Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[Don't be late Pedro]

BC President Brian Cookson : "When you think what the UCI has done in the last few years, pursuing offenders when other sports have let people off on the flimsiest of excuses," he said, "I think the UCI has got a good record in anti-doping that Pat can be proud of.

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news...okson-i-am-100-supportive-of-pat-mcquaid.html

Team Sky is owned by a company called Tour Racing Limited, which holds the team's UCI ProTour licence. TRL is a holding company owned by BSkyB and on the board of TRL are two senior Sky executives and Ian Drake and Brian Cookson, the chief executive and president of British Cycling.

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest/438764/who-owns-team-sky.html

Conflicts of interest much? .

It then goes on to say

That's why there are two people from British Cycling, Ian and Brian, on the board [of TRL] to prevent any conflicts of interest.

So it sounds like they were put explicitly on the board to oversee?

 

[The Hitch]

Riis doped alone. He acted alone.

Leinders injected EPO into young cyclists blood streams using the privilege of being a Doctor.

Sketchy? Dekker was 21. A young man and was “influenced” by a medical practitioner by injecting EPO into his blood stream along with other harmful products.

That's sick.

oh for **** sake hog riis has been implicated in team doping ever since he started the ds gig. Most recently by tyler hamilton, who's testimony presumably you trsut.

Your contributions to this thread just derail the whole discussion.

 

[Darryl Webster]

It then goes on to say


So it sounds like they were put explicitly on the board to oversee?

Oh yeh, that really makes sense don't it. NOT.

If anyone really needs it explaining then there beyond my help.

 

[Joachim]

Posting sonething vague then refusing to provide clarification of what exactly it is you are getting at isn't very helpful

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

Oh yeh, that really makes sense don't it. NOT.

If anyone really needs it explaining then there beyond my help.

I did not say it makes sense to me but that is what it says in the article. It seemed relevant to the argument you were making. Or am I wrong?

 

[The Hitch]

There's dodgy DS's like Riis with riders like Contador,

If links to personnel with sketchy pasts is enough for guilt, the entire cycling world would be guilty.

So you believe Contador is clean?

Oh and it is a bit more suspicious if the team not only has the doping doctor but is taking credit for having a "strict anti doping policy". If the team claims "transparecy" yet refuses to answer questions on this.

Its also more suspicious if the head rider once said that teams with doctors like lienders on them should not be allowed at the tour. now seems ok with having doctors like that at the tour providing he gets one too.

 

[Darryl Webster]

Posting sonething vague then refusing to provide clarification of what exactly it is you are getting at isn't very helpful

Its only "vague" in you mind.

To any one with a modicum of understanding best practice its bloody obvious.

 

[Joachim]

Either ***, or get off the pot, son.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Feck sake, dangerous or not , though of course a concern is rather missing the point. Doping is theft , no if`s or buts.

The tone of certain posters is very much that of apologists.

Hate to use the cliché but Occam's razor any one?

The application of the principle often shifts the burden of proof in a discussion. The razor states that one should proceed to simpler theories until simplicity can be traded for greater explanatory power. The simplest available theory need not be most accurate. Philosophers also point out that the exact meaning of simplest may be nuanced.
By this understanding Sky/ BC have a bloody huge book of explaining to do and they are NOT doing so.
It looks like a duck, it walks like...even quacks like a duck...very high chance its a bloody duck...

Yups, but, how do you gonna explain this to those British Cycling fanboys/hired Sky trolls on this board?

This topic is getting just insane. The more and the more dirt that comes of the clean team sky, the more the apologists from Britain come in and troll. FFS, they have never seen a clean cycling race in their lives. Please, get them back where they belong: at the track.

 

[Bexon30]

So you believe Contador is clean?

Oh and it is a bit more suspicious if the team not only has the doping doctor but is taking credit for having a "strict anti doping policy". If the team claims "transparecy" yet refuses to answer questions on this.

Its also more suspicious if the head rider once said that teams with doctors like lienders on them should not be allowed at the tour. now seems ok with having doctors like that at the tour providing he gets one too.

That was then this is now. He would like to win the Tour again?!

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

Yups, but, how do you gonna explain this to those British Cycling fanboys/hired Sky trolls on this board?

This topic is getting just insane. The more and the more dirt that comes of the clean team sky, the more the apologists from Britain come in and troll. FFS, they have never seen a clean cycling race in their lives. Please, get them back where they belong: at the track.

FGL, for someone who claims to have watch racing since Lemond you must be in your late 30's (at least) right? Yet, all your comments read like someone who is in their mid -teens? Everyone is a fanboy, right? Always commenting on people's nationality. This is the kind of stuff you expect to see on youtube.

 

[Parker]

Feck sake, dangerous or not , though of course a concern is rather missing the point. Doping is theft , no if`s or buts.

The tone of certain posters is very much that of apologists.

Hate to use the cliché but Occam's razor any one?

The application of the principle often shifts the burden of proof in a discussion. The razor states that one should proceed to simpler theories until simplicity can be traded for greater explanatory power. The simplest available theory need not be most accurate. Philosophers also point out that the exact meaning of simplest may be nuanced.
By this understanding Sky/ BC have a bloody huge book of explaining to do and they are NOT doing so.
It looks like a duck, it walks like...even quacks like a duck...very high chance its a bloody duck...

The simplest explanation is that someone didn't do their job properly (when they recruited him). Someone screwing up is the actual reason for almost everything that people ascribe to some sort of conspiracy.

 

[WinterRider]

The simplest explanation is that someone didn't do their job properly (when they recruited him). Someone screwing up is the actual reason for almost everything that people ascribe to some sort of conspiracy.

No. I don't see how the ex-rabo guys could have been unaware of what he was doing at rabo, and they in turn could not have shared this with their sky teammates, at which point he should have been sacked immediately.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

So, care to state what those conflicts of interest are?

Although he has now ruled himself out (as of a couple of hours ago) and backed Pat, there was speculation of Cookson becoming UCI president over the last couple of days. A guy who is the President of British Cycling. Pat McQuaid is on record as stating how good he finds Britain's rise in the sport and how he wanted Cavendish to win the Olympics to continue British Cycling's amazing year. A guy who is on the board of the entity that owns Team Sky, the team that has been the prime benefactor of this rise in the sport.

It's easy to see where a conflict of interest may arise, even if you may consider it not to have arisen yet.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

FGL, for someone who claims to have watch racing since Lemond you must be in your late 30's (at least) right? Yet, all your comments read like someone who is in their mid -teens? Everyone is a fanboy, right? Always commenting on people's nationality. This is the kind of stuff you expect to see on youtube.

To be fair, I must exlclude you in that sence, but really, analyzie this topic trully and you will see the nationalism all over it.

At least some British guys are seeing 'the light', cheers for them.

And, to be fair, I can understand the nationalism, haven't had it myself luckily, never cheer/cheered for Dutch riders because they ARE Dutch [fukk Boogerd/Dekker etc etc] biut I do feel a certain trend in this topic, mostly by British acting posters.

I might be mistaken but I am pretty damn sure I am right on this one.

And it is annoying, I guess everyone would like to know the next holy grail in cycling that sky has 'invented'. With that silly attitude of 'Brits do not dope' we will not get to the bottom.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

Although he has now ruled himself out (as of a couple of hours ago) and backed Pat, there was speculation of Cookson becoming UCI president over the last couple of days. A guy who is the President of British Cycling. Pat McQuaid is on record as stating how good he finds Britain's rise in the sport and how he wanted Cavendish to win the Olympics to continue British Cycling's amazing year. A guy who is on the board of the entity that owns Team Sky, the team that has been the prime benefactor of this rise in the sport.

It's easy to see where a conflict of interest may arise, even if you may consider it not to have arisen yet.

Do we know if he is a paid member of the TRL board?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

The simplest explanation is that someone didn't do their job properly (when they recruited him). Someone screwing up is the actual reason for almost everything that people ascribe to some sort of conspiracy.

Then surely that person would be publicly removed, and BC would have nothing more to do with them.

Another, perhaps simpler explanation - is that the person whose job it was to interview the Doctor, did a very good job and got the candidate that they were looking for.

 

[Parker]

A guy who is on the board of the entity that owns Team Sky.

He's not on the board. He's on the operating committee making sure BC get paid for the shared serves and their interests are looked after.

The actual board (present and past) is here: http://www.creditgate.com/company_information/tour+racing+limited.aspx

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

To be fair, I must exlclude you in that sence, but really, analyzie this topic trully and you will see the nationalism all over it.

At least some British guys are seeing 'the light', cheers for them.

And, to be fair, I can understand the nationalism, haven't had it myself luckily, never cheer/cheered for Dutch riders because they ARE Dutch [fukk Boogerd/Dekker etc etc] biut I do feel a certain trend in this topic, mostly by British acting posters.

I might be mistaken but I am pretty damn sure I am right on this one.

And it is annoying, I guess everyone would like to know the next holy grail in cycling that sky has 'invented'. With that silly attitude of 'Brits do not dope' we will not get to the bottom.

I appreciate your civil reply.

The frustration lies in reading some really excellent posts by yourself and then like the one above. I also think the 'Brits do not dope' crowd are in the minority though you are right and there are some out there.

 

[Parker]

Then surely that person would be publicly removed, and BC would have nothing more to do with them.

This isn't party politics. You don't just fire someone for making a mistake. You might not trust him with recruitment again, but if you fired him you'll find yourself in an employment tribunal very quickly.

 

[mastersracer]

So you believe Contador is clean?

Oh and it is a bit more suspicious if the team not only has the doping doctor but is taking credit for having a "strict anti doping policy". If the team claims "transparecy" yet refuses to answer questions on this.

Its also more suspicious if the head rider once said that teams with doctors like lienders on them should not be allowed at the tour. now seems ok with having doctors like that at the tour providing he gets one too.

With Contador, there's a trail of evidence since day 1 of his career. With Leinders and Sky, it's a matter of speculation. By all means be suspicious, but there's no smoking gun here.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

This isn't party politics. You don't just fire someone for making a mistake. You might not trust him with recruitment again, but if you fired him you'll find yourself in an employment tribunal very quickly.

To be brought in front of an employment tribunal you would have to be an employee.
Like almost everyone on TSky/BC Peters is a contractor, and still retained.

 

[thehog]

This topic is getting just insane. The more and the more dirt that comes of the clean team sky, the more the apologists from Britain come in and troll. FFS, they have never seen a clean cycling race in their lives. Please, get them back where they belong: at the track.

What I learnt today;

* Young men make a choice. When a Doctor of their employer “influences” them to dope and injects them with EPO it’s the cyclists fault. Because they made a choice.

* When a team Doctor masterminds a sophisticated team-wide doping program for 9-years which includes EPO, blood transfusions and HGH he is instantly reformed if he joins another team shortly after this 9 year Frankenstein period.

* The Doctor also becomes a specialist in saddle sores when he spent the majority of his career injecting EPO into young men.

* Also if the Doctor doesn’t appear at races is because he is offering “consultancy” on saddle sores and heat and not what defined his career - doping.

* Despite cycling having a 20+ year history of doping, just because one team hires a notorious doping doctor it doesn’t mean they are doping. Even when they completely dominate an entire season from start to finish it just means they’re clean because doping stopped in 2006 (according to Lance).

 

[Mellow Velo]

No. I don't see how the ex-rabo guys could have been unaware of what he was doing at rabo, and they in turn could not have shared this with their sky teammates, at which point he should have been sacked immediately.

Not sure your wording is quite right, but I think you are saying the Rabo boys would have told other team mates?

Problem is, to tell anyone means they then face the same sacking; the have to fall on their sword, to slay the evil Doctor Leinders.

That's the big fail with this zero policy lark. Instead of destroying Omerta, it actually enforces it.

 

[richtea]

You can pursue a claim through an employment tribunal as a contractor. At least in the UK. Although it doesn't need to come to that of course.