Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[Joachim]

I've also reported the "hate" messages that have been received in my inbox.

Some of the content is sickening.

I'm shocked by this

There really is no need for this kind of thing.

Has Susan taken action? She's made no mention of it.

 

[The Hitch]

Well seeing the extent of Sky's doping programme they probably had a hand in Dekker's doping. Most likely News corp made a secret takeover of Rabobank and made all riders under the age of 22 dope double as much as those above. And then after Rabobank finished doping they sent their head doping doctor over to Sky to help with the doping programme over there.

Even ott theories made in the interest of sarcasm should abide by the laws of continuity

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

I'm shocked by this

There really is no need for this kind of thing.

Has Susan taken action? She's made no mention of it.

This sort of thing is handled behind the scenes. And Susan is not the only mod on this forum.

 

[coinneach]

OPen again. I am feeling gracious and will not hand out any bans at this time.

HOWEVER: No more insults. No more personal stuff. No more dumb nicknames, whether for users or public figures. And above all: don't take this all so seriously!

Please remember that it is possible to disagree with one another without being rude.

And that further violations will indeed bring a ban in their wake.

Thank you.

Susan

I think all you can hope for is the snow clearing and the cycling starting...either that, or we start a fresh thread and put all the porkies there?

(It is irritating when mistakes are not corrected....anyone can make them by mistake or for fun (or maybe for mischief), but just to leave them lying there undermines the value of the clinic (unless its only value is giving grumpy folk an outlet for their frustration?))

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Cofidis was years ago, before the Armstrong revelations revealed cycling to the greater public for what it is. Every cycling doping scandal prior to this was chickenfeed relatively. And Wiggins isn't "some guy" - he's the 2012 TDF winner. I just happen to think you're wrong about how seismic another TDF winner being shown to be a cheat would be. All depending of course on it coming out now as you say.

In the context of the wider world of sport, Bradley Wiggins is some guy. It wouldn't be GOOD for cycling if he popped positive, but it wouldn't destroy cycling, except possibly in the UK.

No one man is bigger than the sport. Armstrong came close, but he's fallen and races are still going on as we speak. Landis didn't kill the sport. Rasmussen didn't kill the sport, except in Germany. Hell, Denmark is MORE into cycling now than it was when Rasmussen was thrown out the TDF.

Also, Wiggins is the current TDF champion, sure, but the time frame for this hypothetical positive has to be considered as well. In the grand scheme of things, he's just another rider. Major riders testing positive happens in cycling. Pantani was the reigning Giro winner, Tour winner AND Giro leader when he was yanked from the race in '99, less than a year after Festina. What happened? Some new guy came along to emerge from the wreckage and rebuild the sport. It happens. It may suffer for a bit until a new success story can build it up again, but Bradley Wiggins is, in the grand scheme of the history of the sport, comparatively inconsequential. Sure, you could (and should) argue that he's more important than a bunch of my favourite all-time riders like Fuente or Herrera... but then he's a lot less important than Merckx, or Hinault, or Indurain, or Armstrong. Most of those failed tests. Maybe Ullrich's a good comparison. A single-time Tour winner with a big following and nationally-focused team who is central to his country's fandom for the sport.

 

[Joachim]

but then he's a lot less important than Merckx, or Hinault, or Indurain, or Armstrong. Most of those failed tests. .

Whilst I agree with the main body of your post, certainly in the era or Merckx and Hinault (and Fignon) testing positive didn't seem to be taken as seriously as it is now.

Of course, we can hypothesize as to what might have happened if a Tour winner of that era subsequently tested positive (Did it ever happen?).

 

[Grandillusion]

In the context of the wider world of sport, Bradley Wiggins is some guy. It wouldn't be GOOD for cycling if he popped positive, but it wouldn't destroy cycling, except possibly in the UK.

No one man is bigger than the sport. Armstrong came close, but he's fallen and races are still going on as we speak. Landis didn't kill the sport. Rasmussen didn't kill the sport, except in Germany. Hell, Denmark is MORE into cycling now than it was when Rasmussen was thrown out the TDF.

Also, Wiggins is the current TDF champion, sure, but the time frame for this hypothetical positive has to be considered as well. In the grand scheme of things, he's just another rider. Major riders testing positive happens in cycling. Pantani was the reigning Giro winner, Tour winner AND Giro leader when he was yanked from the race in '99, less than a year after Festina. What happened? Some new guy came along to emerge from the wreckage and rebuild the sport. It happens. It may suffer for a bit until a new success story can build it up again, but Bradley Wiggins is, in the grand scheme of the history of the sport, comparatively inconsequential. Sure, you could (and should) argue that he's more important than a bunch of my favourite all-time riders like Fuente or Herrera... but then he's a lot less important than Merckx, or Hinault, or Indurain, or Armstrong. Most of those failed tests. Maybe Ullrich's a good comparison. A single-time Tour winner with a big following and nationally-focused team who is central to his country's fandom for the sport.

Who was the new guy that came along after Pantani, emerging from the wreckage to rebuild the sport? The success story who built it up again? Oh yes, Lance Armstrong.

I don't think Wiggins is important at all -in fact I think he's a cowardly disgrace by not helping the sport he claims to love by supporting CCN et al at this critical time. But then again, how 'important' is the likes of Indurain when you think of the joke years he dominated? None of these people are remotely important athletes, that's the point. I just thought that following the armstrong debacle that another TDF winner disgrace would be a step too far for the wider public (who the sponsors target).

I suppose my point is that the sport in recent decades hasn't really been a sport at all has it? So something is going on as we speak, but it probably isn't a race, much as people want to get all excited about it. It might be a race, but nobody really knows.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Who was the new guy that came along after Pantani, emerging from the wreckage to rebuild the sport? The success story who built it up again? Oh yes, Lance Armstrong.

I don't think Wiggins is important at all -in fact I think he's a cowardly disgrace by not helping the sport he claims to love by supporting CCN et al at this critical time. But then again, how 'important' is the likes of Indurain when you think of the joke years he dominated? None of these people are remotely important athletes, that's the point. I just thought that following the armstrong debacle that another TDF winner disgrace would be a step too far for the wider public (who the sponsors target).

I suppose my point is that the sport in recent decades hasn't really been a sport at all has it? So something is going on as we speak, but it probably isn't a race, much as people want to get all excited about it. It might be a race, but nobody really knows.

Said Armstrong did take 13 years to fall though, in which time the sport gained a lot of traction. At that point in time though, after Festina and Pantani, what would another positive REALLY have done? The public esteem for cycling couldn't have fallen much further, and it would have rebuilt around Ullrich instead, which would have led to the same period of tempest from 2006-7, just with a slightly different implication.

So you just get a fall in the number of big global companies and a rise in the number of smaller, local companies. FDJ, or Lotto, or Cofidis, or Euskaltel, or Lampre, are hardly big multinationals. They get exposure in their home market and support from home fans, and that's all they need to make it worth it. Why should FDJ or Euskaltel care if Bradley Wiggins tests positive, as long as the French and Spanish TV channels are still showing it? The sport's too ingrained in their home market to die out entirely, so they'll be fine. Cofidis have stuck with it through thick and thin. Hell, what will it take for LA Aluminios to give up on the sport? Cycling offers comparatively cheap sponsorship, and at a much greater level than in other sports for the most part (jerseys emblazoned with your logo, commentators mentioning the trade team names every five seconds), and if the sport's stock falls, that will only make it cheaper.

The races are more of a worry than the teams, but frankly the main problem for the races is the economy rather than sponsor willinghood to fork out for a sport known for doping. Liberty Seguros might not sponsor a team anymore, but they do sponsor the Portuguese national squad and pretty much every extant race in Portugal gets some sponsorship money from them. Cycling at all but the top level is reliant on fans in businesses and similar, and that won't change, just might invade the top level a bit more than usual.

It's teams without a focused identity like HTC, or teams that are directly embroiled in the scandal, like Rabobank, that are vulnerable.

 

[Grandillusion]

You've worn me down with irrefutable facts O.K. the world is an imperfect place and I'm probably being childishly optimistic that there would be a revolt if Wiggins was stripped tomorrow.

Very depressing really, but as Joachim said, it's not Syria.

UCIIC meeting tomorrow - wonder what'll go down there?

Thanks for the detailed replies.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Said Armstrong did take 13 years to fall though, in which time the sport gained a lot of traction. At that point in time though, after Festina and Pantani, what would another positive REALLY have done? The public esteem for cycling couldn't have fallen much further, and it would have rebuilt around Ullrich instead, which would have led to the same period of tempest from 2006-7, just with a slightly different implication.

So you just get a fall in the number of big global companies and a rise in the number of smaller, local companies. FDJ, or Lotto, or Cofidis, or Euskaltel, or Lampre, are hardly big multinationals. They get exposure in their home market and support from home fans, and that's all they need to make it worth it. Why should FDJ or Euskaltel care if Bradley Wiggins tests positive, as long as the French and Spanish TV channels are still showing it? The sport's too ingrained in their home market to die out entirely, so they'll be fine. Cofidis have stuck with it through thick and thin. Hell, what will it take for LA Aluminios to give up on the sport? Cycling offers comparatively cheap sponsorship, and at a much greater level than in other sports for the most part (jerseys emblazoned with your logo, commentators mentioning the trade team names every five seconds), and if the sport's stock falls, that will only make it cheaper.

The races are more of a worry than the teams, but frankly the main problem for the races is the economy rather than sponsor willinghood to fork out for a sport known for doping. Liberty Seguros might not sponsor a team anymore, but they do sponsor the Portuguese national squad and pretty much every extant race in Portugal gets some sponsorship money from them. Cycling at all but the top level is reliant on fans in businesses and similar, and that won't change, just might invade the top level a bit more than usual.

It's teams without a focused identity like HTC, or teams that are directly embroiled in the scandal, like Rabobank, that are vulnerable.

To be honest I think you are being optimistic, While cycling might just maintain itself as it rocks from scandal to scandal, it is also failing to reach the levels it could without all the dirt, even in its heartlands. However its not within the pro-ranks the effects are felt most keenly anyway. The women's side, the juniors, these really on the trickle down from the marquee events.

Your version may perpetuate the sport, it doesn't make it grow. Just decline, slowly.

 

[Joachim]

I think you might find lots of people love a scandal. That's why the Clinic is stuffed to the brim. Obviously there is all the disingenuous rhetoric here along the lines of 'we woz cheated'.

 

[pmcg76]

To be honest I think you are being optimistic, While cycling might just maintain itself as it rocks from scandal to scandal, it is also failing to reach the levels it could without all the dirt, even in its heartlands. However its not within the pro-ranks the effects are felt most keenly anyway. The women's side, the juniors, these really on the trickle down from the marquee events.

Your version may perpetuate the sport, it doesn't make it grow. Just decline, slowly.

Yes, but if it goes back to the level it was at 20 years. So what!! I loved cycling back then as well and it was just as interesting even if I didn't get to see many of the race's thanks to not having Eurosport.

Whilst it's great to see the sport expand and sad to see it decline, especially for the women, it will always continue. We don't love the sport because it's big or popular. We just love the sport because of what it is.

I actually preferred when there were all these tiny Italian and Spanish teams riding in their home Tour's. Made it more quaint than seeing the same team's in all the races. Like Libertine has pointed out, the ProTour has ensured that small to mid-size companies cannot afford to sponsor team's like they did before and it is hard to attract the big sponsors due to the doping problems.

Maybe the way the sport is now designed is as much a problem as the doping.

 

[thirteen]

In the context of the wider world of sport, Bradley Wiggins is some guy. It wouldn't be GOOD for cycling if he popped positive, but it wouldn't destroy cycling, except possibly in the UK.

No one man is bigger than the sport. Armstrong came close, but he's fallen and races are still going on as we speak. Landis didn't kill the sport. Rasmussen didn't kill the sport, except in Germany. Hell, Denmark is MORE into cycling now than it was when Rasmussen was thrown out the TDF.

Also, Wiggins is the current TDF champion, sure, but the time frame for this hypothetical positive has to be considered as well. In the grand scheme of things, he's just another rider. Major riders testing positive happens in cycling. Pantani was the reigning Giro winner, Tour winner AND Giro leader when he was yanked from the race in '99, less than a year after Festina. What happened? Some new guy came along to emerge from the wreckage and rebuild the sport. It happens. It may suffer for a bit until a new success story can build it up again, but Bradley Wiggins is, in the grand scheme of the history of the sport, comparatively inconsequential. Sure, you could (and should) argue that he's more important than a bunch of my favourite all-time riders like Fuente or Herrera... but then he's a lot less important than Merckx, or Hinault, or Indurain, or Armstrong. Most of those failed tests. Maybe Ullrich's a good comparison. A single-time Tour winner with a big following and nationally-focused team who is central to his country's fandom for the sport.

just want to say that between your posts here and those in the real road section, you have my unabashed admiration!

 

[Dazed and Confused]

To be honest I think you are being optimistic, While cycling might just maintain itself as it rocks from scandal to scandal, it is also failing to reach the levels it could without all the dirt, even in its heartlands. However its not within the pro-ranks the effects are felt most keenly anyway. The women's side, the juniors, these really on the trickle down from the marquee events.

Your version may perpetuate the sport, it doesn't make it grow. Just decline, slowly.

So how do you measure growth?

 

[Northern rider]

To be honest I think you are being optimistic, While cycling might just maintain itself as it rocks from scandal to scandal, it is also failing to reach the levels it could without all the dirt, even in its heartlands. However its not within the pro-ranks the effects are felt most keenly anyway. The women's side, the juniors, these really on the trickle down from the marquee events.

Your version may perpetuate the sport, it doesn't make it grow. Just decline, slowly.

I don't think the dirt, as you put it, is what is preventing womens or juniors cycling to reach a higher level. That's down to the UCI being obsessed with "growth" and the whole mondialisation tack they took some time ago. They spent far too much time, effort and money on starting races in China, Oman and Qatar, that would have been better spent developing womens and grass roots cycling in the heartlands. The UCI wanted to try to be a cycling version of F1 and failed.

 

[ebandit]

duplicity

Shut it down! Wrong thread. Censorship!

bravo hog replying to my post that cav talk should be in opqs thread
( even though you stated that you never reply to my posts )

and now today your reporting my use of a slight variation of your user name
to mods.............trying to shut me up

yet you expect brad to be 100% consistant in his statements?

who? has never changed opinions on subjects with different times / circumstances

 

[thehog]

bravo hog replying to my post that cav talk should be in opqs thread
( even though you stated that you never reply to my posts )

and now today your reporting my use of a slight variation of your user name
to mods.............trying to shut me up

yet you expect brad to be 100% consistant in his statements?

who? has never changed opinions on subjects with different times / circumstances

Let the record show this is the 8th time I've warned you in regards to Cyberbullying.

Informing the moderators is a set procedure defined by CyclingNews. Please respect the process.

Below I have cited the bullying which you are participating in via direct attack. I've also taken a record of the number or messages sent by yourself to me.

I have also reported this post to the moderators which is in line with that policy.

I request that you desist.

Thank-you.

Exclusion is an indirect method of online bullying, intentionally excluding someone from an online group or community.

Harassment is when the electronic bully repeatedly sends insulting, hurtful, rude, insulting messages.


Flaming is a type of online fight. It is an act of sending or posting electronic messages that are deliberately hostile, insulting, mean, angry, vulgar or insulting, to one person or several, either privately or publicly to an online group.
]

 

[Joachim]

Why don't you just put him on ignore if he bothers you?

Certainly would seem a more mature approach rather than getting all batey just because he's calling you Hoggie

 

[ebandit]

sorry!

hog i have not sent ANY personal messages for a month or so

any messages sent then were in reply to your own messages

i have only ever replied to your posts..............politely

 

[thehog]

hog i have not sent ANY personal messages for a month or so

any messages sent then were in reply to your own messages

i have only ever replied to your posts..............politely

Please take the issue up with the moderators. They are carrying out an investigation.

In the interim please refrain from communication with me (9th record of request).

Thank-you.

 

[ebandit]

forum

hog i am quite entitled to reply to your posts and anyone elses

when is brad next in action

good to see geraint go well after working hard through the close season

 

[Joachim]

Hog. Give up. The moderators will see through your attempt to harrass ebandit.

 

[thehog]

You've worn me down with irrefutable facts O.K. the world is an imperfect place and I'm probably being childishly optimistic that there would be a revolt if Wiggins was stripped tomorrow.

Very depressing really, but as said, it's not Syria.

UCIIC meeting tomorrow - wonder what'll go down there?

Thanks for the detailed replies.

And now the UCIIC meeting has occurred. What are your thoughts?

The sport and the UCI are not so healthy.

 

[sublimit]

just want to say that between your posts here and those in the real road section, you have my unabashed admiration!

Err this is the legendary Sky thread where everybody hates or agrees with each other. I'm reporting this post for being too nice.

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

Any further discussion of personal quarrels in this thread will bring an automatic one-week suspension.

Susan