Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[biker jk]

Correct me if I'm wrong but weren't Krebs Cycle and Coggan defenders of Armstrong's performances being possible without doping and are now making the same claims about Wiggins? I'm amazed how these two with so little credibility can continue to try to speak with such authority.

 

[oldcrank]

Correct me if I'm wrong but weren't Krebs Cycle and Coggan defenders of Armstrong's performances being possible without doping

Sure, Louis Armstrong loved his muggles, but he was
a great musician before Mezz turned him on to dope.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Correct me if I'm wrong but weren't Krebs Cycle and Coggan defenders of Armstrong's performances being possible without doping and are now making the same claims about Wiggins? I'm amazed how these two with so little credibility can continue to try to speak with such authority.

Yes, that's been my point these last few pages.

 

[sittingbison]

what a load of BS. Rasmussen admitted to his team manager that the accusation was correct, and that's when he got fired for violating team rules. He later denied that, but later recanted and said it was true that he confessed to his team. An admission is a lot different than 'suspicion.'

Strange how you pretend to be the lone voice of morality in this forum and yet stoop to such immoral twisting of the truth to suit your aims.

Hold it. He got booted out of the Tour while in yellow because of failing the OOC issue, at the time he fervently denied everything coming up with all kinds of stories. Which then got queried in public by was it Cassani??

All that "admission" stuff came later.

And I think I recall our poster Franklin suggesting several times that Dr Leinders knew the Chickens real whereabouts all along

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Hold it. He got booted out of the Tour while in yellow because of failing the OOC issue, at the time he fervently denied everything coming up with all kinds of stories. Which then got queried in public by was it Cassani??

All that "admission" stuff came later.

And I think I recall our poster Franklin suggesting several times that Dr Leinders knew the Chickens real whereabouts all along

Here's what he said in November of that year:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/rasmussen-admits-lies-claims-rabobank-knew-his-whereabouts-1
"I would like to clearly state that I was not in Mexico in June. I have therefore misinformed both the UCI and the public. It is however important for me to stress that at no point did I lie to the Rabobank team," Rasmussen said. Rasmussen insisted that his employer Rabobank knew the truth. "I have never told lies to Rabobank. They knew all the time where I was and why."

Leinders knew all the time where Ras was, and why.

 

[thehog]

what a load of BS. Rasmussen admitted to his team manager that the accusation was correct, and that's when he got fired for violating team rules. He later denied that, but later recanted and said it was true that he confessed to his team. An admission is a lot different than 'suspicion.'

Strange how you pretend to be the lone voice of morality in this forum and yet stoop to such immoral twisting of the truth to suit your aims.

You need to check your history books son...

You got it all wrong.

and (wait for it)

the link...

Dr. Blood (Leinders)

So you have a link for what you say?

Waiting....

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

Leinders knew all the time where Ras was, and why.

The Dutch court to which Ras took his wrongful dismissal case took the view that the team knew of Ras's offence two months before he was sacked. This is why they ordered the team to pay Ras for two months, on the grounds that if they wanted to sack him for his offence, they should have done it immediately.

However, they did rule that the team had the right to sack Ras for whatever he did. This suggests that Ras was either lying to the team or had committed some other act of gross misconduct.

Ras's claim (per your link) to have told the team the truth predates his case for wrongful dismissal, so it's a reasonable bet - given the court's ruling - that in fact he had lied to his team at some stage. He couldn't publically admit to lying to his team before his case for wrongful dismissal, as a key element of this case would be that he had been truthful so the team couldn't sack him for lying.

Ras was subsequently banned by the Monaco Federation for lying to the UCI, and in this respect, there seems little contention as to what happened.

 

[JimmyFingers]

The Dutch court to which Ras took his wrongful dismissal case took the view that the team knew of Ras's offence two months before he was sacked. This is why they ordered the team to pay Ras for two months, on the grounds that if they wanted to sack him for his offence, they should have done it immediately.

However, they did rule that the team had the right to sack Ras for whatever he did. This suggests that Ras was either lying to the team or had committed some other act of gross misconduct.

Ras's claim (per your link) to have told the team the truth predates his case for wrongful dismissal, so it's a reasonable bet - given the court's ruling - that in fact he had lied to his team at some stage. He couldn't publically admit to lying to his team before his case for wrongful dismissal, as a key element of this case would be that he had been truthful so the team couldn't sack him for lying.

Ras was subsequently banned by the Monaco Federation for lying to the UCI, and in this respect, there seems little contention as to what happened.

Sounds like he was hung out to dry. Anyway, isn't this the wrong thread? Any mods about?

 

[Benotti69]

what a load of BS. Rasmussen admitted to his team manager that the accusation was correct, and that's when he got fired for violating team rules. He later denied that, but later recanted and said it was true that he confessed to his team. An admission is a lot different than 'suspicion.'

Strange how you pretend to be the lone voice of morality in this forum and yet stoop to such immoral twisting of the truth to suit your aims.

Ramussen's team were well aware of where he was and what he was up to.

That is why he won a court case against them for sacking him. They pulled him out of the race because ASO demanded it, they then removed the rest of the team. Maybe they were worried about ASO/UCI targeting the team and them popping a positive.

Dont believe what teams tell the media. 99% of it is lies.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

<snip>

Was there a point to your post? Are you disagreeing with what Ras said? I think I must have missed it.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

Sounds like he was hung out to dry.

Sounds that way, though he was far from blameless otherwise the Dutch court wouldn't have ruled that the team had the right to sack him.

He did get his Tour victory bonus though, it wasn't all bad.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

Was there a point to your post? Are you disagreeing with what Ras said? I think I must have missed it.

I think I was actually agreeing with you to a certain extent. Given the court ruling, it seems clear that the team (senior management, one assumes) knew of Ras's offence two months before they sacked him.

Also given the court ruling (July 2008) that the team had the right to sack Ras, I don't believe the veracity of Ras's claim (Nov 2007) that he hadn't lied to the team.

I am assuming that the Dutch legal system hasn't been compromised by the pro peloton and that their rulings are based on a solid assessment of established facts.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Rasmussen/Rabobank thread is that way>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

Rasmussen/Rabobank thread is that way>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

True, but I frequently get lost whilst riding my bike and see no reason why such a cavalier attitude to location shouldn't apply here as well!

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Ex-team sky doctor, Geert Leinders knew exactly what Rasmussen was up to.

tsk tsk.

 

[Netserk]

As JimmyFingers says this is NOT the Rasmussen/Rabo thread.

The only relevant part of the discussion is Leinders and the fact that suspicion leads to action prior to any evidence.

If you don't know who knew what and when, then I'll suggest that you go read in the Rasmussen/Rabo thread. Okay?

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

Ex-team sky doctor, Geert Leinders knew exactly what Rasmussen was up to.

Jimmy - Thanks to Dear Wiggo, we are no longer in danger of retribution from the Mods, as we have a Sky link!

 

[JimmyFingers]

Leinders thread, Rabobank thread, not the Sky thread.

 

[Franklin]

Given the court ruling, it seems clear that the team (senior management, one assumes) knew of Ras's offence two months before they sacked him.

Actually, you are understating this one.

They didn't just know two months in front. They knew it all the time. And you don't have to assume the Senior management knew... we know that they and Rasmussen were discussing it by email when he was in Italy.

And of course this is extremely relevant to the Sky thread. This strange attempt to separate Rabo and Sky is wrong if we see that one of the principal figures was involved in both teams. Not only that, this information was in the open for years. It's not hearsay, it's a bloody court decision!

The problems at Rabo are exactly why we know either DB is the most incompetent idiot in cycling as he trusts his riders with anyone (imagine that after seeing first hand what happened with David Millar...) and can't do the most basic background check... or he's flat-out spinning falsehoods.

And yeah, if the latter, it immediately evokes the: Why? questions.

Why did he hire him?
Why is he lieing about it?

 

[Netserk]

As JimmyFingers says this is NOT the Rasmussen/Rabo thread.

The only relevant part of the discussion is Leinders and the fact that suspicion leads to action prior to any evidence.

If you don't know who knew what and when, then I'll suggest that you go read in the Rasmussen/Rabo thread. Okay?

Further off topic posts will from now on be deleted, and if posters continue they will get a personal warning.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Jimmy - Thanks to Dear Wiggo, we are no longer in danger of retribution from the Mods, as we have a Sky link!

This is why the thread is so bloated, going off topic all the time and up blind alleys. Now we're discussing the minutiae of events that preceded Sky's formation by several years on the Sky thread. The reason we are is because several posters wanted to massage their ego by trying to justify trial by suspicion rather than proper scientific method, nothing to do with Sky at all. DW is now trying to link it retro-actively back to Sky by the Leinders link, despite their being Leinders thread, and a RAs/Rabo one. This discussion has no relevance to Sky.

Not having at pop at anyone in particular but its frustrating

 

[sniper]

This is why the thread is so bloated, going off topic all the time and up blind alleys. Now we're discussing the minutiae of events that preceded Sky's formation by several years on the Sky thread. The reason we are is because several posters wanted to massage their ego by trying to justify trial by suspicion rather than proper scientific method, nothing to do with Sky at all. DW is now trying to link it retro-actively back to Sky by the Leinders link, despite their being Leinders thread, and a RAs/Rabo one. This discussion has no relevance to Sky.

Not having at pop at anyone in particular but its frustrating

the mods are also guilty. I opened a thread a coupla weeks back on Leinders, Brailsfraud and T&R. It was merged with this one.

 

[Franklin]

This is why the thread is so bloated, going off topic all the time and up blind alleys. Now we're discussing the minutiae of events that preceded Sky's formation by several years on the Sky thread. The reason we are is because several posters wanted to massage their ego by trying to justify trial by suspicion rather than proper scientific method, nothing to do with Sky at all. DW is now trying to link it retro-actively back to Sky by the Leinders link, despite their being Leinders thread, and a RAs/Rabo one. This discussion has no relevance to Sky.

Not having at pop at anyone in particular but its frustrating

Ohhh no ulterior motives here for your armchair modding eh?

No way that Leinders is going away however hard you try. And yes, the run up to his tenure at Sky is extremely relevant. Trying to separate this is taking away the reasons why DB should be under scrutiny for hiring Leinders.

 

[Benotti69]

As JimmyFingers says this is NOT the Rasmussen/Rabo thread.

The only relevant part of the discussion is Leinders and the fact that suspicion leads to action prior to any evidence.

If you don't know who knew what and when, then I'll suggest that you go read in the Rasmussen/Rabo thread. Okay?

Suspicion? Rabo knew what Rasmussen was up to. No suspicion. He was probably in the Alps with the help of Leinders getting his BBs lined up for the tour.

The interesting part in all this for me is that Leinders knew, enabled and assisted in all this and never got caught or sanctioned. So why stop doing this speciality? It is obvious what he went to Sky for as this is his speciality and his reason for employment at Rabo.

To keep pretending otherwise really shows how little fans have learnt about the sport of cycling.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

the mods are also guilty. I opened a thread a coupla weeks back on Leinders, Brailsfraud and T&R. It was merged with this one.

Hey easy now. You might end up banninated for that.

Anyhow it is interesting these links of Leinders, Brailsfraud, and T&R.

Does anyone know what type of marginal gain that they can get out of rice crispy treats? I have been eating craploads of the things with no apparent change in my performance. I have noticed some snap crackle and pop while on my training runs. Maybe that is all I will get from the things.