• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Paul Kimmage

Page 15 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
The sportswriters who address sports doping in a critical way are criticized here for "cheerleading" those same sports. Meanwhile, uncritical sportswriters are not individually castigated at all here. And the pro cycling fans here happily cheer their sport one moment and disparage dopers the next.

The hypocrisy is palpable
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

pmcg76 said:
Benotti69 said:
pmcg76 said:
That makes zero sense if someone is supposed to be anti-doping. Why call out Michelle Smith, who is after all Irish but then cheer on the Irish rugby team based on nationalism even if he thinks they are involved in doping. That is double standards of the most ludicrousto type.

In case you cannot read, the last line is directed at Irish Rugby.

That is hardly cheering them on now is it?

But Irish Rugby will not have anything to do with Kimmage. Plenty of the players on twitter have blocked him.

Again no one is perfect, bar those who criticise Kimmage, of course. I dont remember Kimmage calling himself perfect.

But again people want to shoot one of the few guys who has done something rather go after the brown nosers. Tells us a lot.

That is what makes zero sense, one minute he is tweeting his support for the Irish rugby team, another time hs putting question marks around Irish rugby. How can you cheerlead for a team of which you have serious doubts. We can do that here as we are anon nobodies mostly, who have little impact in the real world. Kimmage on the other hand is a public figure who is mostly famous for his anit-doping rants. Kimmage either sees himself as anti-doping or he loses credibility, simples. Did he cheerlead for Michelle Smith?

This is like Steve Tilford, yet another piece on Ryder recently, but as the comments section points out, why did he do another recent post praising Eddy B and continues to ignore anything to do with BMC. When you choose to target certain people/teams whilst blatantly ignoring others, that is not objectivity, that is called a personal agenda. Expect people to call BS on it.

It has nothing to do with defending certain peope but wishing to see objectivity across the board.

So Kimmage is not black and white.

To accuse Kimmage of rants about doping makes me think you are pro doping!

Again, shooting Kimmage when the likes of the Fotheringhams and Moores exist seems to be more about posters rather than Kimmage.
 
Jul 17, 2012
5,303
0
0
Visit site
Kimmage is essentially doing exactly what Walsh got thrown under the bus for in here: going hard after certain dopers and giving others a free ride.

Can see why that makes such uncomfortable reading. The simply point remains however, no matter how you try to rationalise or justify it.
 
Re:

JimmyFingers said:
Kimmage is essentially doing exactly what Walsh got thrown under the bus for in here: going hard after certain dopers and giving others a free ride.

Can see why that makes such uncomfortable reading. The simply point remains however, no matter how you try to rationalise or justify it.

Who are you referring to?
 
Jul 17, 2012
5,303
0
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

Bronstein said:
JimmyFingers said:
Kimmage is essentially doing exactly what Walsh got thrown under the bus for in here: going hard after certain dopers and giving others a free ride.

Can see why that makes such uncomfortable reading. The simply point remains however, no matter how you try to rationalise or justify it.

Who are you referring to?

Irish rugby team, Irish football team, Irish cyclists. Basically anyone he's a fan of he won't ask the same questions that he asks of others. I think the thread has provided ample examples.
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,770
3
0
Visit site
I have been trying to follow this thread since the twitts in question were made by P. Kimmage. I'm no fan of FishHacks but if I follow this correct. ---- Paul twitted his love for a national team as a fan I would guess. Him being a fishhack against pro cycling PED's sorta sets himself up on a higher moral ground in my opinion which would probably get him some grief from the skytrainfans.

I have to admit I admire Kimmage and the work he does with respect to cycling. He has had people try and attack him from many different corners of the playing field.

Seems to me from reading the thread it is a typical skytrainfan vs the clinic. More of the usual.
 
Re: Re:

Benotti69 said:
pmcg76 said:
Benotti69 said:
pmcg76 said:
That makes zero sense if someone is supposed to be anti-doping. Why call out Michelle Smith, who is after all Irish but then cheer on the Irish rugby team based on nationalism even if he thinks they are involved in doping. That is double standards of the most ludicrousto type.

In case you cannot read, the last line is directed at Irish Rugby.

That is hardly cheering them on now is it?

But Irish Rugby will not have anything to do with Kimmage. Plenty of the players on twitter have blocked him.

Again no one is perfect, bar those who criticise Kimmage, of course. I dont remember Kimmage calling himself perfect.

But again people want to shoot one of the few guys who has done something rather go after the brown nosers. Tells us a lot.

That is what makes zero sense, one minute he is tweeting his support for the Irish rugby team, another time hs putting question marks around Irish rugby. How can you cheerlead for a team of which you have serious doubts. We can do that here as we are anon nobodies mostly, who have little impact in the real world. Kimmage on the other hand is a public figure who is mostly famous for his anit-doping rants. Kimmage either sees himself as anti-doping or he loses credibility, simples. Did he cheerlead for Michelle Smith?

This is like Steve Tilford, yet another piece on Ryder recently, but as the comments section points out, why did he do another recent post praising Eddy B and continues to ignore anything to do with BMC. When you choose to target certain people/teams whilst blatantly ignoring others, that is not objectivity, that is called a personal agenda. Expect people to call BS on it.

It has nothing to do with defending certain peope but wishing to see objectivity across the board.

So Kimmage is not black and white.

To accuse Kimmage of rants about doping makes me think you are pro doping!

Again, shooting Kimmage when the likes of the Fotheringhams and Moores exist seems to be more about posters rather than Kimmage.

How does me saying Kimmage rants about doping make me pro doping. More nonsense. Are you saying Kimmage doesn't rant about doping because I have seem him do it many time's whether on TV, radio or in nespapers. I do not have a problem with that and admire him for doing so, what I want to see him do is apply that level of anger/antagonism to all sports he follows. That is hardly unrealistic to ask of a sports journalist for whom doping is a majorly important issue.

As for Moore/Fotheringham, they are th ultimate fans with typewriters
 
Re:

Glenn_Wilson said:
I have been trying to follow this thread since the twitts in question were made by P. Kimmage. I'm no fan of FishHacks but if I follow this correct. ---- Paul twitted his love for a national team as a fan I would guess. Him being a fishhack against pro cycling PED's sorta sets himself up on a higher moral ground in my opinion which would probably get him some grief from the skytrainfans.

I have to admit I admire Kimmage and the work he does with respect to cycling. He has had people try and attack him from many different corners of the playing field.

Seems to me from reading the thread it is a typical skytrainfan vs the clinic. More of the usual.

The bots have decided that Kimmage is the new Walsh and he must be taken down for saying bad things about Sky.

Walsh is the new Graham Watson with a really poor writing ability.
 
Mar 25, 2013
5,389
0
0
Visit site
Re:

Glenn_Wilson said:
I have been trying to follow this thread since the twitts in question were made by P. Kimmage. I'm no fan of FishHacks but if I follow this correct. ---- Paul twitted his love for a national team as a fan I would guess. Him being a fishhack against pro cycling PED's sorta sets himself up on a higher moral ground in my opinion which would probably get him some grief from the skytrainfans.

I have to admit I admire Kimmage and the work he does with respect to cycling. He has had people try and attack him from many different corners of the playing field.

Glenn, plenty of things I agree with Kimmage on. His interview with Froome, column on Wiggins in 2012, his articles on Johanes Draaijer were excellent, Landis interview. I'm with him on the big issues. Those are the excellent sides of Kimmage's work but there are clear inconsistencies towards other sports through out his journalistic career and as a fan of various sports, I'm entitled to point that out.

Seems to me from reading the thread it is a typical skytrainfan vs the clinic. More of the usual.

Nonsense.

Football is my fav sport, yet this is one of the exact sports that I'm saying he has done little or nothing in relation to covering doping.
 
Mar 25, 2013
5,389
0
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

Benotti69 said:
gooner said:
Benotti69 said:
wendybnt said:
Troll and bait?

You don't have to agree with me, but you don't have to insult me either.

Not insulting, just calling the obvious. ;)

Try to criticise Kimmage when their are thousands of hacks to be slammed only points to one thing. :rolleyes:

There's also plenty of sports hacks out there who deserve just as much if not more attention than Kimmage but don't get the publicity they warrant because they don't have have this bravado image that him and Walsh have and who both now love to become the story.

Who here remembers the names of the Sunday Times journalists with athletics?

That was actually the brave investigative work which made a difference and totally the opposite to what we saw in the summer with the Tour.

I have yet to see any change in athletics. Apart from the Russians getting a hammering in the British Media.

The sports hacks, that you have not mentioned, are not being invited onto radio or tv to talk about their respective sports. Why is that? I dont think Kimmage is a media whore, because if he was he would be on twitter all day whoring himself.

Look at Walsh red carpeting it........

The Culture, Sports and Media committee that got Radcliffe to go public was a direct result of The Sunday Times report. There was no mention of Jonathan Calvert and George Arbuthnott for the brilliant work that they did in relation to that story. And yes those two were on tv and radio discussing this multiple times. Their work along with Seppelt would lose anything Kimmage has done in recent years but they get little in recognition as they don't have the bravado image.

Andrew Jennings, Heidi Blake and Calvert again did excellent investigative work on FIFA corruption. Jennings' work has led to an FBI investigation who are following leads based on his work. Blake and Calvert were months away from their families going through the treasure of information on Qatar bribing to win the World Cup. Do you hear anything ever said about them?

Ressiot, Ballester and Rouet did far more influential work on Armstrong, yet all we hear about is Kimmage exposing Armstrong even though he wasn't at any of those 7 Tours. This while he was covering other sports, the same sports he did little in covering doping.
 
Jul 17, 2015
774
0
0
Visit site
Re: Paul Kimmage - Hero

Let's hope that at the next press conference somebody says to Kimmage:

"What is it that you admire so much about those dopers?"
 
Re:

JimmyFingers said:
Oh hello strawman, missed you

You said
Kimmage is essentially doing exactly what Walsh got thrown under the bus for in here

So I asked if kimmage really did what Walsh was attacked for.

I'm guessing from the fact that you immediately changed the subject that the answer is - no.

You seem pretty quick to abandon that position. When you said that kimmage is behaving like Walsh, where you just baiting? Because you seem to have nothing to back that up
 
Oct 4, 2011
905
0
0
Visit site
Re:

wendybnt said:
I expect him to be consistent. I expect him to carry on probing, asking for information, asking for an internship.

Otherwise all his noise about Sky just starts to look like he's butthurt because they wouldn't have him on the Tour.

He's called them out and now he's cheering them on. That's fanboyism. You can't have it both ways. You can't be all or nothing over one team's doping (Sky) and then totally moralally relativistic over another team's ( Ireland).
Of course you can: He is Irish and he is following his national team.

He said rugby has a problem: He didnt say the national side does and he wont support his country because of it.

I give up on this thread, its like trying to debate with a creationist group
 
Re: Re:

thehog said:
The bots have decided that Kimmage is the new Walsh and he must be taken down for saying bad things about Sky.

Walsh is the new Graham Watson with a really poor writing ability.

Isn't the conventional wisdom that Sky fans place Walsh on a pedestal? That would make their comparison of Kimmage to Walsh a compliment.

I think most sports journalists are sports fans at heart. It would be hard to experience the personal happiness and the joy and euphoria from those around you at an event like the big Irish soccer Euro qualification and not put on the blinders for a while. I don't think it makes him a hypocrite, but I also don't think Walsh is a total sellout either. The world is not always a black and white place.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

gooner said:
The Culture, Sports and Media committee that got Radcliffe to go public was a direct result of The Sunday Times report. There was no mention of Jonathan Calvert and George Arbuthnott for the brilliant work that they did in relation to that story. And yes those two were on tv and radio discussing this multiple times. Their work along with Seppelt would lose anything Kimmage has done in recent years but they get little in recognition as they don't have the bravado image.

Imagine if Kimmage was still at ST and allowed to write unhindered, Radcliffe would be running from Kimmage, never mind Sky. That the ST booted Kimmage is pretty much shows how uncompromising Kimmage is.

Wonder why the ST have not let Calvert and Arbuthnott near cycling?

gooner said:
Andrew Jennings, Heidi Blake and Calvert again did excellent investigative work on FIFA corruption. Jennings' work has led to an FBI investigation who are following leads based on his work. Blake and Calvert were months away from their families going through the treasure of information on Qatar bribing to win the World Cup. Do you hear anything ever said about them?

Not on a cycling forum, but pretty sure there are links to their work in the FIFA thread.

gooner said:
Ressiot, Ballester and Rouet did far more influential work on Armstrong, yet all we hear about is Kimmage exposing Armstrong even though he wasn't at any of those 7 Tours. This while he was covering other sports, the same sports he did little in covering doping.

All we hear is Walsh, Walsh, Walsh and more Walsh. Kimmage was one of the few who stood up to Armstrong at a press conference.
 
Mar 25, 2013
5,389
0
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

Benotti69 said:
Imagine if Kimmage was still at ST and allowed to write unhindered, Radcliffe would be running from Kimmage, never mind Sky. That the ST booted Kimmage is pretty much shows how uncompromising Kimmage is.

He's at the Irish Indo. What holds him back now? He has the platform. Radcliffe was already on the back foot from Calvert and Arbuthnott. Ben Rumsby approached her months before the public disclosure. Paul Kelso said she was under intense questioning from the British media for some time. I find it interesting in a story where a sports governing body were threatening an injunction against it, that there was still no compromising on Calvert's and Arbuthnott's story. Yet in these circumstances, these journalists are still in their roles. The whole point is if Kimmage had his name on this, Kimmage's name would be referenced many times, why is it never done with other journalists whose work surpasses what he done in recent years with doping.

Wonder why the ST have not let Calvert and Arbuthnott near cycling?

How do you know they have stopped them or even would stop them in the first place? Sport is just a tiny portfolio of Calvert's and Arbuthnott's work. Their insight team were left near football a few weeks back.

Not on a cycling forum, but pretty sure there are links to their work in the FIFA thread.

All we hear is Walsh, Walsh, Walsh and more Walsh. Kimmage was one of the few who stood up to Armstrong at a press conference.

Yes he did and that's to be be acknowledged. That is Kimmage from '08/09 onwards. I agree that other journalists outside of Walsh should have got more attention and those names have already been mentioned. But then I don't think Kimmage is in that category. He's got plenty of publicity and it's totally out of sync with what others should have got where those same journalists did most of the heavy lifting in the most difficult years of covering Armstrong. And no way does Kimmage deserve the same accolades as Walsh on Armstrong.
 
Jul 17, 2012
5,303
0
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

The Hitch said:
JimmyFingers said:
Oh hello strawman, missed you

You said
Kimmage is essentially doing exactly what Walsh got thrown under the bus for in here

So I asked if kimmage really did what Walsh was attacked for.

I'm guessing from the fact that you immediately changed the subject that the answer is - no.

You seem pretty quick to abandon that position. When you said that kimmage is behaving like Walsh, where you just baiting? Because you seem to have nothing to back that up

Look it's a very simple point, sorry you're having a hard time grasping it. Kimmage is being questioned about his consistency, the fact he goes after some athletes and cheers on others. If you can't see the comparison with the criticism of Walsh for essentially endorsing Team Sky then I can't help you.
 
Jul 17, 2012
5,303
0
0
Visit site
Re: awesome

ebandit said:
The Hitch said:
Jimmy, do you have a link for when Kimmage said that anyone who believes the Irish Rugby Team dopes are bitter jealous ex Armstrong fans? Maybe because I don't follow Kimmage that closely, but I had honestly never heard of that before.

awesome post...................... just when i had lost hope of finding evidence of an alternative

universe balancing our reality

..........surely kimmage would state something like this 'be sure to always ask questions

...don't be complacent forever back slapping your heros'

Mark L

Well said