Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[martinvickers]

Good post, BYOP88.

Circular backslap.

 

[BYOP88]

Quite possibly, and if so, it's a flaw to arrest, further progress needed.

BUT IT DIDN'T. It went to Cologne. They got him. See how that works?

You seem almost ... well, disappointed - if only it hadn't gone there...Poor Berti.

AS the saying goes if "Ifs" and "buts" were pots and pans...

Bertie gets no sympathy from me. The guy should be 3 years into a life ban.

 

[martinvickers]

Bertie gets no sympathy from me. The guy should be 3 years into a life ban.

110% agree, then. Excellente.

Please, PLEASE, don't assume you know my views on the Sky team. I have discussed my hunches with several posters here privately. They aren't what some of the usual suspects might assume.

But my hunches are just that, hunches. That, above all else, is my point. And I don't want to think rider X dopes, or sneer at people who think otherwise - I want it proved one way or the other, and if he or she dopes, have them tossed out for good.

 

[the sceptic]

Bertie gets no sympathy from me. The guy should be 3 years into a life ban.

In an ideal world.

But right now, I much prefer him to be juiced to the max on every substance known to Bjarne, rather than banned.

Cycling is always boring if one team has a big doping advantage over the rest of the peloton.

 

[martinvickers]

In an ideal world.

But right now, I much prefer him to be juiced to the max on every substance known to Bjarne, rather than banned.

Cycling is always boring if one team has a big doping advantage over the rest of the peloton.

Better boring than corrupt. two wrongs don't make a right.

 

[BYOP88]

110% agree, then. Excellente.

Please, PLEASE, don't assume you know my views on the Sky team. I have discussed my hunches with several posters here privately. They aren't what some of the usual suspects might assume.

But my hunches are just that, hunches. That, above all else, is my point. And I don't want to think rider X dopes, or sneer at people who think otherwise - I want it proved one way or the other, and if he or she dopes, have them tossed out for good.

Martin, I know you and me have crossed swords at times mostly started by me(internet warrior chat is so lame, I aplogize) but I really have no problems with you or anyone else on this board.

At the end of the day, I don't really mind if you did think that Sky were clean and everyone else was dirty that would be your call. Life would be pretty dull if we lived in an echo chamber!

Anyway I need to stop this 'love in' because the Angels bullpen is currently melting down.

 

[martinvickers]

Martin, I know you and me have crossed swords at times mostly started by me(internet warrior chat is so lame, I aplogize) but I really have no problems with you or anyone else on this board.

None necessary.

At the end of the day, I don't really mind if you did think that Sky were clean and everyone else was dirty that would be your call. Life would be pretty dull if we lived in an echo chamber!

Exactly. I don't think that, but the point is an excellent one. Sometimes i get the strong impression certain posters - not you by any means - would quite like an echo chamber

 

[ralphbert]

But my hunches are just that, hunches. That, above all else, is my point. And I don't want to think rider X dopes, or sneer at people who think otherwise - I want it proved one way or the other, and if he or she dopes, have them tossed out for good.

This is the clinic, don't let lack of proof get in the way of a good conspiracy theory or righteous indignation.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

None necessary.



Exactly. I don't think that, but the point is an excellent one. Sometimes i get the strong impression certain posters - not you by any means - would quite like an echo chamber

This is the clinic, don't let lack of proof get in the way of a good conspiracy theory or righteous indignation.

Martin, there are also people like whoever this is who come in and do nothing but throw pot-shots and contribute nothing else. Some of us are maddened by this because we suffered through the same crap during Armstrong's reign. Desire for echo chamber or not, at least most have an actual opinion they are willing to express, as opposed to people like this who aren't brave enough to actually put their beliefs on display.

 

[The Hitch]

Meaningless twaddle.

It's always the same twaddle from you on this, Hitch. Because things are not yet perfect, it must mean there's been no real progress at all. It's a ridiculous false binary that evades looking at the realities.

Excuse me, where did I say there's been no progress?

On the contrary I have for years been saying that there has. As you would know if you read my posts rather than make assumptions which is ironically what you have just been complaining other people do to you.

What I did was ridicule your argument, which offered a utopianistic and simplistic account about how some journos and riders attitudes have allegedly changed and this must mean the dawn of a new day.

You dismiss it as you do every posts by any poster that challenges you, in this case as "meaningless twaddle". It's not. The arguments you make are exactly the same as the ones that have been made before.

The question you have to ask yourself is, what do you want - the chance to fight doping, or the chance to sneer?

chance to fight doping? What do you have in mind?

 

[The Hitch]

Martin, when you say people on the forum "sneer", do you include yourself in that?

You may have missed the recent USADA investigation into Armstrong. Google is your friend.

 

[Digger]

Anything is possible. It is absolutely possible that Brailsford is an evil son of a b!tch who makes Bruyneel look like a f***ing choirboy.

Probable? Genuinely, however much it p***es people off, it's just hard to say. You just end up with silly maths, that aren't really maths, but just a convoluted way of saying I believe him, or I don't and then trying to pass hunch off as science.

There is absolutely what I call a "fog of mistrust" - we don't know, and we ought to admit we don't know, but we sure aren't happy. It doesn't fill with any confidence. It's a huge black mark against SDB and against that team. Which, to be fair, has been admitted by the team itself.

But, boring as the repetition is; hard yards. Sometimes you get nowhere, unless you ask the simple question, the boringly mundane one, over and over till you get a straight answer.

I want Brailsford pinned down - I don't want to hear about " we did this", or "process" or passive language like "mistakes were made"...I want, who, what named person, recommended Leinders. Was it De Jongh? Was he asked specifically to suggest someone. Who, what named individual, asked. On what date. Where. Who, what named people, were in the room at the time. etc, etc, etc...

Dare I say it, I want journos acting more like lawyers. I don't want SDB interviewed. I want him cross-examined. And if you ever get the chance, go to a workaday mundane criminal trial (not a pantomime like Oj or Pistorius, which are more about performance), watch how its done - it's not Rumpole, or Perry Mason - it's boring, grinding, undramatic, attritional, demanding of tiny discrete facts until the entire page is coloured in.

It is easy, and enjoyable for some, to stand, point and sneer. But look how USADA, finally got Armstrong - page after page of detail; boring, repetitive detail. Until there was simply nowhere for Armstrong to hide. Nowhere - every cranny had been dug into.

THAT is how winning is done. One rock at a time.

Usada got lance through luck. A certain Floyd landis. Without him nothing happened. Eventhough they had almost a decade.
Regarding Contador and being caught, people forgetting that the Uci covered it up for months. Only when a German journo got wind, did they do anything.
There is zero reason for a governing body to do the job of anti doping properly.
Same goes for ukada.
And oli Cookson and Brian is not good.

 

[Netserk]

But my hunches are just that, hunches. That, above all else, is my point. And I don't want to think rider X dopes, or sneer at people who think otherwise - I want it proved one way or the other, and if he or she dopes, have them tossed out for good.

Then you are in the wrong place. If you want to fight doping help your local NADA with volunteer work or whatever. This is a forum to DISCUSS doping. For people with an opinion. You can't ever prove anything here. The proof will come from elsewhere.

You have posted in this thread far more than I, and guess what, both of us have done **** all to prove any riders dope, so how about you drop your BS. It's not a choice between sneering and proving, but discussing and clogging. You seem to have chosen the latter.

 

[Ventoux Boar]

Wish Wallace would return with stories of what it was like before the legends got banned. Please Mr Wallace? The one about Dawg getting a life ban was great.

Meanwhile 'Kumbaya'

 

[Justinr]

What was irrelevant or smug about my comment

It was perfectly valid. If you want to start looking at the sky are they clean debate from a logic angle you are going to lose.

There are plenty of things you believe in that don't make sense, so I found it funny that you would bring that into an argument.

How about you contribute to the debate properly and put up an argument about why a team would want one of their own riders to look bad, rather than just sniping with silly comments from the sidelines.

 

[martinvickers]

Then you are in the wrong place. If you want to fight doping help your local NADA with volunteer work or whatever. This is a forum to DISCUSS doping. For people with an opinion. You can't ever prove anything here. The proof will come from elsewhere.

You have posted in this thread far more than I, and guess what, both of us have done **** all to prove any riders dope, so how about you drop your BS. It's not a choice between sneering and proving, but discussing and clogging. You seem to have chosen the latter.

You don't know what I've done about doping practically. You don't have a clue. But the admission that you've done **** all comes as little surprise. Nor the fact you seem proud to be of no use.

And with the best will in the world, you don't get to tell me **** all about what I can and can't do, and why I should do it. Your mod days are over. Thankfully.


Now how about you keep your bilious little personal attacks to yourself, there's a good chap.

 

[martinvickers]

Martin, when you say people on the forum "sneer", do you include yourself in that?

Nope. Because there's a point to what I posted beyond sniping invective.

 

[Justinr]

Quite possibly, and if so, it's a flaw to arrest, further progress needed.

BUT IT DIDN'T. It went to Cologne. They got him. See how that works?

You seem almost ... well, disappointed - if only it hadn't gone there...Poor Berti.

AS the saying goes if "Ifs" and "buts" were pots and pans...

I need to look properly but someone responded to me on another thread that the sample was specifically directed to cologne, which means he was targeted. That is positive news if its true. And that was almost 4 years ago - be interesting to know how up to date the other labs are now.

 

[martinvickers]

Excuse me, where did I say there's been no progress?

It was the clear implication of that silly 15,10,5 years speil, that things were as they always had been. i.e. no progress.

 

[Granville57]

You may have missed the recent USADA investigation into Armstrong. Google is your friend.

Perhaps you'd be so kind as to point out exactly where, within that highly detailed and informative report by USADA, that Armstrong was ever "caught"?

I'm reasonably content that Riis' confession amounts to being found out.

Really? Confession = Caught?

Good to know.

 

[LaFlorecita]

I thought this was the Sky thread not the Riis/Contador thread

 

[Granville57]

I thought this was the Sky thread not the Riis/Contador thread

OK then. I can't wait for Contador, with the encouragement of Riis, to crush and humiliate Team Sky at the TdF.

Does that help?

 

[Justinr]

Perhaps you'd be so kind as to point out exactly where, within that highly detailed and informative report by USADA, that Armstrong was ever "caught"?

Really? Confession = Caught?

Good to know.

In 2001 at Switzerland he was 'caught' wasnt he, it was just covered up.

 

[Granville57]

In 2001 at Switzerland he was 'caught' wasnt he, it was just covered up.

Dunno. Was he?

But Flo is right. This is not the Armstrong thread.

 

[martinvickers]

Usada got lance through luck. A certain Floyd landis. Without him nothing happened.

Perhaps there's something to that, but it ignores that Landis himself was placed in that position, not by luck, but by successful testing. A=The fall of the dominos is traceable to that event.

What happened to Rasmussen couldn't and wouldn't have happened in the Indurain years or before. What happened to Contador.

Regarding Contador and being caught, people forgetting that the Uci covered it up for months. Only when a German journo got wind, did they do anything.
There is zero reason for a governing body to do the job of anti doping properly.

I don't forget that at all, Digger. And as someone with an interest in many sports, watching the continuing debacle of the Jamaican ADO, and also what can happen when a previously badly behaved ADO starts getting its act together (the avalanche of positives in the last year from Russia).

Which is why I'm a strong believer, for example, in 'double lab' testing - to take UKAD for example (and UKAD are not the worst offender) - samples taken in Britain should be split, sent to both UKAD and A.N. other lab reporting to WADA and using non UKAD labs. Not only will A.N.Other have no nationalistic reason to hide positives, but the risk of being made to look foolish or corrupt is more likely to make UKAD actually do it's job, because it won't be able to sweep positives under the carpet. And I would extend that to the testers - a testing team should not be 'home ADO' only, it should be a mixed team including foreign ADO testers. The Strong Disinfectant of Sunlight.

Now, it would cost more. But increased funding for anti-doping is a basic argument of anyone actually opposed to doping in sport.

And oli Cookson and Brian is not good.

I can't get overly worked up about this, to be honest. His appointment predate's Cooksons elevation. But I take your point.