here before.

Again, you mention Swart, Walsh and Moore. Yes, Walsh has spoken to Farrell but his column was directed at the doubters who he was willing to speak to. He referred to Ross Tucker.

 

[gooner]

Re: Re:

Leinders was not a disaster.

Which grey areas? "Grey area" is a red herring. These guys are ordinary dopers.
Why wouldn't they be? You think they're gonna test positive under Cookson? Think twice.
And Leinders was not known for "grey area" stuff. He was known for his expertise in ordinary (blood) doping and flying below the radar. So whence this idea that Leinders was hired for grey area stuff?

Is this interview anything new?
Well, to Brailsford ("he was really very antidoping") and the likes of Moore, Swart and Walsh, yes it is.

Leinders was an excellent choice. He was extremely well connected into the UCI and the lastest methods of doping to avoid detection. He was a "consultant" for good reason. If I ran a high budget & high profile cycling team, I'd have him in the background to make a phone call or two to make things go away or check in when testing might take place etc.

Money well spent. 2011 Wiggins looked super good at the Tour & then Froome found his form. What are the chances? :surprised:

I don't think Froome's rise in the Vuelta was with the team's knowledge and Leinders. Why was there an article in the Mail last year about a source in the team saying Brailsford was wondering whether Froome was doping.

If Brailsford hired Leinders for a doping programme and he was involved, why was he only expressing it as a suspicion back then within the team?

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

Leinders was not a disaster.

Which grey areas? "Grey area" is a red herring. These guys are ordinary dopers.
Why wouldn't they be? You think they're gonna test positive under Cookson? Think twice.
And Leinders was not known for "grey area" stuff. He was known for his expertise in ordinary (blood) doping and flying below the radar. So whence this idea that Leinders was hired for grey area stuff?

Is this interview anything new?
Well, to Brailsford ("he was really very antidoping") and the likes of Moore, Swart and Walsh, yes it is.

Leinders was an excellent choice. He was extremely well connected into the UCI and the lastest methods of doping to avoid detection. He was a "consultant" for good reason. If I ran a high budget & high profile cycling team, I'd have him in the background to make a phone call or two to make things go away or check in when testing might take place etc.

Money well spent. 2011 Wiggins looked super good at the Tour & then Froome found his form. What are the chances? :surprised:

I don't think Froome's rise in the Vuelta was with the team's knowledge and Leinders. Why was there an article in the Mail last year about a source in the team saying Brailsford was wondering whether Froome was doping.

If Brailsford hired Leinders for a doping programme and he was involved, why was he only expressing it as a suspicion back then within the team?

Take any coming from sky with a large pinch of salt.

 

[sniper]

Why are you interested in an interview with Farrell?
What is he gonna tell us that we don't already know?

Leinders role? We won't really know as long as nobody cares to look.
Fact is he was there at the big races in 2011 and 2012 where Sky dominated and Froome made his breakthrough.
Plausible to assume at the very least that he was involved in making sure nobody would trip any wires, and as Hog says, it's fair to suspect he exploited his contacts within the UCI to give Sky extra protection. After all, Cookson wasn't there yet.

Everything else is your guess as much as mine.

 

[thehog]

Re:

Why are you interested in an interview with Farrell?
What is he gonna tell us that we don't already know?

Leinders role? We won't really know as long as nobody cares to look.
Fact is he was there at the big races in 2011 and 2012 where Sky dominated and Froome made his breakthrough.
Plausible to assume at the very least that he was involved in making sure nobody would trip any wires, and as Hog says, it's fair to suspect he exploited his contacts within the UCI to give Sky extra protection. After all, Cookson wasn't there yet.

Everything else is your guess as much as mine.

A good doping program has many players and facilitators. Leinders was an excellent choice not to run the program but to play the part of the wolf (insert reference to Pulp Fiction). Leinders could make sure everything went smoothly, he had the connections and knowledge, no one would ever test positive and no one would ever glow above the prescribe levals.

Leinders was also extremely presentable. You could actually pretend he was a regular doctor on a cycling team without raising too much suspicion. Hiring him was genius, Sky could pretend they were using him to weigh riders, he got paid without any backroom deals whilst supplying the protection program.

Gooner is way too naive about such topics, it's pointless engaging with him. In the last 6 months it has been uncovered the extent that WADA etc. simply don't care about doping but he's still trying to pretend Brailsford saved cycling from the doping abyss.

 

[gooner]

Re:

Why are you interested in an interview with Farrell?
What is he gonna tell us that we don't already know?

He was doctor at the time of the prednisolone TUE. Has anyone asked about cortisone abuse? JTL? There is avenues for a journalist to go down.

Leinders role? We won't really know as long as nobody cares to look.

Yes, and in terms of his hiring, someone could easily ask de Jongh in relation to it and what he told Sky. He supposedly recommended him. Benson asked Hayman and his silence speaks volumes.

Fact is he was there at the big races in 2011 and 2012 where Sky dominated and Froome made his breakthrough.
Plausible to assume at the very least that he was involved in making sure nobody would trip any wires, and as Hog says, it's fair to suspect he exploited his contacts within the UCI to give Sky extra protection. After all, Cookson wasn't there yet.

Everything else is your guess as much as mine.

I wouldn't disagree with that. Could quite easily be the case.

 

[Ramon Koran]

So you find an interview of someone known for his doping practices saying he believes doping is happening and somehow this is used against the team that sacked him once they found out about these practices. This is a knew low even by clinnic standards slowly this place is losing all credibility it earned during the armstrong era. You guys should know better than to go after a team based around transparency and zero tolerance.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

Why are you interested in an interview with Farrell?
What is he gonna tell us that we don't already know?

He was doctor at the time of the prednisolone TUE. Has anyone asked about cortisone abuse? JTL? There is avenues for a journalist to go down.

Sure, but did Walsh interview Del Moral, Ferrari, Lance or Bruyneel? Of course not.
If any investigative journo is to go after Sky, it's not gonna be through Farrell or through anybody on Sky's/BC's payroll.

Yes, and in terms of his hiring, someone could easily ask de Jongh in relation to it and what he told Sky. He supposedly recommended him. Benson asked Hayman and his silence speaks volumes.

DeJongh, yes, and Flecha also provides a link. Both are highly likely to keep their mouth shut wrt Leinders, or provide some meaningless comments, but I guess somebody could try.

Hog:
A good doping program has many players and facilitators.

this is very important to stress. It explains Sky's recruitment policy from A to Z.

 

[Benotti69]

Re:

So you find an interview of someone known for his doping practices saying he believes doping is happening and somehow this is used against the team that sacked him once they found out about these practices. This is a knew low even by clinnic standards slowly this place is losing all credibility it earned during the armstrong era. You guys should know better than to go after a team based around transparency and zero tolerance.

I think the clinics standards are well above pro cyclings.

 

[42x16ss]

Re:

So you find an interview of someone known for his doping practices saying he believes doping is happening and somehow this is used against the team that sacked him once they found out about these practices. This is a knew low even by clinnic standards slowly this place is losing all credibility it earned during the armstrong era. You guys should know better than to go after a team based around transparency and zero tolerance.

:lol: Do you honestly believe that Flecha, Hayman and De Jongh didn't let Sky know what Leinders is capable of? Sky would have known, Leinders' knowledge would not have been a secret. Sky only got rid of him once news of Rabobank went public.

Do you seriously believe that a doping doctor with the results and experience of Leinders doesn't know what he's looking at?

FFS, look at what his riders achieved while at Rabobank, it was just behind Ferrari and they flew under the radar far better.

 

[blackcat]

Re:

So you find an interview of someone known for his doping practices saying he believes doping is happening and somehow this is used against the team that sacked him once they found out about these practices. This is a knew low even by clinnic standards slowly this place is losing all credibility it earned during the armstrong era. You guys should know better than to go after a team based around transparency and zero tolerance.

can a mod please sticky this and come back in ten years to clean the egg off ur face

 

[WillemS]

Re:

So you find an interview of someone known for his doping practices saying he believes doping is happening and somehow this is used against the team that sacked him once they found out about these practices. This is a knew low even by clinnic standards slowly this place is losing all credibility it earned during the armstrong era. You guys should know better than to go after a team based around transparency and zero tolerance.

This post makes no sense.

At the time Sky hired Leinders, it was well known he had been involved in doping in his time with Rabobank. So, if Team Sky is the professional, corporate-like organisation they are often claimed to be, and even if they are not, I don't believe for a second that they were ignorant of Leinders' past.* So, if they were aware, but still wanted to hire a doctor with experience in the sports and truly make an effort of being clean, wouldn't his attitude towards doping and cycling be part of the job application and hiring process?

This interview with one of the largest newspapers of the Netherlands, NRC Handelsblad, proves that Leinders' attitude was not anti-doping at the time he was in the employ of Sky, as he basically says that nothing is changed in the medical support of cyclists. To me, this shows that either Sky's anti-doping policy doesn't work (is a joke), so couldn't be trusted to work, or that they just don't really care about anti-doping. Given the fact that Leinders felt safe enough to speak so clearly about his thoughts on doping to a major Dutch newspaper makes me lean towards the latter.

*) If you do believe that, that they were ignorant of his doping past, then the whole Sky story of being thorough with their anti-doping policies falls apart, as not checking a cycling doctor's past would mean their "anti-doping hiring policy" is one big joke.

By the way, great find Sniper; it's a good read. Solid "translate-assisted translation" as well.

 

[sniper]

^good post Willem, and thanks.

 

[sniper]

Steven de Jongh and Geert Leinders at Rabo:

Steven de Jongh and Geert Leinders at Sky:

 

[sniper]

"Peters insists that Leinders was scrupulously ethical in his time with Sky. ‘We agreed as a team that if a rider, suffering from asthma, got into trouble with pollen we would pull him out of the race rather than apply for a therapeutic use exemption on his behalf."

(source: Inside Team Sky)

http://zippy.gfycat.com/DefinitiveGleamingChickadee.webm

 

[meat puppet]

Wasnt asthma, though. Just bending the rules to get TUEs to gain.

So they clear.

 

[Robert21]

Original story here:

http://www.nrc.nl/handelsblad/2011/04/30/zero-tolerance-heeft-niks-met-fietsen-te-maken-12013366

 

[DirtyWorks]

Re: Re:

So you find an interview of someone known for his doping practices saying he believes doping is happening and somehow this is used against the team that sacked him once they found out about these practices. This is a knew low even by clinnic standards slowly this place is losing all credibility it earned during the armstrong era. You guys should know better than to go after a team based around transparency and zero tolerance.

can a mod please sticky this and come back in ten years to clean the egg off ur face

Once again, it's The End of The Clinic.

Apparently Ramon wasn't posting when the Clinic 12 hated Armstrong and were merely bitter losers.

Ramon, stick around. The wheels will come off this fraud scheme like it did all the others and once again, the UCI will be implicated. Bad athletes! Bad!

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

So you find an interview of someone known for his doping practices saying he believes doping is happening and somehow this is used against the team that sacked him once they found out about these practices. This is a knew low even by clinnic standards slowly this place is losing all credibility it earned during the armstrong era. You guys should know better than to go after a team based around transparency and zero tolerance.

can a mod please sticky this and come back in ten years to clean the egg off ur face

Once again, it's The End of The Clinic.

Apparently Ramon wasn't posting when the Clinic 12 hated Armstrong and were merely bitter losers.

Ramon, stick around. The wheels will come off this fraud scheme like it did all the others and once again, the UCI will be implicated. Bad athletes! Bad!

they will.
Still i keep being amazed by Sky's sense of impunity.
Froome: "I'm clean man, I'm telling ya. Hey, you saw that photo shoot I did with Vino? Awesome, right?"
And a lot more along those lines. They really seem to be sure they won't get caught.
I assume they have several 'insurance packages' from UCI, UKAD and WADA.

 

[justifieddoubter]

So... to sum up. Sky took off shorly after hiring Leinders. Wiggins dominated although he was almost overshadowed by another rider on the team named Froome who was about to be canned before he turned in an amazing performance as an injury replacement in the 2011 Vuelta. In 2012, Wiggins won Paris-Nice, the Tour de Romandie, the Criterium du Dauphine, the Tour de France and took gold at the Olympics. This Froome guy placed 2nd at the Tour that year. In 2013, Wiggins took a step back and Froome won Romandie, Dauphine and the Tour. Froome's liuetenant, Porte, took second at Dauphine and won Paris-Nice. Froome crashed out of the Tour in 2014 but came back to win it in 2015 and 2016.

Since 2012, Sky has unquestionably been considered the best team in cycling although there has been skepticism about how they have achieved such dominance.