Paul Kimmage questioning Roman ?

[Ferminal]

Maybe Pellizotti should have worked with Ferrari, wouldn't have lost two years that way.

 

[LaFlorecita]

I seriously don't understand people criticizing Roche for congratulating Roman on twitter. They're teammates ffs and Roche rode AGR ffs so of course he congratulates his teammate.

 

[RHRH19861986]

Amstel is not a 1.2 race, it´s WT, and one of the most important races of the calendar. If Kimmage wants to attack every single winner of races like Amstel, he has a lot to do.

For sure, there are rumours around Ferrari/Kreuziger, but Ferrari is not the only preparatore, and Kreuziger not the only rider with doping rumours around him.

Why exactly yesterday, why exaxtly 2013´s Amstel?

Maybe Kimmage felt it´s time again to place his own name into the news´ headlines, I don´t see another reason.

 

[will10]

I don't see what Kreuziger's past misdemeanours have to do with Roche. Kreuziger has to answer for that himself and it would be great if he was to. Kimmage has also hit out at Roche for riding with Contador. Again Roche bears no responsibility to Contador's positive and it's unfair for Kimmage to single him out always when discussing other riders links to doping. I also see Kimmage retweeting a message from Roche congratulating Kreuziger. What else is he supposed to do in this situation? And from Roche's own performance I see nothing suspicious in any of them and if anything his performances are worse off now since he moved from AG2R to Saxo.

Just to clarify my stance here once again so no understanding. I agree with Kimmage pointing out Kreuziger's links with Ferrari but not with the way he brought Roche in all this. What Kreuziger has to answer for is something that happened when he was at Liquigas and when Roche wasn't a teammate. Kimmage could easily of done this without mentioning Roche in any of this.

Oh please, Roche knows exactly who he's signing for when he's joining Riis' team.

 

[Netserk]

I'd also say that Roche is by far the most suspicious active rider from Ireland.

 

[Benotti69]

I said Kreuziger has questions to answer on all this. Read my previous posts. I have no blinkers on. Kimmage is right to criticise this. My issue is bringing Roche's name into all of it. I bet Kimmage congratulated Roche himself when he won the Worlds in 87.

Then wrote Rough Ride in 1990.

So why doesn't Kimmage say anything about Dan Martin and Phillip Deignan so? They have had plenty of columns in the past as well. And columns or not if any other rider has anything to say with regards to speaking out on doping, finding access to the media won't be too hard to find at all in this modern age. Roche is signed on by the Irish Independent to primarily provide a diary on each race he enters. And you still won't acknowledge the column he wrote about on the Lance affair. And he also wrote another one as well during the Vuelta last year.

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=1000620&postcount=79

Kimmage is on twitter, why dont you ask him?

As for Martin and Deignan, maybe Kimmage speaks to them personally whereas Roche ignores Kimmage and has accused Kimmage of being bitter and along with Walsh of being anti cycling.

 

[elduggo]

I'd also say that Roche is by far the most suspicious active rider from Ireland.

most suspicious protour rider?

or most suspicious rider?

how do you figure that seeing as theres a currently active Irish rider who served a doping ban?

Please explain your logic. Thanks.

 

[elduggo]

big fan of Kimmages but hard to see how this ambush by him isn't prompted, at least a little, by his dislike for Roche snr.

 

[Netserk]

most suspicious protour rider?

or most suspicious rider?

how do you figure that seeing as theres a currently active Irish rider who served a doping ban?

Please explain your logic. Thanks.

Pro rider. I don't know who you are referring to, but it seems to be a rider who hasn't scored a single cq-point for several years.

 

[elduggo]

Pro rider. I don't know who you are referring to, but it seems to be a rider who hasn't scored a single cq-point for several years.

cheers, that answers my question

 

[Ferminal]

David McCann

 

[Benotti69]

big fan of Kimmages but hard to see how this ambush by him isn't prompted, at least a little, by his dislike for Roche snr.

Roche Snr started it by ranting at Kimmage on TV after Rough Ride was published and defending the omerta. Roche even had the cheek to deny doping with Conconi.

The Roches have been critical of Kimmage, so why not shoot back and call out Nico for praising a rider who was accused of doping with Ferarri. Makes Nico a hyporcrite.

 

[gooner]

I seriously don't understand people criticizing Roche for congratulating Roman on twitter. They're teammates ffs and Roche rode AGR ffs so of course he congratulates his teammate.

A real shock. A teammate congratulating another on a win. I never would of thought.

Why exactly yesterday, why exaxtly 2013´s Amstel?

Notice how Kimmage said nothing after Kreuziger' win in the Giro last year. Fast forward a year and Roche is his teammate and now responds.

Oh please, Roche knows exactly who he's signing for when he's joining Riis' team.

Where did I say in any of my posts that Roche didn't know who he is signing for when he went to Saxo?

big fan of Kimmages but hard to see how this ambush by him isn't prompted, at least a little, by his dislike for Roche snr.

The hypocrisy in it all, is that Kimmage congratulated a doper himself when Stephen Roche won the Worlds in 87 when he was a teammate. And Kimmage would of done it as well if Kelly was to win.

 

[elduggo]

Roche Snr started it by ranting at Kimmage on TV after Rough Ride was published and defending the omerta. Roche even had the cheek to deny doping with Conconi.

The Roches have been critical of Kimmage, so why not shoot back and call out Nico for praising a rider who was accused of doping with Ferarri. Makes Nico a hyporcrite.

I would have said it makes him consistent, if anything.

I won't defend Roche snr, and Nico hasn't helped himself by his recent decision making.

However, if Kimmage's beef is with Roche snr (regardless of who was to blame, etc) I think it unfair to drag Nico into the row.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Kimmage seems to lean towards these little personal feuds, doesn't he?

 

[gooner]

Roche Snr started it by ranting at Kimmage on TV after Rough Ride was published and defending the omerta. Roche even had the cheek to deny doping with Conconi.

The Roches have been critical of Kimmage, so why not shoot back and call out Nico for praising a rider who was accused of doping with Ferarri. Makes Nico a hyporcrite.

Riders are all the time congratulating their teammates on big wins and especially if they were a teammate in the race itself. Yet Kimmage has said nothing on many of these occasions.

Again why does Kimmage do it now with Roche? Why didn't he call out Kreuziger after his win in the Giro last year? Why now after this specific win? Yeah, because Roche is now a teammate. See the difference.

Why doesn't he call out Van Garderen so when he said he has got good advice off Evans? The same Evans who has been linked with Ferrari in the past. And I didn't see Kimmage singling out Nibali and his past links with Ferrari after his T-A win either? I see Roche isn't a teammate.

 

[Netserk]

David McCann

Funny that he doesn't have a note in CQranking that he is banned

 

[Benotti69]

Riders are all the time congratulating their teammates on big wins and especially if they were a teammate in the race itself. Yet Kimmage has said nothing on many of these occasions.

Again why does Kimmage do it now with Roche? Why didn't he call out Kreuziger after his win in the Giro last year? Why now after this specific win? Yeah, because Roche is now a teammate. See the difference.

Why doesn't he call out Van Garderen so when he said he has got good advice off Evans? The same Evans who has been linked with Ferrari in the past. And I didn't see Kimmage singling out Nibali and his past links with Ferrari after his T-A win either? I see Roche isn't a teammate.

Instead of taking shots at Kimmage, why not take a shot a Kreuziger or Gasparotto or others?

Why pick on Kimmage, just becuase he had a dig at Roche for praising a dodgy rider? Why shoot Kimmage?

Nitpicking on your part.

Kimmage has done more than enough for his sport.

 

[gooner]

Instead of taking shots at Kimmage, why not take a shot a Kreuziger or Gasparotto or others?

Why pick on Kimmage, just becuase he had a dig at Roche for praising a dodgy rider? Why shoot Kimmage?

Nitpicking on your part.

Kimmage has done more than enough for his sport.

I said Kreuziger has questions to answer and so does Gasporotto and any other rider linked with Ferrari in the past. I have no problem with Kimmage flagging this up. In fact I hope he continues to do so. I do have a problem with him bringing Roche into all this. That's the issue I have here. I think we should agree to disagree on that.

And Kimmage has done more than enough for the sport. I contributed to his fund in recognition of that and have no regrets in doing so.

 

[Basecase]

Kimmage seems to lean towards these little personal feuds, doesn't he?

Well cycling is quite a personal sport - you're less likely to share blame with 10 or 14 others like on a sports field.

When you see a doper has deprived you of a placing etc it is personal.

That's a quality of Kimmage as far as I can see.

He also has the balls to call things as they are personally. He ain't hiding behind News International etc or whatever.

Were you ever robbed of a placing or had a race influenced by a doper? I was - believe me it is quite personal .....

 

[martinvickers]

Well cycling is quite a personal sport - you're less likely to share blame with 10 or 14 others like on a sports field.

When you see a doper has deprived you of a placing etc it is personal.

That's a quality of Kimmage as far as I can see.

He also has the balls to call things as they are personally. He ain't hiding behind News International etc or whatever.

Were you ever robbed of a placing or had a race influenced by a doper? I was - believe me it is quite personal .....

And exactly whay race did Nico Roche dope and deprive Kimmage of? The problem is simple, paul seems to be taking out his anger about roche sr on his son. And on some fundamental level, thats just not on. Have a go at stephen, no probs, deserves it. But this type of proxy attack is just low frankly.

I contributed to the kimmsge fund several times. I wrote to each board member before the mcquaid renomination. Im with paul on the big stuff. But this petty vindictive stuff is not paul's best side, and much more important it undermines the fight against dope and corruption, because it allows others to write off psuls views on mcquaid as part of the same old family fueds. And for what? Does nico care? Its this kinda stuff makes me despair of getting things done...

 

[Benotti69]

I said Kreuziger has questions to answer and so does Gasporotto and any other rider linked with Ferrari in the past. I have no problem with Kimmage flagging this up. In fact I hope he continues to do so. I do have a problem with him bringing Roche into all this. That's the issue I have here. I think we should agree to disagree on that.

I wished Kimmage would bring more than Roche into it, but then he has done that, he has had a go at the whole lot of them, it was a ****ing tweet, not an article, taking a shot at Roche.

I cant fault Kimmage. Maybe if the Roche's criticised UCI McQuaid might be packing his bags.

 

[The Hitch]

Roche Snr started it by ranting at Kimmage on TV after Rough Ride was published and defending the omerta. Roche even had the cheek to deny doping with Conconi.

The Roches have been critical of Kimmage, so why not shoot back and call out Nico for praising a rider who was accused of doping with Ferarri. Makes Nico a hyporcrite.

What Roche senior did is irrelevant. That was Stephen not Nicholas. You can't place the fathers sins onto the son. Now if Nicholas has himself a feud with kimmage that's different. But your comments about what Stephen did mean nothing to this discussion.

My take on this is that kimmage is going after the press. For not taking a stand against doping. And since niko is, with his article and his book a part of that whatsmore a compatriot who writes for an Irish newspaper, kimmage is criticizing him for taking on that role yet ignoring the subject of doping, like pretty much everyone else in the cycling press does. Maybe unfair that he's going after niko and not someone else, but maybe because niko, like him 2 decades ago, is an Irish rider with the writing gig on the side and thus paul holds him to a higher standard.

 

[Benotti69]

What Roche senior did is irrelevant. That was Stephen not Nicholas. You can't place the fathers sins onto the son. Now if Nicholas has himself a feud with kimmage that's different. But your comments about what Stephen did mean nothing to this discussion.

My take on this is that kimmage is going after the press. For not taking a stand against doping. And since niko is, with his article and his book a part of that whatsmore a compatriot who writes for an Irish newspaper, kimmage is criticizing him for taking on that role yet ignoring the subject of doping, like pretty much everyone else in the cycling press does. Maybe unfair that he's going after niko and not someone else, but maybe because niko, like him 2 decades ago, is an Irish rider with the writing gig on the side and thus paul holds him to a higher standard.

Not apportioning the sins of the father.

When Nico was asked about the way Kimmage and Walsh have pursued the doping in cycling, he called it a vendetta (IIRC).

 

[martinvickers]

Well cycling is quite a personal sport - you're less likely to share blame with 10 or 14 others like on a sports field.

When you see a doper has deprived you of a placing etc it is personal.

That's a quality of Kimmage as far as I can see.

He also has the balls to call things as they are personally. He ain't hiding behind News International etc or whatever.

Were you ever robbed of a placing or had a race influenced by a doper? I was - believe me it is quite personal .....

And exactly whay race did Nico Roche dope and deprive Kimmage of? The problem is simple, paul seems to be taking out his anger about roche sr on his son. And on some fundamental level, thats just not on. Have a go at stephen, no probs, deserves it. But this type of proxy attack is just low frankly.

I contributed to the kimmsge fund several times. I wrote to each board member before the mcquaid renomination. Im with paul on the big stuff. But this petty vindictive stuff is not paul's best side, and much more important it undermines the fight against dope and corruption, because it allows others to write off psuls views on mcquaid as part of the same old family fueds. And for what? Does nico care? Its this kinda stuff makes me despair of getting things done...