Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[ferryman]

Yes I'm very sure that's what you fear and keeps you up at night!

Just imagine all the hungry children in the world if Walsh participates in a cover-up with Brailsford. Who can we turn to then? Who can we trust if not David Walsh?

Who can save Sky? They're just trying to be open and honest but David Walsh might not do his job properly and make them look bad in front of the children.

Please stop the overacting. You're like a art version of a Police Academy movie!

Hi, Mr Hog. Just to let you know (you won't be surprised) that we have received a couple of formal complaints about some of your posts today. Personally, no problem with them but maybe hold back on the baiting a bit? Cheers man

 

[Dear Wiggo]

ETA:

Any chance of a link?

Not exhaustive, but one way to sweeten a potential Sky-scandal "journo":

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=1083718&highlight=gallagher#post1083718

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=1081703&highlight=gallagher#post1081703

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=1073072&highlight=gallagher#post1073072

 

[JimmyFingers]

Not exhaustive, but one way to sweeten a potential Sky-scandal "journo":

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=1083718&highlight=gallagher#post1083718

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=1081703&highlight=gallagher#post1081703

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=1073072&highlight=gallagher#post1073072

I fail to see any relevance, particularly since no-one has read the article. This is a blatent attempt to prejudice opinion

 

[Mellow Velo]

ETA:



Not exhaustive, but one way to sweeten a potential Sky-scandal "journo":

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=1083718&highlight=gallagher#post1083718

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=1081703&highlight=gallagher#post1081703

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=1073072&highlight=gallagher#post1073072

Ta, will have a read in a bit.

Meanwhile, Mick Rogers departs for Saxo.
Given time to find another home?
Still, ironically he will improve Saxo's WT licence chances.

.............So, the house cleaning continues.

 

[Ferminal]

I'm not convinced Rogers is leaving Sky because he did or didn't sign their special declaration.

He was out of contract, had not yet resigned. It's possible Saxo offered terms which Sky couldn't match.

 

[coinneach]

I'm not convinced Rogers is leaving Sky because he did or didn't sign their special declaration.

He was out of contract, had not yet resigned. It's possible Saxo offered terms which Sky couldn't match.

Pigs might fly!

 

[Ferminal]

Do you have something to add?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

I'm not convinced Rogers is leaving Sky because he did or didn't sign their special declaration.

He was out of contract, had not yet resigned. It's possible Saxo offered terms which Sky couldn't match.

He was also a key member of the Tour winning team in 2012. Road captain, is what I would have termed him.

Tinman predicted Rogers was being given time, and this fits with the line of "everyone in next year's team have signed".

I'm going to have to go with the flying ham patrol as well.

 

[Mellow Velo]

ETA:

Not exhaustive, but one way to sweeten a potential Sky-scandal "journo":

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=1083718&highlight=gallagher#post1083718

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=1081703&highlight=gallagher#post1081703

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=1073072&highlight=gallagher#post1073072

OK, so what are we saying here?
That after a decade of dogged, doping investigation David Walsh has done a complete one eighty, after a bit of Sky corporate hospitality and a "preferential" interview?

As I predicted, from hero to hack in a day, simply because his latest words contradict (or at best, don't support) the Skyfall manifesto.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

OK, so what are we saying here?
That after a decade of dogged, doping investigation David Walsh has done a complete one eighty, after a bit of Sky corporate hospitality and a "preferential" interview?

As I predicted, from hero to hack in a day, simply because his latest words contradict (or at best, don't support) the Skyfall manifesto.

Context gets lost in threads very quickly when posts responded to are not nested more than 1 post deep.

In a nutshell, someone made a jibe about Walsh turning, I said it sounded similar to Gallagher, you asked for a link, I provided the links.

If you do not think it sounds similar, that's fine, but to leap off the cliff of interpretation seems a little knee-jerky, albeit understandable given my hatred for anything unAustralian and desire to see the UK sink into the sea asap.

I won't pay for the article, but there's no doubt people who will and maybe I will get to read it.

If Walsh has actually talked to Brailsford and bought it all - the whole kit and caboodle - that Sky are clean, won clean, never strayed deliberately from the clean path and after a couple of little mishaps they're all squeaky clean again and their GT domination for 2012 was paniagua, then great.

Have to ignore the whole " we might relax our ZTP " story early 2011 though, yeah?

I need a little more than one journalist buying one story from the person running the team.

Interesting to read more of David Millar's book and his admission that NOONE on Garmin knew Brad was about to stomp 4th place in the Tour. He even hints that JV has suggested JV knew, and disagrees.

Now. If Brailsford had got Kimmage to do the interview... ;-)

 

[sniper]

I fear that this article won't give a full and clear explanation of the Leinder's affair, and will be seen here as cover up, with Walsh as a willing participant, regardless of any possible reason.

well, if walsh ends up trivializing the leinders affair and suggesting that sky are clean, then yes.
because you don't dominate a whole season on bread and ****in water.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

I did say that I might reconsider my view that the house clearance was some absolutely meaningless PR if Mick f***ing Rogers was thrown out.

If Mick Rogers isn't on the roster, then my chances of believing a ZTP statement coming out of Sky HQ increase massively. Because while there may or there may not be stuff going on behind the scenes at Sky, Rogers' dodgy history was out in the open, and people knew about it, so Sky couldn't pull the "we didn't know" card (mind you, the same could be said about Yates, Barry or de Jongh).

The chances are Rogers is leaving on amicable terms and nothing will be said in the press about the ZTP in discussing his leaving. But his presence on the squad was a massive red flag that the whole thing was nonsense and they were just picking and choosing who of the many people with shady history on the squad were expendable, and only getting rid of them. Rogers leaving is a big step towards credibility, at least in terms of the people with pre-Sky history. It doesn't mean that people aren't doing anything wrong actually AT Sky, but it does mean their cleaning house is much more believable.

I still think it's a joke that he was recruited in the first place, mind.

 

[Freddythefrog]

I'm not convinced Rogers is leaving Sky because he did or didn't sign their special declaration.

He was out of contract, had not yet resigned. It's possible Saxo offered terms which Sky couldn't match.

Probably very true.

Offer from Saxo = $XXXXXX,

Offer from Sky = $0.

Translated via Fran: memo to DB -

"Dave - how does this look? "We are very sad to loose the services of that great rider Mick Rogers, he is one top guy. We try and do our utmost to retain the very best riders, and Mick is very definitely in that category. We do try to pay the most competitive rates to secure the very best team. We would very much have liked to retain the services of Mick for next year but whilst we do have a big budget, there are limits. We are not privy to exactly what Saxo have offered Mick, but from what we understand, he has been given an outstanding offer, that we cannot match. We wish Mick well. He is a highly accomplished professional and fantastic athlete. [To be released via Fotheringham and Gallagher and Cycling Weakly together with a note offering each of them a personalised invite to request a single exclusive interview with one of the Sky Men's road team or Track team. Expenses paid hotel accommodation at the camp] Dave we need to keep them sweet. After Mick goes we are left with Shane and nobody is offering him anything. Parachute payments ?]

 

[Ferminal]

Yeh that is also a possibility, I guess the key will be in the PR.

Reason I don't necessarily think it's a doping thing is that Rogers has had no problem hiding his misdemeanours in the past, Stapleton declared him clean. Sky are recruiting a couple of Unzue's crew who had no problems signing the declaration and no doubt there are others who have doped who are sticking around. I guess is that Rogers is a known doper, not just a suspected.

 

[Mellow Velo]

Context gets lost in threads very quickly when posts responded to are not nested more than 1 post deep.

In a nutshell, someone made a jibe about Walsh turning, I said it sounded similar to Gallagher, you asked for a link, I provided the links.

If you do not think it sounds similar, that's fine, but to leap off the cliff of interpretation seems a little knee-jerky, albeit understandable given my hatred for anything unAustralian and desire to see the UK sink into the sea asap.

I won't pay for the article, but there's no doubt people who will and maybe I will get to read it.

If Walsh has actually talked to Brailsford and bought it all - the whole kit and caboodle - that Sky are clean, won clean, never strayed deliberately from the clean path and after a couple of little mishaps they're all squeaky clean again and their GT domination for 2012 was paniagua, then great.

Have to ignore the whole " we might relax our ZTP " story early 2011 though, yeah?

I need a little more than one journalist buying one story from the person running the team.

Interesting to read more of David Millar's book and his admission that NOONE on Garmin knew Brad was about to stomp 4th place in the Tour. He even hints that JV has suggested JV knew, and disagrees.

Now. If Brailsford had got Kimmage to do the interview... ;-)

Sorry, I wasn't clear.
I wasn't getting at you, rather that this was what those selected posts appeared to suggest and that I find improbable in the extreme.
As you say, out of context in respect of the entity.

 

[thehog]

Rogers to Saxo?

I assume in 2013 he'll be classed as "Dirty rider with a past on dodgy Spanish team" rather than part of clean marginal gains success.

The irony. Funny now things end up.

My next question is; Did Brailsford have control of his team? Did he know what Yates, Rogers etc. had the Tour team doing in Tenerife?




(edit: perhaps we should start to thank Porte for speaking up?)

 

[Freddythefrog]

Are you deliberately trying to be un-seeing ?

Yeh that is also a possibility, I guess the key will be in the PR.

Reason I don't necessarily think it's a doping thing is that Rogers has had no problem hiding his misdemeanours in the past, Stapleton declared him clean. Sky are recruiting a couple of Unzue's crew who had no problems signing the declaration and no doubt there are others who have doped who are sticking around. I guess is that Rogers is a known doper, not just a suspected.

Stapleton (via first hand experience) has an ego as big as a kite. He had his own status to defend along with his record of being a superb strategic thinker and businessman. He needed sponsors and he needed a fan base. In the sewer of men's professional cycling, he needed to draw those fans who wanted to believe in something, in exactly the same way that Sky, Brailsford and Cookson do - "believe us - we are clean".

So let's work it out - will Stapleton declare his genuine concerns as he gets to know the guy and call it out. "I was naive. I thought Mick was one of the clean guys, after all he was beaten by Millar but just put his head down and kept plugging away. It seemed a great story. Now I recognise he was just as bad and I was duped" or does he put a nice bit of spin on it. Keep the lid on everything and then exit stage left at the earliest convenient moment.

As it looks right now, Stapleton did make some excellent calls. Cav and HTC did superbly and stapleton exited the room before the *** from the exploding Lance fan coated most people.

 

[thehog]

Stapleton (via first hand experience) has an ego as big as a kite. He had his own status to defend along with his record of being a superb strategic thinker and businessman. He needed sponsors and he needed a fan base. In the sewer of men's professional cycling, he needed to draw those fans who wanted to believe in something, in exactly the same way that Sky, Brailsford and Cookson do - "believe us - we are clean".

So let's work it out - will Stapleton declare his genuine concerns as he gets to know the guy and call it out. "I was naive. I thought Mick was one of the clean guys, after all he was beaten by Millar but just put his head down and kept plugging away. It seemed a great story. Now I recognise he was just as bad and I was duped" or does he put a nice bit of spin on it. Keep the lid on everything and then exit stage left at the earliest convenient moment.

As it looks right now, Stapleton did make some excellent calls. Cav and HTC did superbly and stapleton exited the room before the *** from the exploding Lance fan coated most people.

Stapleton hired Hincapie. Declared him clean also.

There was much press at the time in regards to doing this due to Hincapie's doping.

 

[Bernie's eyesore]

Rogers to Saxo is interesting, We'll get a clear comparison between margianl gains and doping practices. If Rogers isn't as good next year it's a clear sign that marginal gains beats doping hands down and there will no longer be a need for riders to dope in the future. Could be the best thing to happen to cycling in years.

 

[Ferminal]

We have already seen that, as he was better at Sky than with Ferrari.

 

[The Hitch]

I did say that I might reconsider my view that the house clearance was some absolutely meaningless PR if Mick f***ing Rogers was thrown out.

If Mick Rogers isn't on the roster, then my chances of believing a ZTP statement coming out of Sky HQ increase massively. Because while there may or there may not be stuff going on behind the scenes at Sky, Rogers' dodgy history was out in the open, and people knew about it, so Sky couldn't pull the "we didn't know" card (mind you, the same could be said about Yates, Barry or de Jongh)..

What you people ignore is that sky's entire raison detre (pardon my French) was winning wiggins the tour. The fact that they get rid of someone like rogers once he's helped wiggins win the tour does not all of a sudden legitimize the past. Especially since sky are only doing all this because of the renewed focus on doping brought about by the lance scandal.

Its like a corrupt politician throwing his chronies under the bus only after he has won the election and some other corrupt politicians have been brought to trial.

 

[Mellow Velo]

What you people ignore is that sky's entire raison detre (pardon my French) was winning wiggins the tour. The fact that they get rid of someone like rogers once he's helped wiggins win the tour does not all of a sudden legitimize the past. Especially since sky are only doing all this because of the renewed focus on doping brought about by the lance scandal.

Its like a corrupt politician throwing his chronies under the bus only after he has won the election and some other corrupt politicians have been brought to trial.

That would make sense, except that every year is election year, with the TDF. Not every 4 or 5 years.

Once again, Libertine Seguros has shown objectivity, only this time comes down on the opposite side of the argument.
Coincidentally, it is the first time that anyone has expressed any disagreement with an LS post.

 

[martinvickers]

He was also a key member of the Tour winning team in 2012. Road captain, is what I would have termed him.

Tinman predicted Rogers was being given time, and this fits with the line of "everyone in next year's team have signed".

. I'm going to have to go with the flying ham patrol as well.

Haven't seen the conformation yet, but I have to agree with you on this - pretty obvious situation, similar to yates - he won't/can't sign, but he won't admit either - so they 'gently' 'leverage' him out.

It's pretty cowardly by Sky in some ways. to operate like this, but they were pretty clear they weren't going to do 'investigations'.

Still, getting rid of Rogers, however poorly handled, is at least an advance on not getting rid, right? Bueller? Bueller? ...

 

[martinvickers]

I did say that I might reconsider my view that the house clearance was some absolutely meaningless PR if Mick f***ing Rogers was thrown out.

If Mick Rogers isn't on the roster, then my chances of believing a ZTP statement coming out of Sky HQ increase massively. Because while there may or there may not be stuff going on behind the scenes at Sky, Rogers' dodgy history was out in the open, and people knew about it, so Sky couldn't pull the "we didn't know" card (mind you, the same could be said about Yates, Barry or de Jongh).

The chances are Rogers is leaving on amicable terms and nothing will be said in the press about the ZTP in discussing his leaving. But his presence on the squad was a massive red flag that the whole thing was nonsense and they were just picking and choosing who of the many people with shady history on the squad were expendable, and only getting rid of them. Rogers leaving is a big step towards credibility, at least in terms of the people with pre-Sky history. It doesn't mean that people aren't doing anything wrong actually AT Sky, but it does mean their cleaning house is much more believable.

I still think it's a joke that he was recruited in the first place, mind.

I think that's pretty bang on the money. Including the last bit.

I think Sky's original ZTP was largely about 'the present' - if you had no 'obvious' pings -and by that I mean being caught, and you were 'now' clean, that was enough.

But the complete Lanceslide (do you like that?) meant that a) the past was going to mean something whether Sky liked it or not, and b) a lot of people who were 'ping-free' were going to lose that fig leaf - barry and rogers very high on the list.

So yes, it is reassuring that both Yates and Rogers have 'gone' - and they way they've gone is also, oddly, reassuring. Yes, it's cheap and pathetic, but so is life...and it suggests, as you hint, that Sky are (finally) realising these people can't be about...might be too late though...

 

[Bernie's eyesore]

We have already seen that, as he was better at Sky than with Ferrari.

I thought Rogers just mixed with Ferrari because he thought he was a top bloke and enjoyed his company? My mistake, sorry.