Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[JRanton]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/20147726

Article on the BBC's front page about Sky's zero tolerance policy.

 

[Eyeballs Out]

Did I read somewhere recently that Ferrari was linked with Caisse D'Epargne in 2007 ?

David Lopez was good in 2007 (especially Paris-Nice / Tour of Germany)

 

[JRanton]

Did I read somewhere recently that Ferrari was linked with Caisse D'Epargne in 2007 ?

David Lopez was good in 2007 (especially Paris-Nice / Tour of Germany)

A bit off topic but I've noticed that Kiryienka's move to Sky still hasn't been officially confirmed yet (joined Movistar in 2009).

 

[veganrob]

Sorry, not a fan boy or fan, but said riders are immediately within the 'Sky family' and so will fit in very well.

I hate to quote Wiggins but Father Christmas is more believable than a a clean Cobo/Movistar win in Spain 2011.

Huh?

Oh I see what you're saying now, Cobo/Movistar/Vuelta 2011 hahahah That never did happen did it.

 

[Zinoviev Letter]

And what if BSkyB, News Corp and Sky Italia, the companies that actually OWN the team and not only sponsor it, wouldn't agree to that?

People are missing the fact that it's not Brailsford driving the policy. It's Sky, the company, who know full well that the British press and wider British public wouldn't accept the Vaughters/Ellis policy of being comfortable with having known former dopers on the team.

That's certainly possible. And whether the sponsors are calling the shots on this or not, there's an element of Sky having to play the hand they are dealt.

They are currently the most successful team and are the recipients of unprecedented attention at home... just as the biggest doping scandal in sports history hits. They had, like Garmin, made much play of being devoted to cleanliness, but unlike Garmin they had never prepared the ground with sponsors/media/fans for revelations about the past of anyone on the team. Garmin were always big on the idea that the sport used to be dirty, that they were ok with "redeemed" former dopers, that was part of the narrative.

Sky, were always cruder in the way they put across their anti-doping stance, not risking confusing the public with nuance or potentially off-putting discussion about the past of the sport. Garmin, consequently, can get away with taking a line on past indiscretions that would get Sky crucified by any media outlets who care to point out the disjuncture between their "zero tolerance" claims and the pasts of some people on their books. So they have to be seen to be doing something. Those are their cards.

The way they've played that hand hasn't been very clever however. Letting this go on as a drip of resignations and revelations over an extended period is just PR suicide. And the Great Purge will inevitably leave potential hostages to fortune further up the road - they will still have older riders and staff who rode on scandal hit teams in the past, and who therefore could get caught up in further scandal.

 

[Zinoviev Letter]

Did I read somewhere recently that Ferrari was linked with Caisse D'Epargne in 2007 ?

Rabobank, when asked about Luis Leon Sanchez's mention in despatches, offered the explanation that the Caisse D'Epargne team had trained with Ferrari.

It made me do a double take at the time, but it wasn't widely picked up on in the media afterwards.

 

[Tinman]

Parker, I don't visit the clinic for weeks on end. I don't post much. I so much want my sport to be clean, but it is broken and has been for decades.

...

I cannot speak for others but I certainly do not visit in a desire for scandal it is a forlorn hope that cycling might turn a corner and here there are a few who see through the Sky pr machine BS - just as so many were calling it right on the Lance BS - for so many years here.

Freddy just saw your post, catching up myself on a week's posts. Your post the best I read today, and suspect sums up where many of us are. Whilst there are no doubt many other dirty teams (at which more attention needs to be directed), it was Sky by far the most visible and outspoken on "clean" in 2012.

When will Mick announce his departure for another team? Speculation on who will have him?

 

[bobbins]

That's certainly possible. And whether the sponsors are calling the shots on this or not, there's an element of Sky having to play the hand they are dealt.

They are currently the most successful team and are the recipients of unprecedented attention at home... just as the biggest doping scandal in sports history hits. They had, like Garmin, made much play of being devoted to cleanliness, but unlike Garmin they had never prepared the ground with sponsors/media/fans for revelations about the past of anyone on the team. Garmin were always big on the idea that the sport used to be dirty, that they were ok with "redeemed" former dopers, that was part of the narrative.

Sky, were always cruder in the way they put across their anti-doping stance, not risking confusing the public with nuance or potentially off-putting discussion about the past of the sport. Garmin, consequently, can get away with taking a line on past indiscretions that would get Sky crucified by any media outlets who care to point out the disjuncture between their "zero tolerance" claims and the pasts of some people on their books. So they have to be seen to be doing something. Those are their cards.

The way they've played that hand hasn't been very clever however. Letting this go on as a drip of resignations and revelations over an extended period is just PR suicide. And the Great Purge will inevitably leave potential hostages to fortune further up the road - they will still have older riders and staff who rode on scandal hit teams in the past, and who therefore could get caught up in further scandal.

This can only backfire for Sky, they must really regret starting this purge.

They are losing good people and upsetting people who know a lot.

I've heard some interesting things about how the Sky employees get round the Etape. Now if cortisone isn't allowed for their team, how can they justify their own direct employees using it.

More double standards that can only come back haunt them.

 

[coinneach]

Bahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

How many teams have lost soigneurs to mystery bacterial infections in the last 3 years?

None that I know of, but I can't see any connection beyond wild fantasy stuff.

My point (on another forum, which you kindly highlighted and re-posted) is that rather than being stuck on old dope, Sky are more likely to be on the cutting edge of science. This may involve things which are not currently considered illegal, partly because other teams/testers are not aware of them. (For example, there are a number of recreation/street drugs not yet classified as illegal because they are variations on others)

I listed areas where I think they had an advantage over other teams last year (actually, the biggest two advantages were budget and luck with Contador/Sleck, but we all know about that).

Rather than bleating about ridiculous notions like Wiggins training with Farrari (sorry, that might have been the Hog, not dear Wiggo) the clinic could more productively analyze the improvements Sky have made and think about how they have done this. Just a suggestion.

 

[workingclasshero]

Sky are more likely to be on the cutting edge of science.

Like cool downs? which was something they made a point of doing in public at this year's Tour

 

[Dear Wiggo]

My point (on another forum, which you kindly highlighted and re-posted) is that rather than being stuck on old dope, Sky are more likely to be on the cutting edge of science. This may involve things which are not currently considered illegal, partly because other teams/testers are not aware of them. (For example, there are a number of recreation/street drugs not yet classified as illegal because they are variations on others)

Cutting edge science? You don't even know what you wrote!? What the heck!? AFter I posted it here for you and highlighted the amazing Sky team strategy for 2012??

http://gerard.cc/2012/10/29/skyfall/#comment-3313
coinneach Says:

October 30, 2012 at 20:01

All Sky can do is manage their own team.
The cycling world has changed, post Lance: Skt’s own aims and objectives were not being met, so they have gone back to basics. It remains to be seen how this will play out next year and beyond. I’d be less worried about loosing 2 DS’s as I would about the evidence from the Vuelta, which is that other teams are catching up with whatever it is Sky have been doing (weight loss, staying healthy, good recovery). In a few years time we’ll know more of the detail and be able to judge its success, but I for one wish them (and Garmin) well

What you actually say is "staying healthy" - nothing to do with cutting edge science. What the heck.

When I ask, in contrast to your claim that other teams are catching up to Sky's ability to "stay healthy", and ask how many teams have had a soigneur die, you say...

None that I know of, but I can't see any connection beyond wild fantasy stuff.

Here's a hint, then. Staying healthy includes not dying. Something every other team in 2010 did in spades and Sky did not.

You want to rethink your "Sky did so well in 2012 because..." speech, coz it's lacking in reality.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

I've heard some interesting things about how the Sky employees get round the Etape. Now if cortisone isn't allowed for their team, how can they justify their own direct employees using it.

Based on my experience in a couple of Marmottes, the Sky employees get round very slowly, but they look great in their proper Sky kit with names on. Even better when on a Dogma!

Joking aside, when one signs up for the Marmotte, one agrees to abide by the WADA anti-doping code. I would assume that the same applies to the Etape.

Would cortisone provided properly via a prescription violate this code, one wonders? (I assume it would, as otherwise there'd be no reason for pros to avoid it.) If it does, then such a Sky employee would be in breach of the rules. Whether such a breach for a Weekend Warrior aiming for nothing more than to beat the Broomwagon is a really a serious offence is open to debate, though it would not necessarily look good from a PR viewpoint. However, any media outlet highlighting such a breach and trying to present it as proof of doping in the pro team would, I suspect, get laughed at for their desperation.

Also included in the Marmotte terms is a commitment to not drop litter on the road. Many hundreds of people ignore this, so I guess most people signing on don't bother to read what they're signing or think that as they are not "racing" as such, the rules, particularly the WADA code section, don't apply to them, or think that if they breach them accidentally it is OK. For my sins, I accidentally dropped a couple of gel wrappers on the Galibier this year, and certainly didn't go back for them.

 

[blackcat]

posten style uv

captaintbag

n'est pas?

nah not me Wiggo. I did not even get the reference til I went and googled cb.

 

[coinneach]

Cutting edge science? You don't even know what you wrote!? What the heck!? AFter I posted it here for you and highlighted the amazing Sky team strategy for 2012??



What you actually say is "staying healthy" - nothing to do with cutting edge science. What the heck.

When I ask, in contrast to your claim that other teams are catching up to Sky's ability to "stay healthy", and ask how many teams have had a soigneur die, you say...



Here's a hint, then. Staying healthy includes not dying. Something every other team in 2010 did in spades and Sky did not.

You want to rethink your "Sky did so well in 2012 because..." speech, coz it's lacking in reality.

Excuse me, you were too subtle for me, I now see the point you are trying to say.
My memory tell me the soigneur died in 2010 at the Vuelta (I should know, cause I was there for 2 of the stages!). Brailsford has spoken of this being a significant event, forcing a rethink (and the reason/excuse of hiring Dr L)

Now, keeping riders healthy when they loose weight is not a simple matter....Thor & Cadel have had issues, and amongst Sky's riders Froome had a serious virus & JT Locke similarly before joining team. I'd be curious to know what measures they take..again just a suggestion for future enquiry, no need to jump down throat!

 

[bobbins]

Based on my experience in a couple of Marmottes, the Sky employees get round very slowly, but they look great in their proper Sky kit with names on. Even better when on a Dogma!

Joking aside, when one signs up for the Marmotte, one agrees to abide by the WADA anti-doping code. I would assume that the same applies to the Etape.

Would cortisone provided properly via a prescription violate this code, one wonders? (I assume it would, as otherwise there'd be no reason for pros to avoid it.) If it does, then such a Sky employee would be in breach of the rules. Whether such a breach for a Weekend Warrior aiming for nothing more than to beat the Broomwagon is a really a serious offence is open to debate, though it would not necessarily look good from a PR viewpoint. However, any media outlet highlighting such a breach and trying to present it as proof of doping in the pro team would, I suspect, get laughed at for their desperation.

Also included in the Marmotte terms is a commitment to not drop litter on the road. Many hundreds of people ignore this, so I guess most people signing on don't bother to read what they're signing or think that as they are not "racing" as such, the rules, particularly the WADA code section, don't apply to them, or think that if they breach them accidentally it is OK. For my sins, I accidentally dropped a couple of gel wrappers on the Galibier this year, and certainly didn't go back for them.

If I find out more I'll let you know. It's just ironic that if this is being pushed by Sky, they have their own employees flouting the rules!

And as for business ethics, there is no end of examples where they are guilty of less than honest business dealings.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

If I find out more I'll let you know. It's just ironic that if this is being pushed by Sky, they have their own employees flouting the rules!

And as for business ethics, there is no end of examples where they are guilty of less than honest business dealings.

It would be ironic indeed, though entirely unsurprising. I would think that a Weekend Warrior on cortisone is 99.99% certain to be trying to overcome something like tendonitis and complete an event they've trained for a lot in cr*ppy UK winter weather, rather than to mask the use of anything more potent. It's an absolute b*mmer to have to miss your main event of the year through injury.

My personal grouse with the Sky staff team is that there seem to be non-trivial number in the "All gear, no idea" brigade, with their kit, Dogma and beer-belly, showing all the signs of not having prepared sensibly.

I am proud to be able to say that I have no commercial dealings with any part of the Murdoch empire. Something to do with calling for vigilante justice on paediatricians, making up stories to sell papers and having employed Kelvin McKenzie.

 

[bobbins]

It would be ironic indeed, though entirely unsurprising. I would think that a Weekend Warrior on cortisone is 99.99% certain to be trying to overcome something like tendonitis and complete an event they've trained for a lot in cr*ppy UK winter weather, rather than to mask the use of anything more potent. It's an absolute b*mmer to have to miss your main event of the year through injury.

My personal grouse with the Sky staff team is that there seem to be non-trivial number in the "All gear, no idea" brigade, with their kit, Dogma and beer-belly, showing all the signs of not having prepared sensibly.

I am proud to be able to say that I have no commercial dealings with any part of the Murdoch empire. Something to do with calling for vigilante justice on paediatricians, making up stories to sell papers and having employed Kelvin McKenzie.

Good points. From what I understand, they seem to think that the normal rules of the road or bunch do not apply to them and were even told that the best thing to do with empty gel wrappers is to throw them into the countryside. If indeed this 'clean cycling' directive is coming from them then maybe they need to be make sure that they are squeaky clean first.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

...and were even told that the best thing to do with empty gel wrappers is to throw them into the countryside.

That is quite something!

Accidents do happen with gel wrappers, and given the sheer volume of riders, there will inevitably be a lot dropped even by the most fastidious of riders. It's not just gel wrappers, though. A friend of mine started in the last group in the Marmotte and by the top of the Glandon, only a quarter of the way round, he'd already passed half a dozen pairs of crushed Oakleys and enough items of clothing to fill a charity shop. There was even a surprisingly large volume of bike parts abandoned on the road, though nothing "high end" worth stopping for!

 

[JRanton]

That's certainly possible. And whether the sponsors are calling the shots on this or not, there's an element of Sky having to play the hand they are dealt.

They are currently the most successful team and are the recipients of unprecedented attention at home... just as the biggest doping scandal in sports history hits. They had, like Garmin, made much play of being devoted to cleanliness, but unlike Garmin they had never prepared the ground with sponsors/media/fans for revelations about the past of anyone on the team. Garmin were always big on the idea that the sport used to be dirty, that they were ok with "redeemed" former dopers, that was part of the narrative.

Sky, were always cruder in the way they put across their anti-doping stance, not risking confusing the public with nuance or potentially off-putting discussion about the past of the sport. Garmin, consequently, can get away with taking a line on past indiscretions that would get Sky crucified by any media outlets who care to point out the disjuncture between their "zero tolerance" claims and the pasts of some people on their books. So they have to be seen to be doing something. Those are their cards.

The way they've played that hand hasn't been very clever however. Letting this go on as a drip of resignations and revelations over an extended period is just PR suicide. And the Great Purge will inevitably leave potential hostages to fortune further up the road - they will still have older riders and staff who rode on scandal hit teams in the past, and who therefore could get caught up in further scandal.

Frankly I don't believe the team would have ever got started with the ''preparing the ground'' strategy. It simply wouldn't have been acceptable to the sponsor.

 

[JRanton]

Has it ever been explained why Sky didn't join Garmin and the French teams in the MPCC (movement for credible cycling)?

 

[JRanton]

This was a good post I read elsewhere explaining the Sky predicament:

Sky's approach is explicitly aimed at new, British, cycling fans.

You're a new fan. Your first exposure to cycling is seeing Wiggins win the tour. You have been led to believe that pro-cycling is all about who has the best drugs. You have a champion you hope is clean, but just a couple of weeks later a huge ****storm explodes and it turns out that maybe cycling is still full of drugs and corruption after all. Sky need to convince YOU, the new fan, that despite all the crap flying about, Wiggins won it clean and is a worthy champion. But it turns out that despite what they told you about zero tolerance, some of their staff aren't as clean as you'd thought.

That's seriously toxic for Sky. They're dealing with it the only way they can. In general terms it may not be the best way, but for their target audience, yes, its the only way possible.

 

[Zinoviev Letter]

Frankly I don't believe the team would have ever got started with the ''preparing the ground'' strategy. It simply wouldn't have been acceptable to the sponsor.

I don't think that Sky would necessarily have to have started out by "preparing the ground". They were not after all being led by a former Armstrong teammate, nor did they start out with a bunch of other former Armstrong teammates.

But when they started to take on significant numbers of staff who were prominent during the Wild West years, they really needed to start finessing the message there and then. It's just setting yourself up for a series of kicks in the balls if you on the one hand continue to proclaim a rather crude adherence to "zero tolerance" for dodgy pasts while at the same time hiring on experienced people, at least some of whom, by cycling's law of averages were likely to have something dubious in their background.

They actually flirted briefly with this, if I recall correctly, with Brailsford making some comments about how he might have to reconsider some minor aspects of their hiring policy. But they never really changed their narrative. And now they have a PR disaster on their hands because there's an obvious contradiction between their stated policy and their actual recruitment at a time when that sort of contradiction can get you in trouble in the media.

 

[Zinoviev Letter]

This was a good post I read elsewhere explaining the Sky predicament:

Even if you accept that, given their predicament, they have to be seen to be doing something, they are handling this rather ineptly. Why on Earth didn't they announce whatever resignations they were forcing in one go, instead of allowing them to create new headlines day after day?

 

[JRanton]

Even if you accept that, given their predicament, they have to be seen to be doing something, they are handling this rather ineptly. Why on Earth didn't they announce whatever resignations they were forcing in one go, instead of allowing them to create new headlines day after day?

Probably because they were desperate to start shipping the ''reputational risks'' out of the door before too many more articles started to emerge in the media. Interviewing 80+ people is pretty time consuming and it could have been several more weeks, even months down the line before they would be able to reveal the full list of resignations. There will undoubtedly be more to come (some are saying at least three riders will leave).

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Probably because they were desperate to start shipping the ''reputational risks'' out of the door before too many more articles started to emerge in the media. Interviewing 80+ people is pretty time consuming and it could have been several more weeks, even months down the line before they would be able to reveal the full list of resignations. There will undoubtedly be more to come (some are saying at least three riders will leave).

Some Clinic posters? Some .... ???? Source?