Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[The Hitch]

Erm, hang on a minute...

Brailsford has said that Leinders came ''highly recommended''. Wouldn't you like to know who recommended him to Sky and Brailsford and why he was recommended?

This is a guy (Leinders) who had been involved with doping in cycling for over a decade, the doping ''mastermind'' at Rabobank, and we're supposed to believe that Sky, after an extremely poor 2010 season (certainly in GC terms), just happended to innocently stumble across his services?

Do you really believe that? What an incredibly bad bit of luck for a team that set out to hire British doctors who hadn't previously worked in cycling that they just so happened to hire Geert Leinders...

Do you realise that Matt Hayman, a Sky stalwart since the launch of the team, will have worked with Leinders for years at Rabobank (nine years to be exact). Flecha too (for 4 years). Oh and then there's Steven de Jongh. You'll know him. He was a Sky DS since 2010 until recently leaving the team after admitting drug use during his career. He was at Rabobank as a rider for five years with Mr Leinders.

The professional cycling world is an incredibly small one. The idea that Sky and Brailsford weren't perfectly aware of Geert Leinders' reputation when they hired him is utterly ludicrous.

There are none so blind as those who will not see.

It would be rude.not.to applaud this.post, the knowledge that went into it and the expert way it was constructed into a short but very valuable contribution

 

[The Hitch]

Criticise the post, you mean. Just because you have decided you don't like someone, doesn't mean you have to spread your hate around.

I didn't say you or the post are worthy of.criticism
i quite clearly said if someone responding to a post wants to criticise someone for it then criticise the poster and no one else. That applies.to everyones posts mine as.well.

Its got nothing to do with hate i just don't like constantly being attacked for things i don't believe and.never posted. its enough of.a headache keeping track of what i did post

 

[Froome19]

Do we know for a fact that he wasn't? Richard Freeman was mentioned as the team doctor on that race but Sky regularly have two doctors at races.

What we do know is that Leinders was the team doctor at every pre-Tour 2012 stage race that the Tenerife gang attended. What do you think about that?

Maybe he was, but I doubt it.

Though I was just pointing out that why would Sky use a doping doctor for the Vuelta when they could use him for the Tour?

We knew Leinders was the team doctor, that is not the problem. Question is whether Leinders was still practising his art? Nothing to say he was apart from the Sky dominance. Though I feel people are mixing up the issue of Brailsford's PR statements which are obviously pathetic and the transparency of Sky.. and that of whether Leinders was employed in a doping programme when at Sky. One can lead to the other, but we have already seen with the De Jongh, Yates, Julich release/sackings that Sky's transparency and recruitment is not exactly up to standard and was/is not what they promised. More likely imo that is down to a disregard for transparency as Brailsford ignorantly thought he could get away with not backing up his claims.

 

[Joachim]

Criticising the post would be far more useful. Just because you have decided you don't like a poster, doesn't mean you have to spread your hate around.

Hate? You sound like Armstrong. Are you a doper?

There you go

@Hitch, you are making a massive assumption here. Did I say that the fallacious thinking was limited to one side?

 

[Libertine Seguros]

I'll go for actual hard evidence, even a bit of hearsay would be nice, but if there is anything fishy it would take a while for it to surface.

There is no hard evidence Riccardo Riccò doped at the 2008 Giro d'Italia, Ivan Basso doped at the 2006 Giro d'Italia, Danilo di Luca doped at the 2007 Giro d'Italia, or that Juan José Cobo doped at the 2011 Vuelta a España. Hell, Cobo has never tested positive or been named in a scandal, which makes him far more likely to be clean than, say, Mick Rogers, who has been named in two.

Bradley Wiggins certainly didn't require any hard evidence when he by proxy stated Carlos Sastre was doping at the 2008 race (he stated Evans was the first Tour winner in years that we could trust was clean). Pray tell, what is there against Sastre's name? Certainly no more than can be held against Wiggins'.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

One can lead to the other, but we have already seen with the De Jongh, Yates, Julich release/sackings that Sky's transparency and recruitment is not exactly up to standard and was/is not what they promised. More likely imo that is down to a disregard for transparency as Brailsford ignorantly thought he could get away with not backing up his claims.

Very likely, however I do still have my worries about CN approaching Brailsford with questions about the Leinders investigation at the Worlds... and Brailsford running away. That doesn't augur well at all.

I thought at the time he had expected the Olympic fervour to take hold and let him get on with that side of things quietly, but the specialist press wouldn't let him.

 

[will10]

indeed,
if 2012 was clean as everybody at Sky assures us, why get rid of those guys? Or reversely, if they don't trust those guys, how can they assure us 2012 was clean?
It's so obviously a smokescreen, and such a lousy (and fan-insulting) one, that it is sad to see how few journalists are actually picking holes in it.

the burden of the proof lies with the racers and teams. they should start putting out some evidence of being clean. should be relatively easy when you really are clean.

+100000
characters

 

[cineteq]

We knew Leinders was the team doctor, that is not the problem. Question is whether Leinders was still practising his art? Nothing to say he was apart from the Sky dominance.

What has he been known for? What's been his forte? What did he come to Sky highly recommended for?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Consider the statement, "Garmin and Sky share a symbiotic relationship".

I'll attempt to unpack the reasoning behind this statement.

Consider all the teams claiming they are clean. There are really only 2 pushing that mantra: Sky and Garmin.

When "questioning" Pat McQuaid, what did Garmin part-owner and ex-doper David Millar, brother of Sky's PR officer and close, personal friend of Sky's team manager and 2012 Coach of the year Brailsford say? "We won clean with Ryder, and I trust Brad". Absolutely no mention of Contador. In the same way Wiggins saying Evans was the first clean Tour winner, implying Sastre was dirty, Millar here is implying Contador's performance / team is suspect - through omission.

And just look at how closely linked Sky and Garmin are through the relationships between their principals.

But now remove one of these teams claiming to be clean, and what happens? Regardless of their results, they would look suspect in their claims of cleanliness, sustaining top 5 on CQ in the WT, clean. Garmin started it, with pro-conti Chipotle, way back in the day, and Sky are finishing it, by taking it to a whole new level. They reinforce one another, with precedent and social proof. Chipotle looked believable back in the day because they were claiming "clean", and not winning GTs.

How believable would it be if Ryder won the Giro, allegedly clean, but all the other wins from 2012 were spread evenly amongst the top 5-6 "dirty" teams? Imagine Sky won nothing in 2012 - podiumed, sure, but no wins.

How believable now does Garmin's claim of a clean Ryder win look? IMO, it would look barely believable.

IMO, Sky and Garmin's 2012 GT results reinforce one another, making them look more believable, more likely, particularly to your average fan who believes anything JV or David Millar tells them.

This video exemplifies part of what I am trying to get at: http://www.ted.com/talks/derek_sivers_how_to_start_a_movement.html

Garmin started it. Sky became the first "follower", but now have taken the lead, and Garmin are following. But IMO they definitely need each other.

 

[Froome19]

indeed,
if 2012 was clean as everybody at Sky assures us, why get rid of those guys? Or reversely, if they don't trust those guys, how can they assure us 2012 was clean?
It's so obviously a smokescreen, and such a lousy (and fan-insulting) one, that it is sad to see how few journalists are actually picking holes in it.

the burden of the proof lies with the racers and teams. they should start putting out some evidence of being clean. should be relatively easy when you really are clean.

Seriously?

The reason they had to get rid of those guys, is because otherwise you and many others like you would have been accusing them of being hypocritical b******

 

[Joachim]

indeed,
if 2012 was clean as everybody at Sky assures us, why get rid of those guys? Or reversely, if they don't trust those guys, how can they assure us 2012 was clean?
It's so obviously a smokescreen, and such a lousy (and fan-insulting) one, that it is sad to see how few journalists are actually picking holes in it.

In which case, you can expect Yates and Julich to talk.

the burden of the proof lies with the racers and teams. they should start putting out some evidence of being clean. should be relatively easy when you really are clean.

Wrong. Burden of proof lies with the accusers.

Besides, what evidence would you like? Blood values? This sub-forum is a great example of why that wont happen, and not for the reasons you think.

The biggest giggle is I can't stand Murdoch. I'd love for his toxic media brand to be ever associated with cheating and lying.

 

[Froome19]

Consider the statement, "Garmin and Sky share a symbiotic relationship".

I'll attempt to unpack the reasoning behind this statement.

Consider all the teams claiming they are clean. There are really only 2 pushing that mantra: Sky and Garmin.

When "questioning" Pat McQuaid, what did Garmin part-owner and ex-doper David Millar, brother of Sky's PR officer and close, personal friend of Sky's team manager and 2012 Coach of the year Brailsford say? "We won clean with Ryder, and I trust Brad". Absolutely no mention of Contador. In the same way Wiggins saying Evans was the first clean Tour winner, implying Sastre was dirty, Millar here is implying Contador's performance / team is suspect - through omission.

And just look at how closely linked Sky and Garmin are through the relationships between their principals.

But now remove one of these teams claiming to be clean, and what happens? Regardless of their results, they would look suspect in their claims of cleanliness, sustaining top 5 on CQ in the WT, clean. Garmin started it, with pro-conti Chipotle, way back in the day, and Sky are finishing it, by taking it to a whole new level. They reinforce one another, with precedent and social proof. Chipotle looked believable back in the day because they were claiming "clean", and not winning GTs.

How believable would it be if Ryder won the Giro, allegedly clean, but all the other wins from 2012 were spread evenly amongst the top 5-6 "dirty" teams? Imagine Sky won nothing in 2012 - podiumed, sure, but no wins.

How believable now does Garmin's claim of a clean Ryder win look? IMO, it would look barely believable.

IMO, Sky and Garmin's 2012 GT results reinforce one another, making them look more believable, more likely, particularly to your average fan who believes anything JV or David Millar tells them.

This video exemplifies part of what I am trying to get at: http://www.ted.com/talks/derek_sivers_how_to_start_a_movement.html

Garmin started it. Sky became the first "follower", but now have taken the lead, and Garmin are following. But IMO they definitely need each other.

So you are saying that Garmin are dirty?

 

[Froome19]

the burden of the proof lies with the racers and teams. they should start putting out some evidence of being clean. should be relatively easy when you really are clean.

The fear of speaking out and omerta is still inherent within the sport and it certainly is not helped by the violent nature of the fans who are constantly accusing their riders of doping. It intimidates the riders and makes them reluctant to speak out.

Not saying that fans should not be cynical towards the sport after all they have been through, just it leaves the sport in a prickly position.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

Bradley Wiggins certainly didn't require any hard evidence when he by proxy stated Carlos Sastre was doping at the 2008 race (he stated Evans was the first Tour winner in years that we could trust was clean). Pray tell, what is there against Sastre's name? Certainly no more than can be held against Wiggins'.

Interesting you should mention that. Obviously there is a dependency on the stage and the rider himself but what time up Alpe d'Huez would you start to raise an eyebrow for a rider like Sastre?

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

When "questioning" Pat McQuaid, what did Garmin part-owner and ex-doper David Millar, brother of Sky's PR officer and close, personal friend of Sky's team manager and 2012 Coach of the year Brailsford say? "We won clean with Ryder, and I trust Brad". Absolutely no mention of Contador. In the same way Wiggins saying Evans was the first clean Tour winner, implying Sastre was dirty, Millar here is implying Contador's performance / team is suspect - through omission.

Or, perhaps, he does know Wiggins a lot better than he does Contador to be able to make that call.

How believable would it be if Ryder won the Giro, allegedly clean, but all the other wins from 2012 were spread evenly amongst the top 5-6 "dirty" teams? Imagine Sky won nothing in 2012 - podiumed, sure, but no wins.
How believable now does Garmin's claim of a clean Ryder win look? IMO, it would look barely believable.

Really? If, say, Wiggins came second or third rather than first I would be amazed if that influenced people as to whether Ryder won clean.

 

[simo1733]

Consider the statement, "Garmin and Sky share a symbiotic relationship".

I'll attempt to unpack the reasoning behind this statement.

Consider all the teams claiming they are clean. There are really only 2 pushing that mantra: Sky and Garmin.

When "questioning" Pat McQuaid, what did Garmin part-owner and ex-doper David Millar, brother of Sky's PR officer and close, personal friend of Sky's team manager and 2012 Coach of the year Brailsford say? "We won clean with Ryder, and I trust Brad". Absolutely no mention of Contador. In the same way Wiggins saying Evans was the first clean Tour winner, implying Sastre was dirty, Millar here is implying Contador's performance / team is suspect - through omission.

And just look at how closely linked Sky and Garmin are through the relationships between their principals.

But now remove one of these teams claiming to be clean, and what happens? Regardless of their results, they would look suspect in their claims of cleanliness, sustaining top 5 on CQ in the WT, clean. Garmin started it, with pro-conti Chipotle, way back in the day, and Sky are finishing it, by taking it to a whole new level. They reinforce one another, with precedent and social proof. Chipotle looked believable back in the day because they were claiming "clean", and not winning GTs.

How believable would it be if Ryder won the Giro, allegedly clean, but all the other wins from 2012 were spread evenly amongst the top 5-6 "dirty" teams? Imagine Sky won nothing in 2012 - podiumed, sure, but no wins.

How believable now does Garmin's claim of a clean Ryder win look? IMO, it would look barely believable.

IMO, Sky and Garmin's 2012 GT results reinforce one another, making them look more believable, more likely, particularly to your average fan who believes anything JV or David Millar tells them.

This video exemplifies part of what I am trying to get at: http://www.ted.com/talks/derek_sivers_how_to_start_a_movement.html

Garmin started it. Sky became the first "follower", but now have taken the lead, and Garmin are following. But IMO they definitely need each other.

Where did you get the idea that Millar is a close personal friend of Brailsford.Brailsford claims to not have any close friends.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Where did you get the idea that Millar is a close personal friend of Brailsford.Brailsford claims to not have any close friends.

From David Millar's book. They were sitting at the table when the Gendarme's came to arrest Millar. They arrested Brailsford as well.

 

[sniper]

Or, perhaps, he does know Wiggins a lot better than he does Contador to be able to make that call.

JV isn't able to make any calls.
in 2009 JV said he had 'credible sources' telling him AC had gotten his results clean.
good call!

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

JV isn't able to make any calls.
in 2009 JV said he had 'credible sources' telling him AC had gotten his results clean.
good call!

Whatever JV had to say is not really relevant since we were talking about Millar.

 

[Mellow Velo]

If I am correct Leinders has avoided most of France since the 1998 Tour.

And yet, you earlier posted these, as "evidential" proof to the contrary:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aM5slCaEUZc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=seyP-yxUm80

Nuff said, if one has eyes.

Clearly, you like it both ways.

 

[Mellow Velo]

Do we know for a fact that he wasn't? Richard Freeman was mentioned as the team doctor on that race but Sky regularly have two doctors at races.

What we do know is that Leinders was the team doctor at every pre-Tour 2012 stage race that the Tenerife gang attended. What do you think about that?

Again.
If true, this I find quite compelling.
Would like to read that at source.
Good that somebody around here has done their homework.

 

[sniper]

Whatever JV had to say is not really relevant since we were talking about Millar.

my bad.
anyway, both JV and Millar have been 'making calls' about riders to such an extent that the credibility of their 'calls' has inflated.

 

[The Hitch]

The fear of speaking out and omerta is still inherent within the sport and it certainly is not helped by the violent nature of the fans who are constantly accusing their riders of doping. It intimidates the riders and makes them reluctant to speak out.

Not saying that fans should not be cynical towards the sport after all they have been through, just it leaves the sport in a prickly position.

Isn't the whole point of being an anti doping team that proves winning clean is possible, that you are willing to take the lumps once in a whlie that come with breaking the spell?

Sky aren't willing to take any of the lumps for being clean, not even risk a scratch. They just want all.of the benefits.

 

[The Hitch]

Whatever JV had to say is not really relevant since we were talking about Millar.

Well millar also provided character witness for.contador. Only that millar did it 2 years later - 2011, after.contador had failed the test.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

And yet, you earlier posted these, as "evidential" proof to the contrary:

Clearly, you like it both ways.

What is your point?

Or do you really believe a team doctor is always the guy administring doping? Never heard of soigneurs? Freddy Viaene, perhaps Willy Voet? Come on, do better.