Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

Page 1477 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Re: Re:

MatParker117 said:
Rollthedice said:
Any news about the package?
Likely find out the contents on December 19.
Triple facepalm.
So if there was EPO in that package, the parliamentary enquiry is where we'll hear about it.
Live stream.

You're entering new realms of ignorance here Matt, degrees of naivity previously unknown to me and most of mankind. Kudos.
 
May 6, 2016
224
0
0
I have met a member of Team Sky on several occasions. I know him. He was born within the same area that I was. I know for a fact that he doesn't dope nor has he ever doped. So he is not part of some imagined systematic doping programme on Team Sky. That's his story. As for the rest of the team I honestly feel that they are clean also.
 
Re:

Zypherov said:
I have met a member of Team Sky on several occasions. I know him. He was born within the same area that I was. I know for a fact that he doesn't dope nor has he ever doped. So he is not part of some imagined systematic doping programme on Team Sky. That's his story. As for the rest of the team I honestly feel that they are clean also.
of course they're clean, but the big bad Brits must be hated on...its what keeps some people going
 
Aug 17, 2016
53
0
0
Re: Re:

rick james said:
Zypherov said:
I have met a member of Team Sky on several occasions. I know him. He was born within the same area that I was. I know for a fact that he doesn't dope nor has he ever doped. So he is not part of some imagined systematic doping programme on Team Sky. That's his story. As for the rest of the team I honestly feel that they are clean also.
of course they're clean, but the big bad Brits must be hated on...its what keeps some people going
:lol: :lol: :lol:

The naivety is strong with this one.
 
May 6, 2016
224
0
0
Re: Re:

mike75 said:
rick james said:
Zypherov said:
I have met a member of Team Sky on several occasions. I know him. He was born within the same area that I was. I know for a fact that he doesn't dope nor has he ever doped. So he is not part of some imagined systematic doping programme on Team Sky. That's his story. As for the rest of the team I honestly feel that they are clean also.
of course they're clean, but the big bad Brits must be hated on...its what keeps some people going
:lol: :lol: :lol:

The naivety is strong with this one.
Please enlighten us with your professional insight into Team Sky's imagined doping. This smear campaign has gone on long enough. The conspiratorial babble is strong with the doubters.
 
Jul 21, 2016
913
0
0
Interesting the reactions post Wiggins fiasco. Surprising how many people still holding resolutely to the belief Sky are clean.
Seems like cognitive dissonance to me.

The evidence is quite damning. The rational objective response is surely to accept the damning evidence and at least move your belief from 'clean' to uncertainty. To maintain belief in 'completely clean' seems a little delusional. A bit of fence sitting is in order at least, surely?

Is this some kind of life affirming thing, needing sporting heroes to believe in? Or are the true believers here just stirring the pot for a bit light-hearted banter?
 
May 6, 2016
224
0
0
Re:

Dan2016 said:
Interesting the reactions post Wiggins fiasco. Surprising how many people still holding resolutely to the belief Sky are clean.
Seems like cognitive dissonance to me.

The evidence is quite damning. The rational objective response is surely to accept the damning evidence and at least move your belief from 'clean' to uncertainty. To maintain belief in 'completely clean' seems a little delusional. A bit of fence sitting is in order at least, surely?

Is this some kind of life affirming thing, needing sporting heroes to believe in? Or are the true believers here just stirring the pot for a bit light-hearted banter?
I honestly don't think that a Team like Sky would survive this amount of scrutiny if they were actually doping. I think that some posters only think that they are right, really not sure, just guessing, wishful thinking, hoping that they are right for the chance of a "I told you so" moment. Obviously there are some ethical issues with the TUE thing, but Sky acted within the rules.
 
Re: Re:

Because Team Sky, the UCI, WADA and UKAD said so? I can understand that train of thought. There are some of us who don't trust the credibility of those agencies anymore, and disagree with that assessment.
 
May 6, 2016
224
0
0
Re: Sky

The riders of Team Sky are highly talented individuals who like all top athletes were born with natural genetic talent far beyond the reach and comprehension of the average individual's insight and analysis.
 
Re: Sky

Zypherov said:
The riders of Team Sky are highly talented individuals who like all top athletes were born with natural genetic talent far beyond the reach and comprehension of the average individual's insight and analysis.
And they only needed to join Team Sky to realize their potential, right. Because they are the only team with such talent? That's all Froome and Wiggo needed. Well that and a comfy pillow.
 
Apr 3, 2011
2,301
0
0
Re:

Dan2016 said:
Interesting the reactions post Wiggins fiasco. Surprising how many people still holding resolutely to the belief Sky are clean.
Seems like cognitive dissonance to me.

The evidence is quite damning. The rational objective response is surely to accept the damning evidence and at least move your belief from 'clean' to uncertainty. To maintain belief in 'completely clean' seems a little delusional. A bit of fence sitting is in order at least, surely?

Is this some kind of life affirming thing, needing sporting heroes to believe in? Or are the true believers here just stirring the pot for a bit light-hearted banter?
well, remarkably similar evolution as in the case of certain zero times Tour winner: fanbase gradually eroding as the allegations kept piling up, but those that remained gradually hardened up... so at the end there were only real hardcore pharmstrongistas, some of which believe to this day everything was a worldwide conspiracy against their hero (in the worst case, everyone was doped anyway so he deserves his jerseys no matter what)
 
Re: Re:

mike75 said:
rick james said:
Zypherov said:
I have met a member of Team Sky on several occasions. I know him. He was born within the same area that I was. I know for a fact that he doesn't dope nor has he ever doped. So he is not part of some imagined systematic doping programme on Team Sky. That's his story. As for the rest of the team I honestly feel that they are clean also.
of course they're clean, but the big bad Brits must be hated on...its what keeps some people going
:lol: :lol: :lol:

The naivety is strong with this one.
Ok, show me proof team sky are doping, no innuendo, actual proof
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Re: Re:

doperhopper said:
Dan2016 said:
Interesting the reactions post Wiggins fiasco. Surprising how many people still holding resolutely to the belief Sky are clean.
Seems like cognitive dissonance to me.

The evidence is quite damning. The rational objective response is surely to accept the damning evidence and at least move your belief from 'clean' to uncertainty. To maintain belief in 'completely clean' seems a little delusional. A bit of fence sitting is in order at least, surely?

Is this some kind of life affirming thing, needing sporting heroes to believe in? Or are the true believers here just stirring the pot for a bit light-hearted banter?
well, remarkably similar evolution as in the case of certain zero times Tour winner: fanbase gradually eroding as the allegations kept piling up, but those that remained gradually hardened up... so at the end there were only real hardcore pharmstrongistas
Agreed. The usps-sky similarieties are baffling on many levels, also wrt the behavioural curve of the fanbase.

The fall out came a bit earlier with Sky though. I mean the Believers vs. Doubters ratio was much more favourable for Lance around the same time.
Which is no surprise of course considering some people (albeit not too many, and certainly not the UK press) have actually learned from the Lance case, and I guess increased power/reach of social media also plays its part.

Only very few whose learning curve has actually been backwards. Walsh being the most striking example.
 
Feb 23, 2011
618
0
0
Re: Re:

MatParker117 said:
Rollthedice said:
Any news about the package?
Likely find out the contents on December 19.
Likely they will simply lie on December 19, and gamble that the source of the allegation doesn't have evidence to back up the allegation (that's assuming the source hasn't been paid off already to go away).

Employees of News International don't have a great track record in front of Parliamentary Select Committees, Rebecca Brooks and Andy Coulson (also employees of Rupert Murdoch) simply lied until eventually the police caught up with them.

In fact Parliamentary Select Committees have been a joke for some time in terms of people turning up and making a mockery of the fact that the committees have no power, no clout and the people they are interviewing have equally as much dirt on the Committee members themselves.
 
Re: Re:

rick james said:
mike75 said:
rick james said:
Zypherov said:
I have met a member of Team Sky on several occasions. I know him. He was born within the same area that I was. I know for a fact that he doesn't dope nor has he ever doped. So he is not part of some imagined systematic doping programme on Team Sky. That's his story. As for the rest of the team I honestly feel that they are clean also.
of course they're clean, but the big bad Brits must be hated on...its what keeps some people going
:lol: :lol: :lol:

The naivety is strong with this one.
Ok, show me proof team sky are doping, no innuendo, actual proof
we're back at Armstrong ground zero with this
 
Re:

Zypherov said:
I have met a member of Team Sky on several occasions. I know him. He was born within the same area that I was. I know for a fact that he doesn't dope nor has he ever doped. So he is not part of some imagined systematic doping programme on Team Sky. That's his story. As for the rest of the team I honestly feel that they are clean also.
I'll try this approach......................... :)

I have met a member of Team Sky on several occasions. I know him. He was born within the same area that I was. I know for a fact that he dopes and has always doped. So he is part of a systematic doping programme on Team Sky. That's his story. As for the rest of the team I honestly feel that they are dirty also

see how that level of evidence works?
 
Feb 23, 2011
618
0
0
Re: Re:

rick james said:
mike75 said:
rick james said:
Zypherov said:
I have met a member of Team Sky on several occasions. I know him. He was born within the same area that I was. I know for a fact that he doesn't dope nor has he ever doped. So he is not part of some imagined systematic doping programme on Team Sky. That's his story. As for the rest of the team I honestly feel that they are clean also.
of course they're clean, but the big bad Brits must be hated on...its what keeps some people going
:lol: :lol: :lol:

The naivety is strong with this one.
Ok, show me proof team sky are doping, no innuendo, actual proof
Lets flip this, explain to me how a team of 30 'fit' young men need 4 full time Doctors and a medicine fund of £250,000?
 
May 6, 2016
224
0
0
Re: Re:

sniper said:
doperhopper said:
Dan2016 said:
Interesting the reactions post Wiggins fiasco. Surprising how many people still holding resolutely to the belief Sky are clean.
Seems like cognitive dissonance to me.

The evidence is quite damning. The rational objective response is surely to accept the damning evidence and at least move your belief from 'clean' to uncertainty. To maintain belief in 'completely clean' seems a little delusional. A bit of fence sitting is in order at least, surely?

Is this some kind of life affirming thing, needing sporting heroes to believe in? Or are the true believers here just stirring the pot for a bit light-hearted banter?
well, remarkably similar evolution as in the case of certain zero times Tour winner: fanbase gradually eroding as the allegations kept piling up, but those that remained gradually hardened up... so at the end there were only real hardcore pharmstrongistas
Agreed. The usps-sky similarieties are baffling on many levels, also wrt the behavioural curve of the fanbase.

The fall out came a bit earlier with Sky though. I mean the Believers vs. Doubters ratio was much more favourable for Lance around the same time.
Which is no surprise of course considering some people (albeit not too many, and certainly not the UK press) have actually learned from the Lance case, and I guess increased power/reach of social media also plays its part.

Only very few whose learning curve has actually been backwards. Walsh being the most striking example.
See that's the problem right there and that is comparing Team Sky to Lance Armstrong and US Postal. Sky and Us Postal are worlds apart. You can't compare both. For example Sky are especially in the Tour de France deploying the so called train on a daily basis, US postal done the same so the argument goes that Sky must be doping. Same goes for all other current teams dominating the pace setting on the front of the Peloton just like US Postal so they must be doping. No Sky riders ever tested positive, neither did Armstrong (well he did of course), neither did Marion Jones so the argument goes that because these athletes never tested positive then Sky are able to cheat the system. Sky will get rid of employees, doctors and riders etc, who have had an affiliation with doping on some level or another so the argument goes that this has all to do with public relations, etc, ect. Sky are subject to the Biological Passport so the argument goes that it can be manipulated and Sky are real Houdini's at performing this magic. Sky have a magic potion up their sleeves that no one else has access to. These futile arguments go on and yet no one has ever proved anything because there is nothing to prove. These extraordinary allegations must be followed up by extraordinary proof.
 
Re: Sky

Zypherov said:
The riders of Team Sky are highly talented individuals who like all top athletes were born with natural genetic talent far beyond the reach and comprehension of the average individual's insight and analysis.
...but aren't all pros that reach the World Tour level of the sport? How does that make the Team Sky riders any different from the rest of the professional peloton?
 
May 6, 2016
224
0
0
Re: Sky

Angliru said:
Zypherov said:
The riders of Team Sky are highly talented individuals who like all top athletes were born with natural genetic talent far beyond the reach and comprehension of the average individual's insight and analysis.
...but aren't all pros that reach the World Tour level of the sport? How does that make the Team Sky riders any different from the rest of the professional peloton?
Yes, all pros are. I'm not suggesting that Team Sky are any different to the rest of the riders in the Peloton. Semantics hey !!.
 
Sep 15, 2016
230
0
0
Re: Re:

Zypherov said:
sniper said:
doperhopper said:
Dan2016 said:
Interesting the reactions post Wiggins fiasco. Surprising how many people still holding resolutely to the belief Sky are clean.
Seems like cognitive dissonance to me.

The evidence is quite damning. The rational objective response is surely to accept the damning evidence and at least move your belief from 'clean' to uncertainty. To maintain belief in 'completely clean' seems a little delusional. A bit of fence sitting is in order at least, surely?

Is this some kind of life affirming thing, needing sporting heroes to believe in? Or are the true believers here just stirring the pot for a bit light-hearted banter?
well, remarkably similar evolution as in the case of certain zero times Tour winner: fanbase gradually eroding as the allegations kept piling up, but those that remained gradually hardened up... so at the end there were only real hardcore pharmstrongistas
Agreed. The usps-sky similarieties are baffling on many levels, also wrt the behavioural curve of the fanbase.

The fall out came a bit earlier with Sky though. I mean the Believers vs. Doubters ratio was much more favourable for Lance around the same time.
Which is no surprise of course considering some people (albeit not too many, and certainly not the UK press) have actually learned from the Lance case, and I guess increased power/reach of social media also plays its part.

Only very few whose learning curve has actually been backwards. Walsh being the most striking example.
See that's the problem right there and that is comparing Team Sky to Lance Armstrong and US Postal. Sky and Us Postal are worlds apart. You can't compare both. For example Sky are especially in the Tour de France deploying the so called train on a daily basis, US postal done the same so the argument goes that Sky must be doping. Same goes for all other current teams dominating the pace setting on the front of the Peloton just like US Postal so they must be doping. No Sky riders ever tested positive, neither did Armstrong (well he did of course), neither did Marion Jones so the argument goes that because these athletes never tested positive then Sky are able to cheat the system. Sky will get rid of employees, doctors and riders etc, who have had an affiliation with doping on some level or another so the argument goes that this has all to do with public relations, etc, ect. Sky are subject to the Biological Passport so the argument goes that it can be manipulated and Sky are real Houdini's at performing this magic. Sky have a magic potion up their sleeves that no one else has access to. These futile arguments go on and yet no one has ever proved anything because there is nothing to prove. These extraordinary allegations must be followed up by extraordinary proof.
I wouldn't call saying that pro cyclists dope "extraordinary allegations" but YMMV i guess...
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
N The Clinic 10

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts