Sean Yates

[Dear Wiggo]

because they have succes. everything that has succes has a pack full of haters.

dodgy success. big difference.

haters is a lazy copout.

 

[hiero2]

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

While you are correct, I think, you also miss the point. Yates was in the "inner circle". Even if he wasn't, he has been around the block. He got popped himself, 1989, and it is on public record. For him to say "I know nothing" because he "Saw nothing" is disingenuous in the extreme. Hypocritical would be a better word.

I can imagine that he did not know detail - but I find it unbelievable that he did not know something was going on. CYA, plausible deniability. Gag me.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

While you are correct, I think, you also miss the point. Yates was in the "inner circle". Even if he wasn't, he has been around the block. He got popped himself, 1989, and it is on public record. For him to say "I know nothing" because he "Saw nothing" is disingenuous in the extreme. Hypocritical would be a better word.

I can imagine that he did not know detail - but I find it unbelievable that he did not know something was going on. CYA, plausible deniability. Gag me.

+1

best mates with motoman.

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

dodgy success. big difference.

haters is a lazy copout.

I know because you are seemingly the emphasis of a hater. do you even have a day job I wonder?

 

[hiero2]

Because they hired him in the first place in what was a blatant breach of their stated policy and have failed so far to release any info about their investigation and their reasoning for sacking him?

Ok - wait a sec - it is only a "blatant" breach because you say it is. To my knowledge, everything we have against Leinders could be questioned. Leinders could have told them he wasn't involved. Maybe Sky didn't ask the right questions. We have ****-all to go on here. They didn't release any info? From an internal investigation? Hrotha, have you ever worked in management? Have you ever hired and fired? I have, and I'll tell ya this, management doesn't want to leave ANYTHING laying about publicly that could be used to hang them. Self-preservation! Top that with the very strong impression I'm getting of Brailsford being a real self-serving and micro-controlling twit, not to mention a rigid personality, and a lot simpler explanation is that they either didn't find anything except rumors, or they didn't find enough to be more than suspicious. They CAN'T release anything under those conditions! They'd be sued so fast the door wouldn't have even shut!

I will also say this - perhaps some day you will turn out to be right. I sure don't know. I know I am somewhat suspicious of Sky's performance, but I also think we are being very paranoid with our evidence here. I don't like it when we point to something that is dodgy as evidence, and act like we can assume it is true. If we are going to be rational, it cuts both ways.

 

[87'Start]

it certainly not hate. it's disdain for people who act or talk but don't walk the walk.

if the other teams you mention banged on half as much about how clean they are as sky did, they'd cop the same treatment.

Surely regardless of a teams PR strategy if they employ the likes of Kim Andersen as their DS they deserve condemnation.

Sky are in the currently in the spotlight, and rightly so, but is interesting that there is not equal focus on Katusha and RSNT who, it could be argued, deserve greater scrutiny.

 

[hiero2]

it certainly not hate. it's disdain for people who act or talk but don't walk the walk.

if the other teams you mention banged on half as much about how clean they are as sky did, they'd cop the same treatment.

You know I've made the same complaint, I suppose: "we hit on Sky too much". But there is truth in what you say. I would bet Riis was still doing stuff in 2011 and is still looking for ways to bend the rules today! I don't have to worry myself thinking his riders might be riding clean. Especially with today's news, I hate it, but Rabo would be in the same boat, afaic. Astana, etc.

 

[Franklin]

Ok - wait a sec - it is only a "blatant" breach because you say it is. To my knowledge, everything we have against Leinders could be questioned. Leinders could have told them he wasn't involved. Maybe Sky didn't ask the right questions.

It's a bit sad this has to be repeated on a daily basis: In the rather high profile case Michael Rasmussen-Rabobank Geert Leinders was named by Rasmussen to be aware of his whereabouts. The mail correspondence of the Management team was confirming this.

The judge specifically stated that the Management Team was accomplice on whereabouts fraud. That was: Erik Breukink, Theo de Rooij and Geert Leinders.

Public domain, well before Leinders was hired by Sky.

Now we could add other claims which were never refuted (carte blanche specifically for Leinders), but the judgement should be crystal clear. And if Sky didn't know about this I'm completely stunned by their idiocy. not only could they research this in a few minutes, you would think before hiring that they would ask GL about the Rasmussen affair. Or are we now claiming geert dared to lie about this public domain judgement?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Surely regardless of a teams PR strategy if they employ the likes of Kim Andersen as their DS they deserve condemnation.

Sky are in the currently in the spotlight, and rightly so, but is interesting that there is not equal focus on Katusha and RSNT who, it could be argued, deserve greater scrutiny.

do a quick comparison of team clean sky podiums to everyone else. add in pat's tdf after party slip on july 11 and aso meetings twice a year since 2009, ex-doper docs, riders and ds's.

mix in millar's "brad proves you can win clean".

shake violently, see what pops out.

for me it's the desire to reveal what is being hidden in plain sight: better the devil you know kinda thing.

 

[happychappy]

What exactly is his role anyway? He appears to be thick as ****. Does he have some dirt on someone? "Give me a job or else."

 

[webvan]

They need a guy to drive a car so even though he is indeed thick at least he knows his way around the peloton.

 

[hiero2]

I apologize for my ignorance, and thank you for the clear response. Ok - so we do have some reason to say what hrotha said. Leinders COULD have lied about it and said he was wrongly convicted. But we don't need to go there.

I'm beginning to understand a little more about why mjm and hrotha etc are so skeptical about Sky. Leinders wasn't just rumored to be dodgy - he got popped, even if only as an accomplice. Yates got popped, too. Barry speaks, and Brailsford is "shocked" that Barry lied? Yet I can not argue with someone who says that Brailsford MUST know of Yates and Leinders' history. Which leaves Brailsford doing what looks like what so many accuse JV of: the CYA/PR dance. Not believable.

It's a bit sad this has to be repeated on a daily basis: In the rather high profile case Michael Rasmussen-Rabobank Geert Leinders was named by Rasmussen to be aware of his whereabouts. The mail correspondence of the Management team was confirming this.

The judge specifically stated that the Management Team was accomplice on whereabouts fraud. That was: Erik Breukink, Theo de Rooij and Geert Leinders.

Public domain, well before Leinders was hired by Sky.

Now we could add other claims which were never refuted (carte blanche specifically for Leinders), but the judgement should be crystal clear. And if Sky didn't know about this I'm completely stunned by their idiocy. not only could they research this in a few minutes, you would think before hiring that they would ask GL about the Rasmussen affair. Or are we now claiming geert dared to lie about this public domain judgement?

 

[Corona]

It's clear that Yates is toast, Brailsford hasn't left himself any wiggle room at all on this with his statement. He's saying that whilst people can be rehabilitated it won't be on his team.

Getting rid of Yates is the easy decision for Brailsford, the far more difficult decision is replacing him whilst maintaining this stance.

Where does he find an experienced DS befitting the team's current standing & roster that can be held up as completely clean. No prior history, no implications due to previous teams or other associations etc?

Answers on the back of a postage stamp please

 

[Franklin]

I'm beginning to understand a little more about why mjm and hrotha etc are so skeptical about Sky. Leinders wasn't just rumored to be dodgy - he got popped, even if only as an accomplice. Yates got popped, too. Barry speaks, and Brailsford is "shocked" that Barry lied? Yet I can not argue with someone who says that Brailsford MUST know of Yates and Leinders' history. Which leaves Brailsford doing what looks like what so many accuse JV of: the CYA/PR dance. Not believable.

Yes, that's the gist of it, DB is a liar. That makes everything he says or claims questionable.

For the record; I'm not claiming Sky is dirty, that their efforts are ped assisted. But there is plenty of reason to be very suspicious of (as for any team!).

Then we have this latest idea of letting them sign statements to be clean... first of, this has been done before, secondly if someone lied before why would they come clear now? Actually if you disagree and don't sign you are suspect. An awful idea that deserves huge criticism.

 

[Ferminal]

It's clear that Yates is toast, Brailsford hasn't left himself any wiggle room at all on this with his statement. He's saying that whilst people can be rehabilitated it won't be on his team.

Getting rid of Yates is the easy decision for Brailsford, the far more difficult decision is replacing him whilst maintaining this stance.

Where does he find an experienced DS befitting the team's current standing & roster that can be held up as completely clean. No prior history, no implications due to previous teams or other associations etc?

Answers on the back of a postage stamp please

Matt White?
Rolf Aldag?
Scott Sunderland?
Erik Breukink?



Not even JV can find anyone spotless to run his team.

 

[Franklin]

Matt White?
Rolf Aldag?
Scott Sunderland?
Erik Breukink?



Not even JV can find anyone spotless to run his team.

Not being pedantic, but non pro-cycling (junior?) has coaches too. And if Yates (and some other zombies) can "drive the car" their qualifications shouldn't be an issue.

Clean doctors should be no problem, nor clean masseurs etc. Just recruit outside of pro-sport.

 

[Ferminal]

Not being pedantic, but non pro-cycling (junior?) has coaches too. And if Yates (and some other zombies) can "drive the car" their qualifications shouldn't be an issue.

Clean doctors should be no problem, nor clean masseurs etc. Just recruit outside of pro-sport.

I'm sure there is someone in the British Cycling system who would be competent.

But I think those who hold the positions currently, and do well, is partly because their huge experience in pro cycling. For a team like Sky to go for someone without that experience is small risk.

 

[Franklin]

I'm sure there is someone in the British Cycling system who would be competent.

But I think those who hold the positions currently, and do well, is partly because their huge experience in pro cycling. For a team like Sky to go for someone without that experience is small risk.

I guess it's true enough... knowing the races, the quirks, the local organizers, the hotels etc.

The whole scheme is idiotic anyways. Garmin takes the only feasible route. Don't try to be holier than everyone else, just acknowledge the issues, be open about them and act transparently.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Garmin takes the only feasible route. Don't try to be holier than everyone else, just acknowledge the issues, be open about them and act transparently.

So that's what they're doing.

 

[Franklin]

So that's what they're doing.

It certainly looks like that's what JV/Garmin tries to do. Sure it could be better, but even with our scathing criticisms, JV comes here and talks about stuff, within the boundaries of privacy (I respect he can't open up on his riders, I wouldn't like it when my boss did that without my explicit consent). And considering I'm virulently anti DM (who was a bigger crook than most people know), I don't think I'm overly biased.

It's the best model we have and while it's certainly not perfect, I think it's the only way forward.

But feel free to disagree, I certainly see the issues. I certainly agree every team, including Garmin should be indefinitely under scrutiny.

 

[Ferminal]

I guess it's true enough... knowing the races, the quirks, the local organizers, the hotels etc.

The whole scheme is idiotic anyways. Garmin takes the only feasible route. Don't try to be holier than everyone else, just acknowledge the issues, be open about them and act transparently.

Agreed, they could just be like every other team who more or less ignores the publicity around said issues.

Instead they painted themselves into a corner with this whole "we will be clean" mantra, and now have paint on their feet as a result.

 

[Franklin]

Agreed, they could just be like every other team who more or less ignores the publicity around said issues.

That's definitely not what I said

Trying to be cynical on me?

 

[Ferminal]

That's definitely not what I said

Trying to be cynical on me?

Nah, I mean Garmin do it well.

The way Sky tried to do it was very bad.

Other teams just stay quiet wherever possible.

Better to say nothing until you have to, than pretend to be something you're not.

 

[webvan]

Garmin takes the only feasible route. Don't try to be holier than everyone else, just acknowledge the issues, be open about them and act transparently.

I would agree with that, the world is not black and white and people deserve a second chance anyway. Brailford's system can't deal with the reality and one could claim that being caught being "disingenuous" (how could he not know when everyone else did) he's dirty by association too so there you go.

And no I don't think Sky is doing anything illegal mostly because their performances are credible, like Hinault's and Lemond's were (check out how they controlled and crushed the race in 1985 and 1986, even more than Sky did this year), but I understand that when the boss is caught BS'ing, people who had doubts (sometimes irrational) can only feel comforted.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

And no I don't think Sky is doing anything illegal mostly because their performances are credible, like Hinault's and Lemond's were (check out how they controlled and crushed the race in 1985 and 1986, even more than Sky did this year), but I understand that when the boss is caught BS'ing, people who had doubts (sometimes irrational) can only feel comforted.

Yes clearly Brad Wiggins is a Hinault in disguise who did nothing on the road for 7 years, 12-24 km / year quick on the track, then came 4th at the Tour.

Spitting. Image.