Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[Dr. Maserati]

If it was that simple why hire him in the first place then? All this negative PR could have been avoided if they had hired someone from the outside with no dirt on them.

That of course goes for other teams as well. Theres got to be a reason for why these doctors keep getting employed.

And again, if Sky were this devious in having a super secret doping system you don't put your doping mastermind on your website and give him a Rapha t-shirt.
You give him a camper van and set up a secret bank account.

 

[Benotti69]

Link?

Since when does one need to link a speculation, based on what other teams have done in the sport.

This is what I meant before by making things up to push a point. You're guessing and nothing else.

I did not post it as fact. But it doesn't fit your false agenda of the sport being cleanED up by McQuaid.

I suppose Lance/USP should have ditched Ferrari after a year or two when he instructed them and they knew the game for themselves. Would have saved a lot of payments to him.

Yeah, so when Leinders did so much good for Sky they will stop using him?

I dont remember Ferrari hanging out with USPS, so Sky dont need Leinders hanging out in Tenerife or Nice, but that doesn't mean he isn't directing their 'program'.

But again it suits your agenda to believe everything Sky spout just like the Armstrong fans believed everything USPS spouted.

 

[Benotti69]

And again, if Sky were this devious in having a super secret doping system you don't put your doping mastermind on your website and give him a Rapha t-shirt.
You give him a camper van and set up a secret bank account.

This is the team that issues see-through jerseys for their riders to get sunburnt.

The only transparency we have seen from Sky has been compliments of a stupid design from Rapha.

 

[ebandit]

mmmmmmmm

Since when does one need to link a speculation, based on what other teams have done in the sport.

Yeah, so when Leinders did so much good for Sky they will stop using him?

I dont remember Ferrari hanging out with USPS, so Sky dont need Leinders hanging out in Tenerife or Nice, but that doesn't mean he isn't directing their 'program'.

of course ask the ? but random implication without evidence means your

thoughts may be quickly dismissed

now the crucial ? is.............did leinders make a real difference at team sky

the team like us to believe his time there was minimal

but as you know unlike the 'secretive' ferarri team sky employed leinders

and never pretended otherwise

Mark L

 

[Dr. Maserati]

This is the team that issues see-through jerseys for their riders to get sunburnt.

The only transparency we have seen from Sky has been compliments of a stupid design from Rapha.

Now this is a completely meaningless post - most teams have jerseys that are light and see through. What has that to do with doping, nothing.

And whether you agree with it or not, there has been lots of transparency. Your problem, as in you - is that you do not agree with its conclusions.

Again, if you are so certain that Sky are running some sort of program, you should be able to put forth a plausible scenario.

 

[the sceptic]

Now this is a completely meaningless post - most teams have jerseys that are light and see through. What has that to do with doping, nothing.

And whether you agree with it or not, there has been lots of transparency. Your problem, as in you - is that you do not agree with its conclusions.

Again, if you are so certain that Sky are running some sort of program, you should be able to put forth a plausible scenario.

Is going to the outside for "help" a more plausible scenario than sky running a program themselves?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Is going to the outside for "help" a more plausible scenario than sky running a program themselves?

Yes.
Because if its inside, who is now running it?

 

[Benotti69]

of course ask the ? but random implication without evidence means your

thoughts may be quickly dismissed

now the crucial ? is.............did leinders make a real difference at team sky

the team like us to believe his time there was minimal

but as you know unlike the 'secretive' ferarri team sky employed leinders

and never pretended otherwise

Mark L

I never presented evidence.

I presented a possibility.

In this sport we have seen that everything is possible.

Sky hired a doping doctor. Yes they did it in plain sight of everyone, but sometines that it is the best place to hide things, but then it only worked for 2 years and they had to get rid of 'Mr Saddle Sores'...

I dont care for those who dismiss posts just because there is no factual evidence. When did that ever stop doping?

Sky have turned 2 gruppetto fodder riders into Tour winners and never provided a shred of evidence how they did it. We have seen riders lose weight but increase strength and no evidence to how they did it.

When Sky start presenting evidence, then maybe i'll consider it and give them a pass on doping, but until they do, everything they have done in the sport under the watch of McQuaid points to a doping program.

 

[the sceptic]

Yes.
Because if its inside, who is now running it?

I have no idea. I was just curious as to why you think that.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I never presented evidence.

I presented a possibility.

In this sport we have seen that everything is possible.

Sky hired a doping doctor. Yes they did it in plain sight of everyone, but sometines that it is the best place to hide things, but then it only worked for 2 years and they had to get rid of 'Mr Saddle Sores'...

I dont care for those who dismiss posts just because there is no factual evidence. When did that ever stop doping?

Sky have turned 2 gruppetto fodder riders into Tour winners and never provided a shred of evidence how they did it. We have seen riders lose weight but increase strength and no evidence to how they did it.

When Sky start presenting evidence, then maybe i'll consider it and give them a pass on doping, but until they do, everything they have done in the sport under the watch of McQuaid points to a doping program.

Everything is possible, everything.

But, if you are convinced or sure that Sky are doping, that is definitive and therefore must have a way to be done.
And no, you do not have to give factual evidence, but any theory it should withstand scrutiny from factual evidence to be considered plausible.

 

[Benotti69]

Everything is possible, everything.

But, if you are convinced or sure that Sky are doping, that is definitive and therefore must have a way to be done.
And no, you do not have to give factual evidence, but any theory it should withstand scrutiny from factual evidence to be considered plausible.

The hiring of Leinders could easily be considered plausible.

The stratospheric rise of a guy from hanging onto motorbikes to Tour winner is plausible.

That the team is not transparent points to plausibility of doping.

That the team hired riders who are well known to have had a doping history is plausible that they wanted doping knowledge.

That the team pointed to warm downs, pineappe juice, pillows, mechanics out of the rain as the difference for their riders to beating the dopers just stinks and fails as any kind of evidence that they do things differently.

That the team won 2 Tours under McQuaid's watch also points to a plausibility of doping. McQuaid couldn't clean anything never mind the sport of pro cycling.

Plenty of reasons to doubt Sky

 

[gooner]

Since when does one need to link a speculation, based on what other teams have done in the sport.




I did not post it as fact. But it doesn't fit your false agenda of the sport being cleanED up by McQuaid.

Where did I say this?

Yeah, so when Leinders did so much good for Sky they will stop using him?

I dont remember Ferrari hanging out with USPS, so Sky dont need Leinders hanging out in Tenerife or Nice, but that doesn't mean he isn't directing their 'program'.

But again it suits your agenda to believe everything Sky spout just like the Armstrong fans believed everything USPS spouted.

I referred to this in the new thread just set up. It feels appropriate to the above.

I also don't agree with the USP comparisons and think the Sky situation should be judged on its own merits where I think the evidence against Sky doesn't stack up when we take what we had against USP for the same period. Too much is made of that and it's not an argument with substance, just a statement that is being pushed to further a narrative.

I'm judging Leinders and Sky based on performances with him and without him.

You're repeating the same rubbish that he still maybe employed just because Armstrong did it with Ferrari. Great reasoning.

 

[roundabout]

How about judging Leinders and Sky based on performances before him?

And of course no knowledge was gained during the time he was employed...

 

[Benotti69]

I'm judging Leinders and Sky based on performances with him and without him.

They didn't win much without Leinders. They officiailly won at least 1 TdF with him. Not bad

You're repeating the same rubbish that he still maybe employed just because Armstrong did it with Ferrari. Great reasoning.

The history of the sport has shown that history is being repeated. USPS used Ferrari so have lots of others. This is rubbish or do you wish to ignore it. Vino, Ullrich, Kreuziger, Evans, Nibali, Scarponi etc etc all used Ferrari.

 

[gooner]

They didn't win much without Leinders. They officiailly won at least 1 TdF with him. Not bad



The history of the sport has shown that history is being repeated. USPS used Ferrari so have lots of others. This is rubbish or do you wish to ignore it. Vino, Ullrich, Kreuziger, Evans, Nibali, Scarponi etc etc all used Ferrari.

Well done for proving my point. Ferrari's influence was with riders across many teams and a link that is tried to be kept secretive.

Now where is a similar influence with Leinders's outside of the teams he has worked with? Where is it with other riders that you then can have some backbone to what you're saying?

 

[veganrob]

And again, if Sky were this devious in having a super secret doping system you don't put your doping mastermind on your website and give him a Rapha t-shirt.
You give him a camper van and set up a secret bank account.

Sometimes the best way to get something by people is to just put it right out front instead of trying to sneak it by.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Well done for proving my point. Ferrari's influence was with riders across many teams and a link that is tried to be kept secretive.

Now where is a similar influence with Leinders's outside of the teams he has worked with? Where is it with other riders that you then can have some backbone to what you're saying?

Lienders left Rabbobank because management decided they weren't going to dope any more. Oh, but I'm sure that's not proof of anything.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

The hiring of Leinders could easily be considered plausible.

I know you are attempting to be a smarta$$ - but you have failed at it.

The hiring of Leinders is not just plausible, or possible - it is an accepted fact.
It is also a fact that he is no longer on the Sky payroll and was publicly dismissed. Yet the tam has had no drop in performance.

The stratospheric rise of a guy from hanging onto motorbikes to Tour winner is plausible.

No, its again factual he hung on to a moto and has won a Tour.

That the team is not transparent points to plausibility of doping.

They have been transparent on some things. Including things you have requested and when presented with dismissed.

That the team hired riders who are well known to have had a doping history is plausible that they wanted doping knowledge.

Indeed true and not just plausible, factual. As is the fact they are no longer part of the team.

That the team pointed to warm downs, pineappe juice, pillows, mechanics out of the rain as the difference for their riders to beating the dopers just stinks and fails as any kind of evidence that they do things differently.

Again, these are factual things they do - and indeed something that they do differently from other teams.
But it has nothing to do with either doping or not doping.

As in - if they said this was the difference, and it turned out the mechanics were out in the rain, or they used non fluffy pillows, you then may show that they are lying.

That the team won 2 Tours under McQuaid's watch also points to a plausibility of doping. McQuaid couldn't clean anything never mind the sport of pro cycling.

Plenty of reasons to doubt Sky[/QUOTE]
Pat McQuaid was Pres from 2005 - why did Sky not win from when 2010 when they started? Do you expect a significant change now that McQ is no ,longer President?
Or will you change tack and point to Cookson bring British, which effectively means bring McQ in to the discussion was pointless.

Plenty of reasons to doubt Sky

As much as i have my doubts, there are not plenty of reasons IMO, just a few - and you attempted to be cute and pretty much most do not stand to scrutiny.

 

[gooner]

Lienders left Rabbobank because management decided they weren't going to dope any more. Oh, but I'm sure that's not proof of anything.

Oh, but that's not proof he has been working with riders behind the scenes in some secretive relationship in the manner of what Ferrari did.

I don't dispute his Rabobank history.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Sometimes the best way to get something by people is to just put it right out front instead of trying to sneak it by.

And I agree.
But then why get rid of Leinders? Why not just stand by him and say he is a great guy? PR wise that would have been the easiest thing to do - as well as if they are still retaining him secretly and get found out it will be game over for them.

 

[Col Okey]

Pat McQuaid was Pres from 2005 - why did Sky not win from when 2010 when they started? Do you expect a significant change now that McQ is no ,longer President?
Or will you change tack and point to Cookson bring British, which effectively means bring McQ in to the discussion was pointless.

Who was president in 2012/13 when Sky won every race they targeted? Why bin McQuaid if the clean riders are finally winning? McQuaid did what no one else could and levelled up the playing field letting us Brits win something at last with the aid of nothing more than a stiff upper lip and a dash of pineapple juice

 

[veganrob]

And I agree.
But then why get rid of Leinders? Why not just stand by him and say he is a great guy? PR wise that would have been the easiest thing to do - as well as if they are still retaining him secretly and get found out it will be game over for them.

They most likely didn't think they would catch so mush flak over the hiring, don't know why they would have thought that IMO. But Sky don't seem to be very savvy at all PR wise either. Who knows if Leinders is doing any work for Sky now? That truly would be disastrous for them if found out. If a doping program had been in place initially for Sky, it is not too much of a stretch to keep the framework and knowledge from said program and the riders to be getting his assistance on their own.
Unfortunately, I think doping has progressed much further from the simple EPO injections, hgh and BB's, etc to something far more sinister and riskier to riders health. Time will tell.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Pat McQuaid was Pres from 2005 - why did Sky not win from when 2010 when they started? Do you expect a significant change now that McQ is no ,longer President?
Or will you change tack and point to Cookson bring British, which effectively means bring McQ in to the discussion was pointless.

Who was president in 2012/13 when Sky won every race they targeted? Why bin McQuaid if the clean riders are finally winning? McQuaid did what no one else could and levelled up the playing field letting us Brits win something at last with the aid of nothing more than a stiff upper lip and a dash of pineapple juice

Pat McQuaid was President in 2012 & 2013. This is indeed a fact.
Also a fact, he no longer is President. Does this mean there will be a significant drop off in performance for Sky? Yes or no.

If it is yes, then thats cool. The cheaters have been thwarted.
If no - then the introduction of McQuaid in to this convo has been a complete waste of time.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

They most likely didn't think they would catch so mush flak over the hiring, don't know why they would have thought that IMO. But Sky don't seem to be very savvy at all PR wise either. Who knows if Leinders is doing any work for Sky now? That truly would be disastrous for them if found out. If a doping program had been in place initially for Sky, it is not too much of a stretch to keep the framework and knowledge from said program and the riders to be getting his assistance on their own.

I dont disagree with much of what you say. But again, it cannot be both scenario's, ultimately it must be one or the other.

IE - Leinders was being naughty with Sky knowledge and they disposed of him because of PR.
Or they belatedly worked out his history and got rid of him hoping to be never found out.

Unfortunately, I think doping has progressed much further from the simple EPO injections, hgh and BB's, etc to something far more sinister and riskier to riders health. Time will tell.

Perhaps - but then that would require a fair degree of expertise, expense and a lot of deceit to implement.
that brings us back to who and how is it being done?

 

[Benotti69]

<snip the vortex>

Your hair splitting will just go the same way all your thread back forths go. Yawn.