Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

Page 1128 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
sniper said:
good post.

we already knew the ztp was a smokescreen, but i agree with you that the knaven-case seems to cement it.

here's Sky's staff line-up for the 2012 Dauphine which of course Wiggins won:
DS: Sean Yates
2nd DS: Servais Knaven
Doctor: Geert Leinders

While Knaven was never at Rabo, he may have had good contacts with Leinders (language brings people together).

Otoh, Leinders may of course turn out to be a red herring in the larger scheme of things. I mean there are more roads that lead to Rome. Still, I think the Sky-Lowlands link (de jongh, leinders, knaven) is salient.
When did SdJ start/stop with Sky? Was it 2009 - 2012?
 
Feb 22, 2014
779
0
0
You don't have to be bigoted to read this...

Wow. What a nasty little cess pit this place has become.

Since it now seems within the scope of the topic, what country's education system should take a bow for Sceptic?
 
Feb 22, 2014
779
0
0
The Hitch said:
Using the word "nationalistic" rather than"British" is probably the solution
Perhaps a ZTP for bigoted racists is another. Might improve the calibre of posters. Give it a whirl sometime.
 
Feb 22, 2014
779
0
0
Benotti69 said:
Sceptic apologised.
Where are you from? I want to prepare a few offensive comments related to your nationality in case we ever disagree.

Please note, I also apologise after deliberately insulting people.
 
red_flanders said:
Or he stopped answering obvious questions and informed fans list respect. I find the idea that the observers of Walsh are only listening to what they want to hear just as unfounded as some of the Skybot comments.

Thx for the responses though, much appreciated.
I'm pretty sure that the ZTP came down from News Internstional / Sky, as PR/insurance and that the staff on the team aren't bothered. Certainly Walsh doesn't rate the idea and criticised it in his book. (Which might explain why he's not asking questions about it too; he doesn't care)

With regards Knaven, presumably he must have been interviewed/signed something saying he's always been clean in 2012 when the rest of the team did, and since he's never been charged with anything it's hard to see what the team could do to get rid of him for doping, even if it wanted to (which I doubt).
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
Justinr said:
Trying not to spend too much time on here as its holiday weekend and haven't read through all of them so will take me some time to catch up, but very unimpressed with the sort of bile we get with the 'British Muppets' type posts.

Banter is one thing - bashing me for my nationality is technically racism. Very unimpressed ...

EDIT - after seeing the posting thread & times, this response was written / posted at the same time as Sceptics so I didn't see his apology. All sorted from my point of view.
No, no it's not.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
2
0
RownhamHill said:
I'm pretty sure that the ZTP came down from News Internstional / Sky, as PR/insurance and that the staff on the team aren't bothered. Certainly Walsh doesn't rate the idea and criticised it in his book. (Which might explain why he's not asking questions about it too; he doesn't care)
Whether Walsh rates the idea or not is not the point. The team said it has a ZTP in place, which ignores the fact that Knaven was a doper.

RownhamHill said:
With regards Knaven, presumably he must have been interviewed/signed something saying he's always been clean in 2012 when the rest of the team did, and since he's never been charged with anything it's hard to see what the team could do to get rid of him for doping, even if it wanted to (which I doubt).
I am pretty sure Sky could find out easily if they wanted. They dont want. Sky lie just as easily as the next doping team.
 
Feb 10, 2013
36
0
0
Regardless of whether hypothetically a ZTP is the best way to deal with doping, in Sky's case the way it came about was clearly a way of allowing known dopers in the team's staff a way of distances themselves from any potential scandals. Take a payoff and we'll say nothing about anything.

Of course if there are staff with history who still want to play the innocent card Sky can't really fire them on a hunch or "clinic" evidence - legally they'd probably need much more than that, and as it's a PR thing, anything going through the courts isn't what Sky wants. But, now the staff have signed the ZTP contract, Sky can be seen to be doing the right thing and fire them should any past misdemeanors come to light.

Now as it seems to be PR stuff, whether as a clean team trying to do the right thing, or as a dirty team trying to cover up, I don't think the ZTP really can really offer much evidence either way aside from indicating that those ushered out probably didn't want to sign such a contract. Read what you want into that!
 
Erm, Happy Easter all.

I've just had a bit of a clean out of posts in the last few pages. No place on here for insulting anyone because of their nationality either individually or collectively. Just not on.

Other Mods won't show as much patience as I have so far this weekend.
 

Justinr

BANNED
Feb 18, 2013
806
0
0
ferryman said:
Erm, Happy Easter all.

I've just had a bit of a clean out of posts in the last few pages. No place on here for insulting anyone because of their nationality either individually or collectively. Just not on.

Other Mods won't show as much patience as I have so far this weekend.
TBH there were apologies after other people pulled them up on it. I for one was not initially impressed but had a post pass on the wires with an apology so am fine with it. You're right with the warning but from my point of view all done / cleared - "nothing to see here" (lol).
 

Justinr

BANNED
Feb 18, 2013
806
0
0
The_Captain said:
Regardless of whether hypothetically a ZTP is the best way to deal with doping, in Sky's case the way it came about was clearly a way of allowing known dopers in the team's staff a way of distances themselves from any potential scandals. Take a payoff and we'll say nothing about anything.

Of course if there are staff with history who still want to play the innocent card Sky can't really fire them on a hunch or "clinic" evidence - legally they'd probably need much more than that, and as it's a PR thing, anything going through the courts isn't what Sky wants. But, now the staff have signed the ZTP contract, Sky can be seen to be doing the right thing and fire them should any past misdemeanors come to light.

Now as it seems to be PR stuff, whether as a clean team trying to do the right thing, or as a dirty team trying to cover up, I don't think the ZTP really can really offer much evidence either way aside from indicating that those ushered out probably didn't want to sign such a contract. Read what you want into that!
I followed that until the last paragraph, but thats by the by. Your second paragraph hits the nail on the head for me. If someone signs up to ZTP after (lets assume this has happened) a grilling from Brailsford then in my mind that is fair game for Sky to ditch them if things come out. That's their look out and Sky can claim to have done the right thing.

Also originally Sky said they would only recruit people not from the cycling world. Again noble but in hindsight silly. If you're running a GT campaign, a minor stage race, or even a classic you really need an experienced DS. So they look for one. Well (in hindsight) we all know that a clean one of those is not easy to find, but at the time they could recruit one on the basis of "not being implicated". And I think that could be fair at that time.

Is it perfect? No. Does it mean they are doping? No, not necessarily. Does it raise the suspicion and possibility? Well yes - but no more than any other team (and I say that because this thread runs and runs and as I see it there are 25% supporters and 75% others). Maybe its because for the others everyone is happy to either say they are or they aren't. I don't know.
 
Justinr said:
TBH there were apologies after other people pulled them up on it. I for one was not initially impressed but had a post pass on the wires with an apology so am fine with it. You're right with the warning but from my point of view all done / cleared - "nothing to see here" (lol).


Good man. That's the Easter spirit:)
 
Jul 21, 2012
9,860
2
0
I would sort of agree that a fake ZTP and lying doesnt necessarily make them that much more likely to be doping. A little yes, but that alone wouldnt convince me they were doping.

Like with garmin, there is a lot of snake oil being sold there as well. But I am still inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt, because their performances doesnt seem too alien to me.

Sky on the other hand have set off all the alarms and I would be 99.9% sure they were doping, with or without the ZTP.
 
Mar 12, 2010
545
0
0
sniper said:
2nd DS: Servais Knaven
Doctor: Geert Leinders

While Knaven was never at Rabo, he may have had good contacts with Leinders (language brings people together).
So Knaven and Leinders potentially had a prior relationship because they are both Dutch?

In which case, All Spaniards are dopers because they may well know Valverde, all Belgians are suspicious because they may know Duffy, him being Belgian and all, and any Italians of more than a passing acquaintance with Di Luca are dopers because of that.

What utter nonsense.
 
RownhamHill said:
I'm pretty sure that the ZTP came down from News Internstional / Sky, as PR/insurance and that the staff on the team aren't bothered. Certainly Walsh doesn't rate the idea and criticised it in his book. (Which might explain why he's not asking questions about it too; he doesn't care)

With regards Knaven, presumably he must have been interviewed/signed something saying he's always been clean in 2012 when the rest of the team did, and since he's never been charged with anything it's hard to see what the team could do to get rid of him for doping, even if it wanted to (which I doubt).
It goes to the point of transparency and believability. He should care. He's not interested in asking difficult questions.
 
TheGame said:
So Knaven and Leinders potentially had a prior relationship because they are both Dutch?

In which case, All Spaniards are dopers because they may well know Valverde, all Belgians are suspicious because they may know Duffy, him being Belgian and all, and any Italians of more than a passing acquaintance with Di Luca are dopers because of that.

What utter nonsense.[/QUOTE]

Agreed and that's why we are all going to keep the nationalistic nonsense out of here.

Of course there will be links within cliques but they are not all due to nationality.
 
Justinr said:
I followed that until the last paragraph, but thats by the by. Your second paragraph hits the nail on the head for me. If someone signs up to ZTP after (lets assume this has happened) a grilling from Brailsford then in my mind that is fair game for Sky to ditch them if things come out. That's their look out and Sky can claim to have done the right thing.

Also originally Sky said they would only recruit people not from the cycling world. Again noble but in hindsight silly. If you're running a GT campaign, a minor stage race, or even a classic you really need an experienced DS. So they look for one. Well (in hindsight) we all know that a clean one of those is not easy to find, but at the time they could recruit one on the basis of "not being implicated". And I think that could be fair at that time.

Is it perfect? No. Does it mean they are doping? No, not necessarily. Does it raise the suspicion and possibility? Well yes - but no more than any other team (and I say that because this thread runs and runs and as I see it there are 25% supporters and 75% others). Maybe its because for the others everyone is happy to either say they are or they aren't. I don't know.
I wonder if this tends to ignore the timeline of events. They did hire a BUNCH of guys with shady pasts, ran the team happily for a while then when people started pointing out how dodgy these guys actually were, they let them all go. Pretty horrible stuff to do with your friends and co-workers. All to save public face, but having nothing to do with actual impact. Pretty political and pretty slimy IMO. Yates was none too pleased.

Then you have a guy who anyone can verify was a doper and they keep him on? Why? I think saying it's not perfect is letting them off too easily. They've been dishonest, deceptive and have thrown colleagues and employees under the bus when the heat came on. And all the while maintained the "clean team" and "zero tolerance" stance for anyone who would listen.

Does it mean they're doping? No, it just means they're willfully lying. And no one can tell me that Brailsford and the management team didn't know who these guys were when they hired them, out of some naiveté regarding road cycling. If you have a stated ZTPolicy, you would simply do a quick check on all these guys, you wouldn't just blindly hire whomever was recommended. Anyone with 2 minutes on their hands can find out anything about any of the guys they hired.

I've been in executive roles and managed large teams (not in sport). No one would have a hiring philosophy and simply fail to do the smallest effort to ensure that policy was enacted. This is not a case of missing the details, this is a case of willfully doing the opposite of what is stated. It's not possible to know for sure what the reasons are, maybe they are just simply that you can't hire experienced team managers and directors with no links to doping. Maybe it's a clear effort to conceal a business-as-usual top team.

Given the team's results, it's pretty tough to ignore the latter as the strongest possibility. But the "we didn't know when we hired them" argument isn't maintainable anymore. They know. They knew. They simply didn't care and kept up the facade. And guys paid for it with their livelihoods.

Sad state of affairs.
 
sniper said:
wiki says 2010-2012.
pourquoi?
Just 'cause he was a DS with firm ties to a past, knew Leinders, and seems to have special performances following him. Oh ya, that history, erm, Sky did their research. :rolleyes: No really, it looks like they did :eek:

I think where Sky finds themselves in such a hole is that, while there may be no team organized doping, their claims are so obviously marketing goop and they really are presenting as dishonest, if you take the blinders off. That and some ridiculous performances (marked understatement of the week).
 
Sep 20, 2009
263
0
9,030
red_flanders said:
I wonder if this tends to ignore the timeline of events. They did hire a BUNCH of guys with shady pasts, ran the team happily for a while then when people started pointing out how dodgy these guys actually were, they let them all go. Pretty horrible stuff to do with your friends and co-workers. All to save public face, but having nothing to do with actual impact. Pretty political and pretty slimy IMO. Yates was none too pleased.

Then you have a guy who anyone can verify was a doper and they keep him on? Why? I think saying it's not perfect is letting them off too easily. They've been dishonest, deceptive and have thrown colleagues and employees under the bus when the heat came on. And all the while maintained the "clean team" and "zero tolerance" stance for anyone who would listen.

Does it mean they're doping? No, it just means they're willfully lying. And no one can tell me that Brailsford and the management team didn't know who these guys were when they hired them, out of some naiveté regarding road cycling. If you have a stated ZTPolicy, you would simply do a quick check on all these guys, you wouldn't just blindly hire whomever was recommended. Anyone with 2 minutes on their hands can find out anything about any of the guys they hired.

I've been in executive roles and managed large teams (not in sport). No one would have a hiring philosophy and simply fail to do the smallest effort to ensure that policy was enacted. This is not a case of missing the details, this is a case of willfully doing the opposite of what is stated. It's not possible to know for sure what the reasons are, maybe they are just simply that you can't hire experienced team managers and directors with no links to doping. Maybe it's a clear effort to conceal a business-as-usual top team.

Given the team's results, it's pretty tough to ignore the latter as the strongest possibility. But the "we didn't know when we hired them" argument isn't maintainable anymore. They know. They knew. They simply didn't care and kept up the facade. And guys paid for it with their livelihoods.

Sad state of affairs.
But it is interesting to look at it with hindsight. I thought way back in 09 at the launch it was about riders who had failed drug tests/banned which probably annoyed Brailsford as he probably would have liked Millar on board. Was this possibly a sponsor and perhaps BC requirement leading up to London Olympics. Was Brailsford worried about staff with histories? Probably not. Perhaps the initial policy morphed into a rider and staff ZT policy without too much thought because no-one thought they would win the Tour with Wiggins and Froome! It then became a black cloud over their heads. Ellingworth was out of his depth and you can't beat experience sometimes.

When you look at all large organizations there is always PR speak that does not match up with what happens in the organization. Brailsford is probably like many CEO's and doesn't want to know sometimes no matter what he says! He has continually supported Millar and he defended Hayles at BC which looked like a cover up. But he made the rod for his own back.

Like you I am surprised about Knaven but what can they do? He denies it and was never charged with an offence, criminal or sport. The cost of paying out everybody can be significant!

Perhaps if Wiggin's hadn't had a great road year in 2012 this thread wouldn't have started or it would be about why Sky should put EBH on the juice so he can get a decent result!

Rain stopped so had three good days training!

PS Was Walsh ever really rated as an investigative journalist?
 
Apr 20, 2012
6,320
0
0
sniper said:
While Knaven was never at Rabo, he may have had good contacts with Leinders (language brings people together).
Wrong dots sniper. Servais had his own pretty damn good doctors:
* Michailov - now Katusha
* Van Mol - still at Lefevre

No need to consult Lienders, Georges Moutons on the other hand was a populair one in those days.
 

Justinr

BANNED
Feb 18, 2013
806
0
0
timmers said:
But it is interesting to look at it with hindsight. I thought way back in 09 at the launch it was about riders who had failed drug tests/banned which probably annoyed Brailsford as he probably would have liked Millar on board. Was this possibly a sponsor and perhaps BC requirement leading up to London Olympics. Was Brailsford worried about staff with histories? Probably not. Perhaps the initial policy morphed into a rider and staff ZT policy without too much thought because no-one thought they would win the Tour with Wiggins and Froome! It then became a black cloud over their heads. Ellingworth was out of his depth and you can't beat experience sometimes.
I think you may be right about it starting with just applying to the riders - cant really remember.

Brailsford has always been a fan of Millar from what I can see, he would have proved to have been a good recruit back then for his tactical experience, etc. so I'm sure they would have wanted him on board.

I would suspect it was probably more of a sponsor thing - i remember back then that sponsors were pulling out left right and centre, one of the German TV channels was even threatening to pull coverage iirc.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Fearless Greg Lemond said:
Wrong dots sniper. Servais had his own pretty damn good doctors:
* Michailov - now Katusha
* Van Mol - still at Lefevre

No need to consult Lienders, Georges Moutons on the other hand was a populair one in those days.
it was my ambiguous formulation, but to be sure i was more hinting at Knaven having a good relationship with Leinders whilst working for Sky.
Perhaps that's why they kept knaven? (pure speculation, i know)
Btw, I don't know exactly what a 'logistics' base is supposed to be, but according to Wikipedia Team Sky have one in Belgium.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
N The Clinic 10

ASK THE COMMUNITY