Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[King Of The Wolds]

This is why this thread is over 10k posts.

In fairness, the last 6 pages worth were a direct result of you and Hog demanding a statement from Wiggins, and it taking the majority of those 6 pages for you to realise that, in the real world, professional people don't actually react to unconfirmed reports.

 

[thehog]

Whatever Wiggins says will be under strict PR limitations so it would not mean much anyways.

There are obviously reasons as to why Sky do not want Wiggins to comment on the matter. Maybe they want to keep it as quite as possible? I would not blame them considering that Leinders was a blemish on their reputation..

I'm a big fan of cycling. Also a big fan of the truth. I'd like to see Wiggins break protocol and speak out like he did of Vino in 2007.

After the Armstrong affair what is needed is more 'humility' not PR.

I think you'll agree with me. Cycling needs a better leader of the peloton.

It shouldn't be up to the French riders to carry the can on the truth again.

 

[Joachim]

In fairness, the last 6 pages worth were a direct result of you and Hog demanding a statement from Wiggins, and it taking the majority of those 6 pages for you to realise that, in the real world, professional people don't actually react to unconfirmed reports.

But if they did, I think we know what Wiggins would say

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

So, you had read Levi's affidavit, a year before he made it?

How would Sky go about finding out what we eventually learned today, if and when Leinders told them a pack of lies?

What Sky sceptics are really saying is that they should have been aware about the rumour and not touched him with a barge pole.

I think with the benefit of hindsight, Brailsford would agree.

You lived under a rock the last years? Guess you are not a regular follower of the pro - peloton then? Rabo 2007 = SKY 2012

 

[Joachim]

Cycling needs a better leader of the peloton.

You think he's the leader?

Clentador is back, hadn't you heard?

 

[MartinGT]

In fairness, the last 6 pages worth were a direct result of you and Hog demanding a statement from Wiggins, and it taking the majority of those 6 pages for you to realise that, in the real world, professional people don't actually react to unconfirmed reports.

Like someone said a few pages back, no smoke without fire. There is so much heat being generated by Sky and their actions I feel I have a hotel on the top of mount Etna!

Froome and his meteoric rise to become a GC contendor (I suppose this is being put down to marginal gains?)
Rogers
Barry
Leinders
Yates
Jullich
de Jongh
Wiggins and his comparrison with USPS
Wiggins and his love for Lance
Wiggins suddenly divorcing Lance
Wiggins USPS style outburst about lazy ****ers
Skys domination in 2012
Skys PR Failings (Too many to list)
More

All the above for me is just TOO many items that cause too much smoke. Its been said on this thread before, if the above was Movistar of AG2R well jesus, the Sky Boyz would be kicking off.

Its just smells, we need answers.

 

[Joachim]

I think, in fairness, you should apply the same standard of evidence to every team in the peloton and see how it works out for you.

 

[King Of The Wolds]

Like someone said a few pages back, no smoke without fire. There is so much heat being generated by Sky and their actions I feel I have a hotel on the top of mount Etna!

Froome and his meteoric rise to become a GC contendor (I suppose this is being put down to marginal gains?)
Rogers
Barry
Leinders
Yates
Jullich
de Jongh
Wiggins and his comparrison with USPS
Wiggins and his love for Lance
Wiggins suddenly divorcing Lance
Wiggins USPS style outburst about lazy ****ers
Skys domination in 2012
Skys PR Failings (Too many to list)
More

All the above for me is just TOO many items that cause too much smoke. Its been said on this thread before, if the above was Movistar of AG2R well jesus, the Sky Boyz would be kicking off.

Its just smells, we need answers.

And now you've added another unnecessary post by summarising the entire thread.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

I think, in fairness, you should apply the same standard of evidence to every team in the peloton and see how it works out for you.

SKY fanboy detection alert going off:

 

[MartinGT]

I think, in fairness, you should apply the same standard of evidence to every team in the peloton and see how it works out for you.

I agree, BUT

Sky have won;

Romandie
P-N
Dauphine
TdF

Plus countless other stages and races too, so I think I would rather have them answer first.

 

[Joachim]

Wow! You'd be easy meat for the Scientologists

 

[The Hitch]

Thanks. Would you mind linking to the document in question, please? It is news to me that this guy was named so early on.



I'm not quite sure that the bit I've bolded adds to your argument, or is a bit spurious, but to the rest of it then, yes, I agree with you, if it was in the public domain. I probably haven't followed this as closely as some, but I'm not sure Leinders role at Sky has ever been fully revealed...and I don't mean that in a conspiratorial way...I mean whether he was just a useful hired hand with race experience. It is far too easy to jump to conclusions, make assumptions, and start building a case on false premises.

But, again, this isn't evidence of Sky doping. It is evidence of Rabobank doping.

It may just be that Brailsford has been caught out making some promises that he wasn't in an easy position to keep. Then again, it can't be easy attempting to staff a squeaky-clean team given the recent history of the pro scene.

I think it is also worth pointing out that if we apply the standard of so-called 'evidence' that some on here deem reasonable, then, by implication Garmin are a doping team.

Geddit?

You are introducing this term evidence, but it doesnt really appear much on this thread because in doping, "evidence" when it does exist is kept from us anyway. The whole point of a doping conspiracy is that you keep the evidence hidden otherwise you end up losing.

Even in the recent USADA case there were riders there who had no evidence against them, who it now turns out did dope.

What we have is a belief or similar beliefs that Wiggins and Froome doped and arguments to back our beliefs up and you are welcome to agree or disagree with us.

And as for Garmin being by these standards a doping team, well not really .

Garmin were not the best team in the world last year. And Dan Martin who less than 1 and a half years ago was considered 10 times the talent of Chris Froome, struggled in the Tour de France, while Froome was left wondering if he wasnt just playing a training computer game on easy mode.

Also JV does actually answer questions and lots of them. Bailsford will only answer a question if it gets to big to ignore and when he does its so full of PR you are left wondering at what point he is going to announce his run for political office. I mean claiming he was shocked to find out Lance doped. Really?

Edit: I was gonna say that DB is so full of PR you wonder if he hired Allistair Campbell but then i remembered that Allistaire Campbell is actually very good friends with Bailsford going back a few years now.

So he learns from the best.

 

[MartinGT]

You are introducing this term evidence, but it doesnt really appear much on this thread because in doping, "evidence" when it does exist is kept from us anyway. The whole point of a doping conspiracy is that you keep the evidence hidden otherwise you end up losing.

Even in the recent USADA case there were riders there who had no evidence against them, who it now turns out did dope.

What we have is a belief or similar beliefs that Wiggins and Froome doped and arguments to back our beliefs up and you are welcome to agree or disagree with us.

And as for Garmin being by these standards a doping team, well not really .

Garmin were not the best team in the world last year. And Dan Martin who less than 1 and a half years ago was considered 10 times the talent of Chris Froome, struggled in the Tour de France, while Froome was left wondering if he wasnt just playing a training computer game on easy mode.

Also JV does actually answer questions and lots of them. Bailsford will only answer a question if it gets to big to ignore and when he does its so full of PR you are left wondering at what point he is going to announce his run for political office. I mean claiming he was shocked to find out Lance doped. Really?

Edit: I was gonna say that DB is so full of PR you wonder if he hired Allistair Campbell but then i remembered that Allistaire Campbell is actually very good friends with Bailsford going back a few years now.

So he learns from the best.

*boom* this, read it and think.

 

[will10]

So, you had read Levi's affidavit, a year before he made it?

How would Sky go about finding out what we eventually learned today, if and when Leinders told them a pack of lies?

What Sky sceptics are really saying is that they should have been aware about the rumour and not touched him with a barge pole.

I think with the benefit of hindsight, Brailsford would agree.

It's not about what we've learned today, as you well know.

With Rabobank we've had the humanplasma scandal rumbling on for the best part of 6-7 years now. We had all sorts of rumours surrounding Rasmussen and what he was up to in 2007. Rasmussen acknowledged publicly that he "worked closely" with Leinders in 2007.

Anyone who's been paying the slightest bit of attention to the sport will be aware that team doctors have been heavily involved in every major doping scandal. The fact that Leinders worked at Rabobank at this time has been common knowledge for years. If you didn't pick up on anything at the time, it's quite straightforward to limit a google search to certain dates. Limit your search to before 2010 if you want (as I've just done). Try "Rasmussen Leinders" and then tell me there was no rumours doing the rounds before Brailsford hired the good Dr. Leinders.

Hell, De Jongh rode for Rabobank from 2000 until 2005. Do you think he was completely in the dark about what role the team doctors had at Rabobank? Do you think he wouldn't have said a word to anyone at Sky when they hired Leinders?

I think any team who truly sought to uphold a policy where no staff member with an association to doping would be hired, would absolutely not hire Dr. Leinders. The fact that they did suggests that whoever at Sky that was responsible for hiring Leinders not being concerned about his past with regards to doping.

In which case, why was the hiring of Leinders kept so underwraps (not published on Sky staff lists etc.) if there was nothing to hide?

 

[martinvickers]

This is not about me.

Its about Sky hiring the services of a nerfrious doping Doctor. Leinders would have been know in the peloton as a "go to man" for doping products. There are many Rabobank riders and team staff who would have been aware of his actions. Why Sky hired him is a BIG QUESTION.

Why?

It needs to answered.

Wiggins is the patron of the peloton - he needs to respond.

In my mind his victory has been dimished by this revelation.

That last bit isn't honest, hog. Wiggins victory was already worth nothing to you, so it can't get any lower.

That said, I have to say, the centrality of Leinders to Rabobank doping is very, very troubling for the 2012 race. My own suspicion just shot up a couple of notches...

 

[King Of The Wolds]

*boom* this, read it and think.

I did, and thought about that one time that Campbell had any dealings with a professional sporting outfit, the 2005 British Lions, and it was an unmitigated PR disaster.

 

[Mellow Velo]

You lived under a rock the last years? Guess you are not a regular follower of the pro - peloton then? Rabo 2007 = SKY 2012

Got a link for the facts, back in 2007, before Sky employed him?

No? I thought not.

So, in the absence of substance, deflect and go straight to the personal attack.

If the pro racing season were on, I wouldn't be wasting my time posting here.

It's not about what we've learned today, as you well know.

With Rabobank we've had the humanplasma scandal rumbling on for the best part of 6-7 years now. We had all sorts of rumours surrounding Rasmussen and what he was up to in 2007. Rasmussen acknowledged publicly that he "worked closely" with Leinders in 2007.

Don't call them rumours. Fearless Greg Lemond will think you live under a rock.

I actually said this in my post.

Sky should not have hired Leinders due to these rumours.
Especially now the rumours have become corroborated.
However, they did and we debate with hindsight.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Dear Jimmy, everyone in the pro-peloton knows who Leinders is, who the other extreme good alchemists are. As did Brailsford, as did Wiggo. Wake up. You are on your way.

Did you read my post at all? Or was just over your head completely?

 

[The Hitch]

I think, in fairness, you should apply the same standard of evidence to every team in the peloton and see how it works out for you.

How on earth did you decide that people dont apply these standards to other teams in the peloton.

In 2012 there were 2 other teams who's results raised eyebrows - OPQS with Ibraugen and Astana, and both these teams, everyone in the clinic concluded were red level on suspicion.

 

[Joachim]

And as for Garmin being by these standards a doping team, well not really .
Garmin were not the best team in the world last year.

The problem I have with this line of argument is that, historically, it wasn't just the winners that doped. Losers doped too.

This doesn't do anything to prove that Sky aren't doping, they may well be, but equally it doesn't add anything to the accusation that they are. Somebody has to win.

Also JV does actually answer questions and lots of them. Bailsford will only answer a question if it gets to big to ignore and when he does its so full of PR you are left wondering at what point he is going to announce his run for political office. I mean claiming he was shocked to find out Lance doped. Really?
.

On the one hand it is a bit nauseating, but on the other hand he is the consummate professional, and part of that means getting the PR right. It is the climate we live in. Brailsford is doing an excellent job of the PR. Worthy of an Oscar, a bit vomit-inducing, but nevertheless, he is successfully steering a highly-pressured team through a torrid environment post-Lance.

You and I might prefer that he was frank, but that wouldn't be realistic.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Really... kind of like when Lance says he never tested positive? We know.

Wha?? You need to make a relevant point to what I said rather than just making a point irrelevant

 

[martinvickers]

good point lawyers always act with integrity and tell the truth

oi, watch it sailor boy!!

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Or he should have learnt Dutch and read the document that Liberty Seguros is going to link to.

I'm not a Dutchie or a Fleming, but we do have a thread on Leinders specifically. Franklin can help you out with this post which contains a link to the Rasmussen ruling. This one is also helpful when connected to this 2007 Nieuwsblad article by Jans Koerts about his doping which would appear to verify the suggestions in Franklin's post.

 

[Joachim]

Brilliant. Thanks, I'll go and have a browse

 

[The Hitch]

I did, and thought about that one time that Campbell had any dealings with a professional sporting outfit, the 2005 British Lions, and it was an unmitigated PR disaster.

kind of like Wiggins trying to win the tour with Sky was an unmitigated disaster the first time. Things end up better with experience

Anyway Allistaire Campbell was not the point of the post. It wasnt even in the post just a bit of humour added afterwards.

In case anyone tries to pin me on this later, no i dont think new labour are doping sky.