Paul Kimmage questioning Roman ?

[Caruut]

And when you say Martin clarified things for you - weren't you saying a couple weeks back that Riis might not have known about Bassos doping or supplied Tyler with Fuentes number?

Basso might never have doped. He was only trying to dope. If Riis had been involved, he'd probably have actually managed it.

 

[Le Baroudeur]

No not really, although AGR is probably the most suited classic for him.
But regardless , point is whichever race he or any rider prefers, how would a clean rider feel if they are being overlooked for a race by a suspicious team mate.

I think its fair to call this irrelivant considering you alluded the point that Nico was a) beaten to the AGR win by his teammate, b) Overlooked as leader for AGR because of an enhanced teammate, neither of which have any basis in reality regarding the ability of the rider, the prefference of the rider, or the policy of the team.

I see no point in seriously discussing hyperbole based on assumption.

Can you show just 10 or 12 of these "many recent pops" at TST and Bjarne?

Firstly, I have never seen 'many' quantified or qualified as 10, 12 or more...

Take 'many' to be relative and mean during almost all of his appearances/TV soundbites, radio chats in the fall last year, during his 'I'm relevant again month' that I watched or heard (six at a guess before I wasn't interested in anything he had to say anymore). "Must get people like Bjarne Riis out of the sport" was the catchphraise iirc. No sorry DR. I'm not going to list them, upload them, or log them for you. You will just have to respect my impression.

And when you say Martin clarified things for you - weren't you saying a couple weeks back that Riis might not have known about Bassos doping or supplied Tyler with Fuentes number?

Again irrelevant. What was clarified was the possible reason for the focus of PK's comentary in its context towards TST, and in particular what he didn't focus upon. It is of course still a possiblity that TH's uncorroborated allegation was the fuel, or he was uninformed, or flustered, but if so then using any as a basis for his 'catchphrase' delivery would be eaquilly damaging to my opinion of him as a serious journalist.

Either way, I will practice my own form if reactionary 'omerta' here and not be led down another line of circular and diversionary discussion with you today if that's ok.

Bye for now.

 

[Le Baroudeur]

Basso might never have doped. He was only trying to dope. If Riis had been involved, he'd probably have actually managed it.

Basso might have been hooked up by the team he was rumoured to be secretly negotiating to join and lead... He and Lance were more than close after his mothers illness. Who knows... His two self proclaimed 'brothers' at CSC certainly weren't too impressed by it all. Perhaps one day the plot will thicken, or perhaps we will never know the truth, however, assumptions are exactly that, assumptions, leaving many possible and opposing ones equally assumable.

 

[Benotti69]

Did you read the sticky bottle meltdown?

I'm telling you now, believe it or not as you please, but his 'letting off' on others this last weekend or so undermined his perfectly correct attack on the McQuaid renomination.

So, you know, great, let's all lionize Paul while he makes it harder for himself to get a job, or harder for himself to achieve something with the sport, or just harder for himself to be taken seriously. Because we all get to feel good at the rebel. Great. Productive. Fantastic job, guys.

Not lionising Kimmage. He made a comment that while some feel is nitpicking, I feel is justified in the fight against doping and omerta.

If you want a clean sport you question everyone who has questions to answer. Nicolas Roche is firmly in the McQuaid camp so as far as I am concerned is a legitimate target in the fight against the omerta keep this sport in a dark place.

I dont feel Kimmage undermined himself at all. In fact he is doing what he has always done. Why is Roche who writes a column congratulating a guy who has been accused of working with Ferarri? It was this type of questioning that eventaully led to the downfall of the biggest fraud in sport. But no lets attack Kimmage again.

 

[Benotti69]

Yet you, Kimmage and others are the ones blowing Roche's tweet out of proportion. He tweeted that in the context of congratulating a teammate who he rode alongside in his big win.

A teammate who has questions to answer about working with Ferarri. Last time that was overblown the biggest fraud was caught.

But of course Kimmage had to bring Roche and Roche alone with no other Saxo riders involved in to it and twist it that it was a supporting message of a Ferrari client. When Roche tweeted that, he didn't intend for it to be interpreted they way it did. It was just Kimmage adding arms and legs on to it so then to have a go at Roche as a result.

Why dont you have a go at those in the article? Why are you not continuing the questioning of those seen in the company of Ferarri? Whya re you attacking Kimmage and not the dopers?

And would you, Kimmage and others write a column in Roche's position questioning Kreuziger's past links to Ferrari while at the same time being a current teammate?

Doing it here. I think Digger should have a column in a national newspaper.

Of course you would though and alienate yourself in the team you just joined. His columns are a diary for his racing experiences and not to specifically satisfy Paul Kimmage needs irrespective of whatever he says about it.

Lets not play games here. Nico Roche is in the McQauid camp of cycling. His manager is a McQuaid and his Father works for a McQuaid. Makes them legitimate targets int he fight to rid cycling of its doping omerta.

Kreuziger has to answer for his past and not Roche who wasn't even at Liquigas when all this happened.

Roche was not asked to answer for Kreuziger, he was asked to question him. Massive difference.

 

[gooner]

A teammate who has questions to answer about working with Ferarri. Last time that was overblown the biggest fraud was caught.

Yes, you're right. A teammate has questions to answer about his past link to Ferrari, not Roche though.

Why dont you have a go at those in the article? Why are you not continuing the questioning of those seen in the company of Ferarri? Whya re you attacking Kimmage and not the dopers.

I said Kreuziger and all riders with previous associations to Ferrari have questions to answer for. I hope they get exposed. I don't have any disagreement with you there.

Doing it here. I think Digger should have a column in a national newspaper.

As if a newspaper would print the rant after rant.

His opinion is no better than yours or mine.

Lets not play games here. Nico Roche is in the McQauid camp of cycling. His manager is a McQuaid and his Father works for a McQuaid. Makes them legitimate targets int he fight to rid cycling of its doping omerta.

I agree Roche has been evasive on this but to think he is going to slag off his own father and his links to McQuaid is frankly absurd, even if he was clean.

Roche was not asked to answer for Kreuziger, he was asked to question him. Massive difference.

Again, would you question Kreuziger in Roche's position? Like hell you would and the same applies to Kimmage as well.

 

[Digger]

As if a newspaper would print the rant after rant. [/B]His opinion is no better than yours or mine.

You are wrong. Firstly at least I am on the money about what I write. Secondly my opinion is better that yours.

 

[LaFlorecita]

wrong

10char.............

So what does this mean:

To those who want clean cycling he is asking a rider to use all the tools available to help clean up the sport.

I thought it meant: "if Roche wants clean cycling he should try to get rid of Roman because he is a doper"

 

[LaFlorecita]

Roche was not asked to answer for Kreuziger, he was asked to question him. Massive difference.

So why should Roche ask Roman about it? "Hey Roman, I was just wondering, were you really a client of Dr Ferrari?" And then write about it in his column yea seems nice to screw your teammate like that

 

[gooner]

You are wrong. Firstly at least I am on the money about what I write. Secondly my opinion is better that yours.

Talk about someone with a high opinion of himself. You're not going to come in here with a chip on your shoulders and shoot down my opinion at all. That line of debate might work on your own twitter feed but won't with me. You're nothing special so think you are. There's plenty of posters who I respect around here even when I disagree but I don't go around saying all of a sudden mine is better than yours and that's that because I said so.

I respect Paul hugely but I disagree with him in this instance and it's not a crime to do so. When I express my opinion here, it's my own independent one, not a closet of someone else's.

And you say you're on the money. As if you would write a column knocking Kreuziger in Roche's position. So easy from afar when you're not in the situation where you don't have to deal with that predicament yourself.

Take another rider in Marco Pinotti. Highly respected by me and many and has hit out at Basso, Di Luca and took issue with Lance in the past. He rides with Evans(link with Ferrari in the past) and is with Lelangue and Ochowicz at BMC. Has he ever criticised them? No and I don't expect him to either as it would be suicidal with regards to his future on his team. Pinotti has written blogs for CN and there isn't a chance I hell I would expect him to pen a piece writing about their past misdemeanours when he is a current teammate.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Talk about someone with a high opinion of himself. You're not going to come in here with a chip on your shoulders and shoot down my opinion at all. That line of debate might work on your own twitter feed but won't with me. You're nothing special so think you are. There's plenty of posters who I respect around here even when I disagree but I don't go around saying all of a sudden mine is better than yours and that's that because I said so.

I respect Paul hugely but I disagree with him in this instance and it's not a crime to do so. When I express my opinion here, it's my own independent one, not a closet of someone else's.

And you say you're on the money. As if you would write a column knocking Kreuziger in Roche's position. So easy from afar when you're not in the situation where you don't have to deal with that predicament yourself.

Can you explain that?
What do you respect about Kimmage, and then why not in his instance?

(And I am not flaming, or suggesting there cannot be a differentiation, I just can't see it)

Take another rider in Marco Pinotti. Highly respected by me and many and has hit out at Basso, Di Luca and took issue with Lance in the past. He rides with Evans(link with Ferrari in the past) and is with Lelangue and Ochowicz at BMC. Has he ever criticised them? No and I don't expect him to either as it would be suicidal with regards to his future on his team. Pinotti has written blogs for CN and there isn't a chance I hell I would expect him to pen a piece writing about their past misdemeanours when he is a current teammate.

Ok, let's take Marco.

I can understand someone saying nothing, but has he turned around and congratulated a dopers performance?
To me that's the obvious difference.

 

[Digger]

Talk about someone with a high opinion of himself. You're not going to come in here with a chip on your shoulders and shoot down my opinion at all. That line of debate might work on your own twitter feed but won't with me. You're nothing special so think you are. There's plenty of posters who I respect around here even when I disagree but I don't go around saying all of a sudden mine is better than yours and that's that because I said so.
.

I am awesome - trust me. And you are lucky i am bothering to reply to you.

 

[Le Baroudeur]

Ok, let's take Marco.

I can understand someone saying nothing, but has he turned around and congratulated a dopers performance?
To me that's the obvious difference.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/races/giro-della-toscana-2012/elite-men/photos/220244

 

[Zam_Olyas]

Talk about someone with a high opinion of himself. You're not going to come in here with a chip on your shoulders and shoot down my opinion at all. That line of debate might work on your own twitter feed but won't with me. You're nothing special so think you are. There's plenty of posters who I respect around here even when I disagree but I don't go around saying all of a sudden mine is better than yours and that's that because I said so.

I respect Paul hugely but I disagree with him in this instance and it's not a crime to do so. When I express my opinion here, it's my own independent one, not a closet of someone else's.

And you say you're on the money. As if you would write a column knocking Kreuziger in Roche's position. So easy from afar when you're not in the situation where you don't have to deal with that predicament yourself.

Take another rider in Marco Pinotti. Highly respected by me and many and has hit out at Basso, Di Luca and took issue with Lance in the past. He rides with Evans(link with Ferrari in the past) and is with Lelangue and Ochowicz at BMC. Has he ever criticised them? No and I don't expect him to either as it would be suicidal with regards to his future on his team. Pinotti has written blogs for CN and there isn't a chance I hell I would expect him to pen a piece writing about their past misdemeanours when he is a current teammate.

So you are the old gooner how come you didnt defend marco in the sky thread?

 

[pmcg76]

Not lionising Kimmage. He made a comment that while some feel is nitpicking, I feel is justified in the fight against doping and omerta.

If you want a clean sport you question everyone who has questions to answer. Nicolas Roche is firmly in the McQuaid camp so as far as I am concerned is a legitimate target in the fight against the omerta keep this sport in a dark place.

I dont feel Kimmage undermined himself at all. In fact he is doing what he has always done. Why is Roche who writes a column congratulating a guy who has been accused of working with Ferarri? It was this type of questioning that eventaully led to the downfall of the biggest fraud in sport. But no lets attack Kimmage again.

In the name of consistency, can you find something similar Kimmage might have said publically when Philip Deignan joined Radioshack or all the times he lambased the An Post boys for riding on a team owned by a doper Kimmage knows very well, but never mentions the fact that said former rider never talks about doping when he is commentating.

I mean if Kimmage is that consistent, it should be easy.

 

[GJB123]

Can you explain that?
What do you respect about Kimmage, and then why not in his instance?

(And I am not flaming, or suggesting there cannot be a differentiation, I just can't see it)

He is not saying he now disrespects PK, he is saying he disagrees. Are you not allowed to disagree with someone you respect? If so then please don't tell my wife or my boss.

Ok, let's take Marco.

I can understand someone saying nothing, but has he turned around and congratulated a dopers performance?
To me that's the obvious difference.

I am pretty sure that he has congratulated Evans on his TdF-victory and no I am not going to look for it in his twitter-history or elsewhere.

Kreuziger's past is just that, Kreuziger's past. Has nothing to do with Roche and the fact they are in the same team. Now if he had firsthand knowledge of current PED-violations by Kreuziger I would very like to see him come forward or rather go the appropriate authorities. Querying Kreuziger's past is not in Roche's job description, I assume.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/races/giro-della-toscana-2012/elite-men/photos/220244

Shaking hand, great.
Did he tweet anything? Or say anything (good or bad) about Ballan?

 

[GJB123]

but would Saxo not be the most tainted - of all the teams in all the world ....

And you come to that conclusion how? Given the extraterrestrial performances by Sky and their hiring of Rabo's dope doctor, the doping cases at Katusha and to boot a manager who has spat (literally) on riders breaking omerta and who has not come clean on his own PED-history at USPS at all, the history at Astana where a known PED-user and client of Ferrari and Fuentes is still the man calling all the shots, with OPQS hiring a well-known dope doctor, BMS who have Lelangue, Ochowicz and an owner who has always known that his Phonak team leaders Hamilton and Landis were doped to the eye balls, etc., etc.

 

[GJB123]

Shaking hand, great.
Did he tweet anything? Or say anything (good or bad) about Ballan?

Was he critical on him in any way? That's much more interesting since that seems the yardstick by which people get measured.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

He is not saying he now disrespects PK, he is saying he disagrees. Are you not allowed to disagree with someone you respect? Iso then please don't telle my wife or my boss.




I am pretty sure that he has congratulated Evans on his TdF-victory and no I am not going to look for it in his twitter-history or elsewhere.

Kreuziger's past is just that, Kreuziger's past. Has nothing to do with Roche and the fact they are in the same team. Now if he had firsthand knowledge of current PED-violations by Kreuziger I would very like to see him come forward or rather go the appropriate authorities. Querying Kreuziger's past is not in Roche's job description, I assume.

To the highlighted, from memory, I agree.

And again Kreuziger past is up to him to explain, but Roches tweet is up to him to explain.
Two things are happening in this thread, one is people are assuming something of Nico - for me, let him clarify (or not) and form that people will draw their own conclusions.
The second is that PK should not be questioning or tweeting anything to Nico, which is nonsense.

 

[Digger]

In the name of consistency, can you find something similar Kimmage might have said publically when Philip Deignan joined Radioshack or all the times he lambased the An Post boys for riding on a team owned by a doper Kimmage knows very well, but never mentions the fact that said former rider never talks about doping when he is commentating.

I mean if Kimmage is that consistent, it should be easy.

Roche was a team leader and a top ten contender - and more pertinently, something which Kimmage has alluded to, Roche has a diary in a national newspaper.
Deignan hasn't even got remotely the profile or media access of Roche - or power...and as for the An Post guys - come on man.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Was he critical on him in any way? That's much more interesting since that seems the yardstick by which people get measured.

By whom?
You may want to address that to those people, and not me.

And I have read Marcos book, I don't remember any specifics about Ballan.

 

[GJB123]

To the highlighted, from memory, I agree.

And again Kreuziger past is up to him to explain, but Roches tweet is up to him to explain.
Two things are happening in this thread, one is people are assuming something of Nico - for me, let him clarify (or not) and form that people will draw their own conclusions.
The second is that PK should not be questioning or tweeting anything to Nico, which is nonsense.

I think in this case you can at least question the motives for PK asking only Roche.

https://twitter.com/marcopinotti/status/247574156089118720

As we can see Pinotti thanked Ballan for helping him win a silver TTT medal at the world championships. Should he really be thanking someone like Ballan, with his history? And where was PK asking Pinotti the pertinent question he is asking Roche?

I hugely respect PK, I donated to his fund and would willingly do so again when needed. He has done a lot of good for cycling by being who he is, but that doesn't mean I cannot or should not question his motives and just assume they are always noble and for the best of cycling and never ever have anything to to with some personal animosity.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

In the name of consistency, can you find something similar Kimmage might have said publically when Philip Deignan joined Radioshack or all the times he lambased the An Post boys for riding on a team owned by a doper Kimmage knows very well, but never mentions the fact that said former rider never talks about doping when he is commentating.

I mean if Kimmage is that consistent, it should be easy.

Someone brought up Deignan earlier in the thread.
He did join RadioShack. I believe it was spun as joined Bruyneel &Lance, even though they probably never saw each other.

Key difference again is, did Deignan ever tweet congratulations about JB or LA?

 

[Le Baroudeur]

Shaking hand, great.
Did he tweet anything? Or say anything (good or bad) about Ballan?

I don't believe you're being serious about degrees of congratulation here...

And yes he did:

Marco Pinotti @marcopinotti
The pasta load worked well today in Giro di Toscana. Team controlled the whole race. Brilliant finish by @aleballan79!
4:38pm - 29 Apr 12