Sergio Henao

[Ventoux Boar]

Why dont Sky publish and be transparent?

Sky are the team that leave no stone unturned and dont do blood testing? Even Garmin did internal blood testing, but then Sky claimed never to have put Froome in a wind tunnel or test his Vo2.......

Keep swallowing the lies.

That's correct. Now if I'm such a naive dreamer, and you're the one with your ear close to the ground, you should top listening to the dog *** and back up your claims.

Or are you making everything up?

[Edit: That may have been a little harsh. When your trusted source for news is mutant-spotter Stokes, you're as well informed as a Fox News viewer getting election results from Karl Rove.]

 

[Benotti69]

Plenty of evidence of Sky lying, go through any sky related threads to see lies from Sky. Their biggest, no doping doctors! Leinders worked for 2 years for Sky. Transparency from day 1 was what Brailsford told Kimmage. LIE.

Skybots trolling the clinic dont want to see the woods for the trees.....

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

Plenty of evidence of Sky lying, go through any sky related threads to see lies from Sky. Their biggest, no doping doctors! Leinders worked for 2 years for Sky. Transparency from day 1 was what Brailsford told Kimmage. LIE.

Skybots trolling the clinic dont want to see the woods for the trees.....

when was leinders conficted for doping charges prior top sky hiring him?

 

[Netserk]

when was leinders conficted for doping charges prior top sky hiring him?

In the Rasmussen court case against Rabo.

 

[Benotti69]

when was leinders conficted for doping charges prior top sky hiring him?

I dont remember Brailsford saying that they would use anyone without conviction, do you?

He used the term 'cycling doctors' to Paul Kimmage in a Sunday times article and in that case Leinders was/is a 'convicted' cycling doctor.

 

[Ventoux Boar]

Digger's made-up tweets.
Hog's asthma fiction.
Garmin riders "nowhere near" Froome
And now, Benotti's Sky testing program.

All complete fabrications on here over the last 48 hours. But never mind, 'cos #Leinders

 

[the sceptic]

Digger's made-up tweets.
Hog's asthma fiction.
Garmin riders "nowhere near" Froome
And now, Benotti's Sky testing program.

All complete fabrications on here over the last 48 hours. But never mind, 'cos #Leinders

Then why are you still here?

 

[Benotti69]

Digger's made-up tweets.
Hog's asthma fiction.
Garmin riders "nowhere near" Froome
And now, Benotti's Sky testing program.

All complete fabrications on here over the last 48 hours. But never mind, 'cos #Leinders

Digger's not accepting the omerta tweets
Hog's fiction.
Garmin riders of the oh so cleanER team
Benotti yet again showing Sky lies

All worthy of the clinic yet cause deep distress to Sky fans.

 

[MatParker117]

when was leinders conficted for doping charges prior top sky hiring him?

No there the earliest accusation from Rasmussen I could find was March this year.

 

[Benotti69]

No there the earliest accusation from Rasmussen I could find was March this year.

Cycling is not a big sport. It is eurocentric. That sky claim to have not known about Leinders past is clearly a lie. That posters think they should just google someone before giving them a job is BS. They had people on their team to ask about Leinders. They could have gone to plenty of people to find out about Leinders. When Leinders presented at the interview with his CV, was rabobank not listed as a team he worked for? Did that not ring any alarm bells in Sky?

Keep believing in unicorns..........

 

[Ventoux Boar]

Then why are you still here?

Bizarre. Why to you keep making stuff up?

 

[HSNHSN]

No there the earliest accusation from Rasmussen I could find was March this year.

The court case Rasmussen vs Rabobank was March 2013, so March last year. Could it be that you're a year off?

If I recall correctly, he didn't talk about it publicly before the court case, since he feared it could've harmed his case. If one finds any public accusations against Leinders from before his hiring by Sky, these most likely won't be by Rasmussen. I have to say I don't recall any such accusations, but then, I didn't follow cycling that much in the years before 2010.

 

[Benotti69]

The court case Rasmussen vs Rabobank was March 2013, so March last year. Could it be that you're a year off?

If I recall correctly, he didn't talk about it publicly before the court case, since he feared it could've harmed his case. If one finds any public accusations against Leinders from before his hiring by Sky, these most likely won't be by Rasmussen. I have to say I don't recall any such accusations, but then, I didn't follow cycling that much in the years before 2010.

Prior to march 2013 there are more than 25 incidents related to doping at Rabobank. And we are really expected to believe that Sky knew nothing about doping at Rabobank and therefore might investigate a little bit deeper when considering hiring Dr Geert Leinders!

http://www.dopeology.org/teams/Rabobank/

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

Digger's not accepting the omerta tweets
Hog's fiction.
Garmin riders of the oh so cleanER team
Benotti yet again showing Sky lies

All worthy of the clinic yet cause deep distress to Sky fans.

Since you have personally finished righting the wrongs in cycling could you go back and explain how I spun or misinterpreted your post where you were defending a known drug dealer? Cheers.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

I dont remember Brailsford saying that they would use anyone without conviction, do you?

He used the term 'cycling doctors' to Paul Kimmage in a Sunday times article and in that case Leinders was/is a 'convicted' cycling doctor.

From Walsh's first fanboi book:

‘It seemed to me the recruitment of doctors was key. We agreed not to take any doctor from cycling, and would hire doctors from outside cycling and work from there.’

I tell him that when it was revealed the team had employed Dr Geert Leinders from Rabobank, who was later shown to have been involved in doping, the question in my mind was, ‘How could Brailsford have done that?’

‘That’s been a very humbling experience for me.

Inside Team Sky, page 29

 

[HSNHSN]

Prior to march 2013 there are more than 25 incidents related to doping at Rabobank. And we are really expected to believe that Sky knew nothing about doping at Rabobank and therefore might investigate a little bit deeper when considering hiring Dr Geert Leinders!

http://www.dopeology.org/teams/Rabobank/

Of course, I was merely talking about direct accusations against his person, not the heaps of indirect evidence there were.

 

[Benotti69]

Of course, I was merely talking about direct accusations against his person, not the heaps of indirect evidence there were.

Of course Sky are the masters of detail and would beyond the man and look at his work.....

 

[Benotti69]

Since you have personally finished righting the wrongs in cycling could you go back and explain how I spun or misinterpreted your post where you were defending a known drug dealer? Cheers.

YAWN!!!!!!

Dont take cycling so personal and maybe you would enjoy watching the dopers more.

 

[hfer07]

I'm looking forward to read SKY's report on Henao's case to determine "what went wrong" with him. What is unclear yet is IF the case was close & He's cleared to ride, then why the findings will only be available a month after? can't they rather be released right along with Henao's incorporation, so there is no room for speculations ?

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

YAWN!!!!!!

Dont take cycling so personal and maybe you would enjoy watching the dopers more.

Funny how you hold people to account for things they say years back but when someone does it to you it ends with you evading.

Why should I take it personally? If someone ends up being caught for doping that I like or think might be clean then sure it might be disappointing but it is not surprising. You think I am foolish enough to mention the riders that I really like on here (Maybe I have mentioned one or two in the odd post)?

Plenty of people make rational arguments as to why a rider might be doping. You don't see me calling them out? However, there is a trend for certain posters to just post opinion as fact, be disingenuous about presenting an argument or just plain lie. That is when I tend to join the argument.

You have a simple line - every rider (that counts) is doping. You are perfectly entitled to have that but that leaves no room for debate. Which is why you end up just posting the same thing again and again and again...

 

[Benotti69]

Funny how you hold people to account for things they say years back but when someone does it to you it ends with you evading.

Why should I take it personally? If someone ends up being caught for doping that I like or think might be clean then sure it might be disappointing but it is not surprising. You think I am foolish enough to mention the riders that I really like on here (Maybe I have mentioned one or two in the odd post)?

Plenty of people make rational arguments as to why a rider might be doping. You don't see me calling them out? However, there is a trend for certain posters to just post opinion as fact, be disingenuous about presenting an argument or just plain lie. That is when I tend to join the argument.

You have a simple line - every rider (that counts) is doping. You are perfectly entitled to have that but that leaves no room for debate. Which is why you end up just posting the same thing again and again and again...

I have a simple line. The sport has not cleaned up. The use of EPO was lessened compared to the 90's various tests for versions of EPO and the BP has also meant that riders needed to get their 'programs' together. I think 99.9% of WT riders dope. Sky have found new methods and others will use same as soon as they get a handle on them

The UCI still runs the anti doping and has not increased its funding. It has been proven time and time again that outside agencies have been the most effective a catching dopers.

That you keep going back to my old posts and selecting them out of context shows you are trying very hard to troll me.

The only debate is what doping everyone is on, not who are and who are not. Only fools believe that the culture to dope was over. What made it end? Not the riders who are the bottom feeders of the sport and definitely not the team owners who dont give a fig about riders.

Logic dictates that the sport has not cleanED up because there would have been a monumental moment in the anti doping to effect that change. There has not been!

 

[blackcat]

It has been proven time and time again that outside agencies have been the most effective a catching dopers.

not outside agencies. Unless the poh-leeece, are an outside agency

 

[Benotti69]

not outside agencies. Unless the poh-leeece, are an outside agency

outside the UCI. Pohleeces and Kuuuustums.......

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

I have a simple line. The sport has not cleaned up. The use of EPO was lessened compared to the 90's various tests for versions of EPO and the BP has also meant that riders needed to get their 'programs' together. I think 99.9% of WT riders dope. Sky have found new methods and others will use same as soon as they get a handle on them

The UCI still runs the anti doping and has not increased its funding. It has been proven time and time again that outside agencies have been the most effective a catching dopers.

That you keep going back to my old posts and selecting them out of context shows you are trying very hard to troll me.

The only debate is what doping everyone is on, not who are and who are not. Only fools believe that the culture to dope was over. What made it end? Not the riders who are the bottom feeders of the sport and definitely not the team owners who dont give a fig about riders.

Logic dictates that the sport has not cleanED up because there would have been a monumental moment in the anti doping to effect that change. There has not been!

Like I said before. It was not out of context or spun. You keep saying that but have yet to explain how it is because you can't.

I don't believe the doping culture has gone. I have posted before saying that the best we can hope for is that a clean rider can win major races. Is Dan Martin clean? Some think so and he won LBL. Some people will think he is dirty for that same reason and no other evidence.

Younger riders are showing as are the Colombians. Of course, you will say they are all doping. As I said that is why you just keep posting the same thing over and over again.

It's a catch 22. To you if a guy shows when he is young he is a doper. If he shows when he is older then he is a doper because he never had results when he was younger.

Anyway, this is the Henao thread so if you want to add context that post I am all ears on the other thread.

 

[Escarabajo]

I have a simple line. The sport has not cleaned up. The use of EPO was lessened compared to the 90's various tests for versions of EPO and the BP has also meant that riders needed to get their 'programs' together. I think 99.9% of WT riders dope. Sky have found new methods and others will use same as soon as they get a handle on them

The UCI still runs the anti doping and has not increased its funding. It has been proven time and time again that outside agencies have been the most effective a catching dopers.

That you keep going back to my old posts and selecting them out of context shows you are trying very hard to troll me.

The only debate is what doping everyone is on, not who are and who are not. Only fools believe that the culture to dope was over. What made it end? Not the riders who are the bottom feeders of the sport and definitely not the team owners who dont give a fig about riders.

Logic dictates that the sport has not cleanED up because there would have been a monumental moment in the anti doping to effect that change. There has not been!

Benotti, there has to be a good reason for you believing that 99.9% of the riders dope? That seems to be much exaggerated. Based on what? Basically all the busts and scandals that we have heard have almost certainly catched riders that matter in the GC of races. But that leaves a lot of room for the rest of the riders, don't you think?