Sean Yates

[orbeas]

" I never saw anything guv !!!!!! "

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/yates-denies-seeing-anything-dodgy-at-discovery-channel-in-2005

Omerta is alive and well at Team Sky !!!!

 

[IFRider]

http://audioboo.fm/boos/1001448

"I just drive the car", nothing to do with training, guv

 

[hiero2]

Talk about being disappointed.

All Hail Sergeant Schultz!

 

[Walkman]

In his defense, Discovery were very paranoid in 2005 according to Floyd, no more bragging like in 2001 so it's possible they conducted a strict "need to know basis". On the other hand, if they did stop to dope on mountain roads, he would probably know. Did Floyd said that was in 2004 or 2005?

 

[Huckleberry]

I see nothing–NOTHING!

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Why the **** did no one at CN think to asking him about ****ing Motoman and the photos of him with him?

For ****s sake, talk about letting someone off the hook.

Tough questions from CN my ****. ****wits

 

[MatParker117]

In his defense, Discovery were very paranoid in 2005 according to Floyd, no more bragging like in 2001 so it's possible they conducted a strict "need to know basis". On the other hand, if they did stop to dope on mountain roads, he would probably know. Did Floyd said that was in 2004 or 2005?

If the stuff was wrapped in tin foil or something similar it was probably easier for Yates to assume they were distributing snacks.

 

[taiwan]

In his defense, Discovery were very paranoid in 2005 according to Floyd, no more bragging like in 2001 so it's possible they conducted a strict "need to know basis". On the other hand, if they did stop to dope on mountain roads, he would probably know. Did Floyd said that was in 2004 or 2005?

His wiki page says it was Lance who brought him to Discovery Channel, so you can probably infer that LA knew from the Motorola days that he was down.

 

[JRanton]

They're still a joke, I agree. Trouble is that you have situations like after this article was published: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/brailsford-vague-on-leinders-investigation, after which Brailsford phoned the CN editor to complain about it. CN will be worried about ''access'' etc just like they were in the USPS days.

 

[hiero2]

In his defense, Discovery were very paranoid in 2005 according to Floyd, no more bragging like in 2001 so it's possible they conducted a strict "need to know basis". On the other hand, if they did stop to dope on mountain roads, he would probably know. Did Floyd said that was in 2004 or 2005?

I would dearly like to be able to see a fair side to Yates denial - but we are talking about SEAN YATES fer g** sakes! This is a man from the top of the sport. He knows about doping, methods, people involved, what's popular now, EVEN IF HE NEVER USED ANYTHING. Either that, or he is so DUMB he belongs in the Sgt Schultz role! I simply find it impossible to believe that he would suspect nothing. Even if he was an outsider, not in the inner ring - ignorance just surpasses credibility. And he obviously is not that dumb.

I will grant that Andreu said HE did not know the extent - and while he was there - but to not even suspect still is beyond believability. He is denying to do the cya dance.

 

[Walkman]

If the stuff was wrapped in tin foil or something similar it was probably easier for Yates to assume they were distributing snacks.

I am not saying he is innocent, I am just pointing out assumed facts, don't be an idiot about it.

 

[taiwan]

If the stuff was wrapped in tin foil or something similar it was probably easier for Yates to assume they were distributing snacks.

Maybe he just thought they got hot and were drinking a refreshing ribena, out of plastic bags, through their arms.

 

[MatParker117]

I am not saying he is innocent, I am just pointing out assumed facts, don't be an idiot about it.

I was being sarcastic. Either Yates was incredibly naive or turned a blind eye, assuming he's innocent which I do unless there is overwhelming evidence.

I also massively misread that.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

They're still a joke, I agree. Trouble is that you have situations like after this article was published: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/brailsford-vague-on-leinders-investigation, after which Brailsford phoned the CN editor to complain about it. CN will be worried about ''access'' etc just like they were in the USPS days.

CN's talk about tough questions was just posturing. They'd rather keep on sucking up the teams in the hopes of some freebies over the winter. Don't want to rock the boat too hard by asking too many questions.

 

[tofino]

No interview

CN's talk about tough questions was just posturing. They'd rather keep on sucking up the teams in the hopes of some freebies over the winter. Don't want to rock the boat too hard by asking too many questions.

CN did not interview Yates. The quotes come from a BBC radio interview.

Now CN should/could be on the phone trying to get an follow up interview along with the Motoman question.

 

[KayLow]

I would dearly like to be able to see a fair side to Yates denial - but we are talking about SEAN YATES fer g** sakes! This is a man from the top of the sport. He knows about doping, methods, people involved, what's popular now, EVEN IF HE NEVER USED ANYTHING. Either that, or he is so DUMB he belongs in the Sgt Schultz role! I simply find it impossible to believe that he would suspect nothing. Even if he was an outsider, not in the inner ring - ignorance just surpasses credibility. And he obviously is not that dumb.

I will grant that Andreu said HE did not know the extent - and while he was there - but to not even suspect still is beyond believability. He is denying to do the cya dance.

This. It is one thing if you are someone who comes in from the outside to give riders massages or to run errands, but Sean Yates is an insider who rode when cycling was already extremely dirty and was highly placed staff inside the dirtiest team in the history of sports. The notion that he could maintain cluelessness through all of those years with even the most heroic of efforts is laughable. Were his powers of perception (not to mention sight or hearing) so failing, there is no way any human being on earth would trust him to run a lawnmower, let alone a cycling team.

 

[JimmyFingers]

I've heard a lot of innuendo around Sean Yates, just wondering how long he was working with Lance (that article suggests only one season, one Tour de France).

There's an easy assumption to say he's the DS, he must either know or worst be complicit in the doping. However it's clear he wasn't a major protagonist in the doping (of Lance and the rest of the team), like Ferrari was, even if he was aware of it. While he's quilty of sticking to the omerta (and there aren't many in the sport that aren't), it's not as if he was supplying or instructing the riders in the use of EPO. That would seem to be the domain of Ferrari and Lance himself.

I also thinks it's a fallacy to suggest manager/bosses etc are aware of what their employees are up to. I'm an account manager so essentially sales, so know that people will take an opportunity to achieve targets, sometimes by foul means if the necessity is required. I've never fully broken rules, but I have skimmed them on occasion. You know what? Success armours you: a company isn't going to conduct witch hunts on their best achieving employees. Sean Yates comes into the TdF as DS of Lance Armstrong in 2005, where is the power?

If you think with Yates you are in cloud cuckoo land. Lance called the shots, his influence clearly extended beyond the team, throughout the peloton and into the sport's governing body. You think if Yates had said anything, anything would have changed? He would have lost his job, he would have been black-marked and out the sport. And while he may have suspected as everyone did, I doubt he was in the inner-circle.

Just remember managers don't always know what is going on: that's why get rogue-traders bankrupting banks. Also remember in companies or teams managers or captains can be less influential then the successful members of the team: even if they call a person on their performance the chances are nothing would change.

There is a danger of being overly puritanical: the sport was riddled with drugs, it's impossible to emerge from that entirely untainted. Yates may have turned a blind eye, but he wasn't a major protagonist of the cheating either. I know the fevered desire to build team Sky into a zerox of USPostal, but Yates isn't the conduit IMO

 

[richwagmn]

" I never saw anything guv !!!!!! "

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/yates-denies-seeing-anything-dodgy-at-discovery-channel-in-2005

Omerta is alive and well at Team Sky !!!!

He didn't say doping wasn't happening. He said in his role, he didn't see it. Not impossible.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

CN did not interview Yates. The quotes come from a BBC radio interview.

Now CN should/could be on the phone trying to get an follow up interview along with the Motoman question.

Thanks. You are right.

 

[Froome19]

Disappointing but totally understandable, he would have lost his job at Sky if he admitted to any links whatsoever..

 

[Don Quixote]

I think the most pertinent question that Yates should answer is : "Did you introduce Motoman to Lance?"

 

[thehog]

" I never saw anything guv !!!!!! "

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/yates-denies-seeing-anything-dodgy-at-discovery-channel-in-2005

Omerta is alive and well at Team Sky !!!!

Thinking Cyclingnews need to change their headline. It doesn’t make sense.

He didn’t deny seeing anything dodgy. He stated he didn’t see anything dodgy. If he denied it would mean he did see something dodgy.

 

[ElChingon]

CN did not interview Yates. The quotes come from a BBC radio interview.

Now CN should/could be on the phone trying to get an follow up interview along with the Motoman question.

Once again people are fooled into thinking CN actually is out asking questions, but the way they word their stories they are written to seem like they got the info first hand when its actually 2nd or 3rd hand. Make sure to first read the author of the story or if there is one before even thinking they are the source.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

I've heard a lot of innuendo around Sean Yates, just wondering how long he was working with Lance (that article suggests only one season, one Tour de France).

There's an easy assumption to say he's the DS, he must either know or worst be complicit in the doping. However it's clear he wasn't a major protagonist in the doping (of Lance and the rest of the team), like Ferrari was, even if he was aware of it. While he's quilty of sticking to the omerta (and there aren't many in the sport that aren't), it's not as if he was supplying or instructing the riders in the use of EPO. That would seem to be the domain of Ferrari and Lance himself.

I also thinks it's a fallacy to suggest manager/bosses etc are aware of what their employees are up to. I'm an account manager so essentially sales, so know that people will take an opportunity to achieve targets, sometimes by foul means if the necessity is required. I've never fully broken rules, but I have skimmed them on occasion. You know what? Success armours you: a company isn't going to conduct witch hunts on their best achieving employees. Sean Yates comes into the TdF as DS of Lance Armstrong in 2005, where is the power?

If you think with Yates you are in cloud cuckoo land. Lance called the shots, his influence clearly extended beyond the team, throughout the peloton and into the sport's governing body. You think if Yates had said anything, anything would have changed? He would have lost his job, he would have been black-marked and out the sport. And while he may have suspected as everyone did, I doubt he was in the inner-circle.

Just remember managers don't always know what is going on: that's why get rogue-traders bankrupting banks. Also remember in companies or teams managers or captains can be less influential then the successful members of the team: even if they call a person on their performance the chances are nothing would change.

There is a danger of being overly puritanical: the sport was riddled with drugs, it's impossible to emerge from that entirely untainted. Yates may have turned a blind eye, but he wasn't a major protagonist of the cheating either. I know the fevered desire to build team Sky into a zerox of USPostal, but Yates isn't the conduit IMO

Yates rode for Motorola 1991-1996, so he was on the same team as Armstrong and rode the 1994 TDF him. Had a positive test in 1989

As a manager (a bit more than mere car driver) he went from CSC to Disco in 2005.

Considering that many DS's will micromanage a riders diet, fashion habits etc, it is hard to believe that they would be completely oblivious to something as major as the doping program you were on.

 

[burning]

Wonder how much he got paid for this statement...