Shane Sutton - Team Sky coach

[Joachim]

Yes, and there is every chance it won't be anything like as dramatic as your speculations

 

[DirtyWorks]

Now don't get me wrong, the accusation that Leinders may have been employed to provide doping assistance is reasonable, although it is far from a given.

Let me get this straight. Did they hire Lienders just to hear his cool accent? If not for doping, then why bother at all?

That staffers such as Sean Yates and Shane Sutton doped during their careers is neither here nor there.

I'm confused. I need an explanation how one simply disregards the fact a team that works in a doping sport DID NOT hire clean staff for 2012 and earlier? They had experienced dopers on staff and it's not material to anything? How is that possible?

Why were you all not shouting and screaming about Vaughters doping, and calling for his downfall in the years that he was acting as a team director prior to his confession?

Some were. Your swift revision to history to make it fit your case is noted.

 

[DirtyWorks]

The problem is not now. Its 3-5 years from now.

When Jullich doesn’t get another job and Porte gets busted and does a tell all, he’ll tell the world the role Jullich played at Sky.

Jullich with a 2 year NDA, bitter, angry and twisted will also tell all about Porte, Wiggins, Froome and Sky.

Presumably, he can do it from the U.S. where the terms of his contract don't apply. But, first he's got to get totally shut out of work inside pro cycling.

 

[MatParker117]

The problem is not now. Its 3-5 years from now.

When Jullich doesn’t get another job and Porte gets busted and does a tell all, he’ll tell the world the role Jullich played at Sky.

Jullich with a 2 year NDA, bitter, angry and twisted will also tell all about Porte, Wiggins, Froome and Sky.

That’s what cycling does. It tries to suppress to doping stories two years later. But they always bubble to the top.

USPS, T-Mobile, Kelme, Rabobank etc. etc. etc. – all of them came out in the end.

It just takes one guy to go down and then dominos fall.

NDA's are usually at least five years in length fyi.

 

[Joachim]

Let me get this straight. Did they hire Lienders just to hear his cool accent? If not for doping, then why bother at all?

How much do you know about the demands on and the skillset required of an effective team doctor? I'm not asking for a speculation, I'm asking for what you know.

Again, what would be the point otherwise?

Excellent coaching skills and a dedicated guy, in Suttons case. Yates is a very experienced racer and makes for a good guy to read the race and call tactics on the day.

Besides which, their experience of doping whilst racing is irrelevant. What is the value of doping knowledge which is two decades out of date?

Besides, apply your 'otherwise what is the point' argument to Vaughters. What is the point of having an ex-doper as a DS?

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

The problem is not now. Its 3-5 years from now.

When Jullich doesn’t get another job and Porte gets busted and does a tell all, he’ll tell the world the role Jullich played at Sky.

This presupposes, of course, that there is something dodgy going on now, or at least something dodgy that Jullich knows about. Life would be very simple if we actually knew this to be the case rather than suspecting it!

 

[thehog]

Presumably, he can do it from the U.S. where the terms of his contract don't apply. But, first he's got to get totally shut out of work inside pro cycling.

Lance lasted about 6 weeks before havng to "come out".

The isloation kills.

 

[Joachim]

So, let's assume that Sky are doping.

They will know from the LA case that THE big risk is disgruntled former team mates spitting in the soup.

So, what do they do to avoid alienating anybody? They set up a system which results in the immediate firing, or letting go under a cloud of a whole bunch of people.

Yeah...that makes sense doesn't it

 

[Benotti69]

This presupposes, of course, that there is something dodgy going on now, or at least something dodgy that Jullich knows about. Life would be very simple if we actually knew this to be the case rather than suspecting it!

I suggest Brailsford's action in firing anyone and everyone with a doping past Sky makes it a given.

 

[will10]

So, let's assume that Sky are doping.

They will know from the LA case that THE big risk is disgruntled former team mates spitting in the soup.

So, what do they do to avoid alienating anybody? They set up a system which results in the immediate firing, or letting go under a cloud of a whole bunch of people.

Yeah...that makes sense doesn't it

The big risk for Sky is that the British general public believe they are cheating, regardless of what they've been up to. Hence the PR bullsh*t brigade we've been treated to from Brailsford et al. since July.

 

[Joachim]

I'm not sure I agree that is the big risk.

Very few of the British (or any nationality) public are that interested or informed about doping issues. There is no real heat on Sky, despite the opinion of people who post here. There isn't even a whispering campaign. Nothing. Nada. Rien...and that is a reflection of the total lack of anything concrete to go on.

The only risk is an expose. PR won't hold that off.

If they've been up to no good, their zero-tolerance policy is the very worst thing they could do in real terms.

 

[sniper]

They will know from the LA case that THE big risk is disgruntled former team mates spitting in the soup.

Disagree.
Everybody knows from cycling that the risks are in fact extremely small.
Even wrt Lance, omerta worked for him for 10+ years.
Landis was an extreme case. It would have been relatively easy to keep him under control. Lance could have been partying till it's 1999 if he had been just a tiny bit cleverer wrt Floyd.

No chances Brailsford/Sky are gonna let anybody drift off in anger and disgruntlement the way Lance/UCI let Landis drift off.
Landis had been ridiculed, neglected, ousted and humiliated before he set the whole thing on fire.
Brailsford is obviously smart enough to not let something similar happen.

Funny that you underestimate Brailsford like that.

 

[Joachim]

Disagree.
Everybody knows from cycling that the risks are in fact extremely small.
Even wrt Lance, omerta worked for him for 10+ years.

I said THE big risk, not A big risk. Big difference, although I acknowledge that English is not your first language.

However, the omerta didn't work for Lance at all. You have to take the longer view. How many tour victories does Lance have? 10 years, 3 years, 5 years before being stripped.. makes no difference.

 

[sniper]

I said THE big risk, not A big risk. Big difference, although I acknowledge that English is not your first language.

However, the omerta didn't work for Lance at all. You have to take the longer view. How many tour victories does Lance have? 10 years, 3 years, 5 years before being stripped.. makes no difference.

the risk isn't big. period. the risk is small.
you're a sky-troll joachim. just admit it and save us the bs posts.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

If they've been up to no good, their zero-tolerance policy is the very worst thing they could do in real terms.

If a core Sky rider other than Wiggo gets busted then that's worth about 70 on a scale of 0-100 re "bad news". Any hoo hah about the ZTP in the aftermath would be worth an extra 5 bad news points. It would make a bad situation worse, but not by much on the grand scale of things.

A Wiggo bust would be a full 100 points on its own.

A confession/implication from AN Other Sky team member would be worth 50 bad news points. Without an actual test failure, there's more than enough scope for the PR-merchants to spin things to save a certain amount of face/reputations. (3 such confessions/implications would probably sink Sky, though.)

 

[Joachim]

I think in the climate of today the media would be all over any revelation from team mates, current or former.

Sky PR couldn't spin their way out of that.

 

[The Hitch]

This depends on the purpose of Sky's actions.

Sky's management (or most likely News International's lawyers) want to be able disassociate themselves from any riders or team-members found to have been doping in the past. The new "Zero Tolerance Policy" gives dodgy employees the chance to fess up and leave on good terms or get sacked in future.

Sky can then clear demonstrate they took doping seriously post-USADA, with subsequent relevations clearly the responsibility of the employees concerned if they signed the document knowing they had skeletons in the cupboard. As Sky can't question employees under oath, this is realistically all they can do.

I don't think Sky is bothered about clean cycling per se or the Clinic and other such forums; they are concerned about wider public opinion in the UK should something emerge in the future. My guess is that public opinion will accept that an employee whose dodgy past emerges after they were given the chance to "do the decent thing" is not Sky's fault. Particularly if they happen to be foreign.

There's a huge amount of goodwill in the UK towards Sir Brad and Sir Dave, and a very strong view that Sky, GB, Wiggo etc are clean. This goodwill/view will only be compromised if one of the current riders/senior managements gets busted for / seriously implicated in a recent offence (or Sir Brad turns into John Terry). Until this good will is eroded, internet chatter, even if well-founded, will most likely be dismissed as conspiracy theories/jealousy.

I'm no fortune teller, mind you. The Daily Mail may out Wiggo tomorrow, with pictures of him simultaneously taking EPO and sh*gging Chris Froome's other half!

Its the fans of wiggins and in particular of team gb who believe wiggins is clean because he's one of the lads ( and if contador and lance have taught us anything they would believe it even if wiggins tested positive).

However among people who didnt grow up watching Zulu , reading tolkein and singing Jerusalem, the predominant view.is still that this entire tour de France nonsense is a drug fest top.to bottom.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

However, the omerta didn't work for Lance at all.

Even with the Landis angle, Lance only went down because the Feds got involved due to state funds being allegedly misused at US Postal. If the team had been sponsored by the Discovery Channel from the word go then the Feds wouldn't have got involved and none of the ex-team-mates would have had a knock on the door from armed Federal Marshalls. Hamilton was quite clear that it was the armed Marshalls at the front door that made him fess up.

 

[Joachim]

Its the fans of wiggins and in particular of team gb who believe wiggins is clean because he's one of the lads ( and if contador and lance have taught us anything they would believe it even if wiggins tested positive).

True, although it is worth noting that the Clen bust gave Contador a huge amount of wiggle room. If it had been an EPO positive it might have been a different story.

However among people who didnt grow up watching Zulu , reading tolkein and singing Jerusalem, the predominant view.is still that this entire tour de France thing is a drug fest top.to bottom.

The predominant view here maybe, but that is a very small self-selecting sample. Even Ashenden refers to 'pockets of doping' rather than wholesale.

 

[bobbins]

Think the 'Mail on Sunday' has a list of the races from the riders who he cheated out of prize money -race bonus- and future better contracts..

Wasn't he asked to leave the 1988 Tour of Ireland by an Irish Official called Pat, when he tried to pass off somebody else's urine at a dope test ???

As far as I can tell, the only former rider making accusations is one with a mental problem who by the sounds of things written on various forums seems to blame his own problems on others.

The mail didn't print anything so can't have proof.

This seems to be a load of hot air. Anyone got any specifics?

 

[Joachim]

Even with the Landis angle, Lance only went down because the Feds got involved due to state funds being allegedly misused at US Postal. If the team had been sponsored by the Discovery Channel from the word go then the Feds wouldn't have got involved and none of the ex-team-mates would have had a knock on the door from armed Federal Marshalls. Hamilton was quite clear that it was the armed Marshalls at the front door that made him fess up.

Take the longer view. Armstrong was swimming in direct accusations and testimonies for years. It took a long time coming, but it came.

 

[sniper]

Take the longer view. Armstrong was swimming in direct accusations and testimonies for years. It took a long time coming, but it came.

the sky-accusations are already there, and they're not less serious than the ones Lance/USPS was facing in 1999.
Lance 1999 had the cortisone pos to explain, Sky 2012 have Leinders to explain.

but imo you're still grossly underestimating brailsford and Sky. You really think they're gonna let things escalate the way Lance, Hog and UCI did? Of course you don't. Brailsford must have learned something from the Lance case.

 

[Joachim]

the sky-accusations are already there, and they're not less serious than the ones Lance/USPS was facing in 1999.
Lance 1999 had the cortisone pos to explain, Sky 2012 have Leinders to explain.

Leinders isn't the same as a positive test, although I agree that it doesn't look good. Let's face it though, why bother asking for an explanation? It isn't as if you will be open to listening to it. Your mind is already made up, is it not?

 

[Benotti69]

the sky-accusations are already there, and they're not less serious than the ones Lance/USPS was facing in 1999.
Lance 1999 had the cortisone pos to explain, Sky 2012 have Leinders to explain.

but imo you're still grossly underestimating brailsford and Sky. You really think they're gonna let things escalate the way Lance, Hog and UCI did? Of course you don't. Brailsford must have learned something from the Lance case.

Brailsford and his lackeys are also learning from the clinic. Sadly. It will be hard to catch their doping, but someone will eventually tell all. There is always 1 from Stephen Swart who wanted to clear his conscience to a Floyd Landis who does it for revenge.

 

[Joachim]

Brailsford and his lackeys are also learning from the clinic. .

I think you might be over-selling yourself just a little bit there.