Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[SundayRider]

The article in question:

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto...e?shareToken=ccea51abc589211e28ad23ea10f8b076

"You join the team any time you like, for as long as you like. You live in the hotel, eat with us, attend our meetings. Everything. Access to all areas and that doesn’t mean you see what we want to show you. You want to go to a doctor’s bedroom and see what he is carrying with him, you knock on the door. He won’t have a problem.”

Wasn't what happened a couple of years ago with Kimmage though was it? Change the answer to suit the time, no mention of Dr Leinders in the article.

 

[SundayRider]

I think you put that very well. Walsh seems to have done a bit of an about face in shifting his interest from Lance to Sky. He is acting more of a journalist/fan than truly trying to investigate the situation.
PK I think is mislabeled by some comments here. I don't see him as a cynic at all but as more as a sceptic. As well he has a right to. As you said, he is not afraid to ask the tough questions that some appear to be uncomfortable with.

Yeah if you read, Walsh's articles on Sky you would never believe he was the same guy that helped bring down Armstrong. He almost sounds like a generic sports journalist who doesn't need much about cycling and its past.

 

[cineteq]

Yeah if you read, Walsh's articles on Sky you would never believe he was the same guy that helped bring down Armstrong. He almost sounds like a generic sports journalist who doesn't need much about cycling and its past.

Remember when 'local guys' were complaining about Oprah? They should bring Walsh, Kimmage blah blah blah to ask the tough questions?

So where are Walsh's tough questions in this article? Leinders Q's for instance?

 

[Ferminal]

The article in question:

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto...e?shareToken=ccea51abc589211e28ad23ea10f8b076

lol, did everyone laugh at this?

" Some got jobs in the team by denying or concealing a doping past but when new information became available they were moved on."


Michael, we know you worked with Michele Ferrari...

Yes, it was just for training plans

Good to hear

 

[Froome19]

Also I think people here should keep in mind that the Clinic may adore Paul Kimmage but in real life he is not as popular.

 

[Froome19]

Remember when 'local guys' were complaining about Oprah? They should bring Walsh, Kimmage blah blah blah to ask the tough questions?

So where are Walsh's tough questions in this article? Leinders Q's for instance?

Wrong article. This was about what Walsh saw.
Walsh understandably never saw anything suspicious.

 

[SundayRider]

I'd like someone to ask questions like 'If another team had a rider like BW who really struggled in GTs during the middle of his career but then toward the back end of his career suddenly started to get podiums and wins, would you be suspicious?'

 

[argyllflyer]

why do you believe they are clean? Wanting to them to be clean? Believing what they have said? Or some other reason?

That can be flipped to:

why do you believe they aren't clean? Wanting to them to be dirty? Not believing what they have said? Or some other reason?

And it's far easier to find people of the above persuasion in this forum.

I've said this before - there are people in this forum who must hate cycling because no matter what happens in a race, the default position is to come on here and accuse the winner of doping. Or maybe it's an extreme kind of love - every winner is tarnishing the sport with their dirty ways.

The next decade will be a write-off for the most fervent of the anti-doping brigade here. You'd be as well coming back in 2023 to see if Utopia has been unearthed.

 

[SundayRider]

Wrong article. This was about what Walsh saw.
Walsh understandably never saw anything suspicious.

It wasn't entirely. DB actually asked Walsh how he thought Sky are perceived. Walsh could have mentioned Leinders there and then.

 

[SundayRider]

That can be flipped to:

why do you believe they aren't clean? Wanting to them to be dirty? Not believing what they have said? Or some other reason?

And it's far easier to find people of the above persuasion in this forum.

I've said this before - there are people in this forum who must hate cycling because no matter what happens in a race, the default position is to come on here and accuse the winner of doping. Or maybe it's an extreme kind of love - every winner is tarnishing the sport with their dirty ways.

The next decade will be a write-off for the most fervent of the anti-doping brigade here. You'd be as well coming back in 2023 to see if Utopia has been unearthed.

I don't think I need to go into the exact details about why many feel they are not clean, this has been discussed thousands of times (literally) on here. Why do you believe they are clean? I'm interest to know.

 

[Mellow Velo]

lol, did everyone laugh at this?

" Some got jobs in the team by denying or concealing a doping past but when new information became available they were moved on."


Michael, we know you worked with Michele Ferrari...

Yes, it was just for training plans

Good to hear

I'll bet they didn't LOL at Rabo HQ.

Took them until this week to discover that Lulu's doping with Dr F in 2006.

Yet some people here think they were the go to guys to get the dirt on Dr L.

 

[Rambo1970]

why do you believe they are clean? Wanting to them to be clean? Believing what they have said? Or some other reason?

Of course we all want Sky to be clean. Walsh want to believe Sky to be clean.

To not want this is imbecile.

 

[Ferminal]

I'll bet they didn't LOL at Rabo HQ.

Took them until this week to discover that Lulu's doping with Dr F in 2006.

Yet some people here think they were the go to guys to get the dirt on Dr L.

Yes, all these teams with no idea what goes on in the sport they are supposed to be leaders in. Katusha are perhaps the only ones

 

[SundayRider]

Of course we all want Sky to be clean. Walsh want to believe Sky to be clean.

To not want this is imbecile.

I want to believe I will meet a girl who looks just like Kelly Brook, however you have to be objective and realistic. If something is too good to be true 99.9% of the time it is.

 

[shades1]

why do you believe they are clean? Wanting to them to be clean? Believing what they have said? Or some other reason?

i guess i WANT them to be clean , as iv said before if SKY get found to be using PEDs it would be the final nail in the coffin for pro cycling and no true fan wants to see that .

what would happen if all the big sponsors pulled out of the sport , i expect they are only just clinging on by the skin of there teeth now due to what has already happened this year thanks to the LA saga . this sport does not sell tickets of fill stadiums with fans or sell mass amounts of merchandise , so where would the money come from ? these big sponsors have plenty of other places where they can put there money without there name being used to promote a sport notorious for drugs .

SKY being clean is massive for this sport , if they are not im not sure the sport would survive it .

 

[Libertine Seguros]

i guess i WANT them to be clean , as iv said before if SKY get found to be using PEDs it would be the final nail in the coffin for pro cycling and no true fan wants to see that .

what would happen if all the big sponsors pulled out of the sport , i expect they are only just clinging on by the skin of there teeth now due to what has already happened this year thanks to the LA saga . this sport does not sell tickets of fill stadiums with fans or sell mass amounts of merchandise , so where would the money come from ? these big sponsors have plenty of other places where they can put there money without there name being used to promote a sport notorious for drugs .

SKY being clean is massive for this sport , if they are not im not sure the sport would survive it .

1) British pro cycling, not cycling as a whole. Belgium and Italy at least would survive, and probably France and Spain too.
2) Depends when it happens, if it happens several years after the fact like with Armstrong, it won't have the same effect as if it happened tomorrow with the Armstrong case so fresh in the headlines.
3) Sponsors like Cofidis, FDJ, Lotto, Euskaltel and Lampre have had more than enough ammunition to pull out at various times, but they're still there. The big money sponsors pulling out will only be disastrous if the sport completely sells out to them and alienates loyal, long-term sponsors from smaller companies.

 

[Caruut]

The article in question:

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto...e?shareToken=ccea51abc589211e28ad23ea10f8b076

Wasn't exactly probing. Ehh stupid cycling.

 

[ebandit]

death to dopers

1) British pro cycling, not cycling as a whole. Belgium and Italy at least would survive, and probably France and Spain too.

while it's comforting to think that everyone today is more important than

anyone else...past or future the idea that scandal over doping revelations

will kill off pro cycling is ridiculous

as long as people love cycling there will always be racing

for sure we may see less professional riders but the current core calendar

is here with us for some time to come

pheee....eeew! not the end if team sky caught out

 

[martinvickers]

Big difference between DW and PK IMO, DW had a massive vendetta/obsession (call it whatever you like) against Armstrong and pretty much Armstrong alone. Whereas Kimmage just wants cleaner cycling and isn't afraid to ask the right questions even if those he needs to question are British and cleaning to be clean as a whistle.

I'm sorry, but that's balderdash. Walsh's track record is just as impressive as Paul's, and his investigative stuff significantly better - simply because it's more within his skill set.

And please, lets remember Walsh is no more British than Kimmage is, or frankly I am, so enough already of this nationalistic bullsh*t. This smacks entirely of simply picking the writer who comes closer to your existing prejudices than any actually consideration of their work.

 

[martinvickers]

I think you put that very well. Walsh seems to have done a bit of an about face in shifting his interest from Lance to Sky.

Here's a wild idea. Maybe he doesn't just assume they are the same before investigating himself?

He is acting more of a journalist/fan than truly trying to investigate the situation.

With all due respect, D Walsh has vastly more credit than you, or most anybody on this forum, on this subject. When you go after him because you don't like Sky, you show yourself up as simply bigotted in your views, exactly same as those who go after Paul because they do like Sky.

PK I think is mislabeled by some comments here. I don't see him as a cynic at all but as more as a sceptic. As well he has a right to. As you said, he is not afraid to ask the tough questions that some appear to be uncomfortable with.

Nope, there's no mislabelling. Kimmy is definately a cynic on all things Wiggins, and more broadly frankly. And he's entitled to Be.

It's good for the sport that there's some cynicism about. But let's not pretend it's not what it is. That actually does Paul a disservice. He is like a 'devil's advocate', he lets no one away with 'good faith', and it helps keep the sport honest.

 

[veganrob]

Here's a wild idea. Maybe he doesn't just assume they are the same before investigating himself?



With all due respect, D Walsh has vastly more credit than you, or most anybody on this forum, on this subject. When you go after him because you don't like Sky, you show yourself up as simply bigotted in your views, exactly same as those who go after Paul because they do like Sky.



Nope, there's no mislabelling. Kimmy is definately a cynic on all things Wiggins, and more broadly frankly. And he's entitled to Be.

It's good for the sport that there's some cynicism about. But let's not pretend it's not what it is. That actually does Paul a disservice. He is like a 'devil's advocate', he lets no one away with 'good faith', and it helps keep the sport honest.

Well thanks for just giving the definitive truth about everything Sky and everyone elses opinions are just plain wrong. That is a relief, we may as well close the thread now.

hahahah

 

[Mellow Velo]

I'm sorry, but that's balderdash. Walsh's track record is just as impressive as Paul's, and his investigative stuff significantly better - simply because it's more within his skill set.

And please, lets remember Walsh is no more British than Kimmage is, or frankly I am, so enough already of this nationalistic bullsh*t. This smacks entirely of simply picking the writer who comes closer to your existing prejudices than any actually consideration of their work.

I must admit to being somewhat unsure of Kimmage's investigative palmares.
Famous for 'Rough Ride', his pursuit of Lance, calling him a cancer and unflinching anti-doping stance.
That's about it, from my standpoint.

Anybody got a brief rundown of the dirt he's actually dug up in the course of his investigations?
Genuine question: not intended as sarcasm etc.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

“It is my responsibility,” he says, “to make absolutely sure that we do everything in our power to say to Mrs Dombrowski and every other parent that your son will never be put in a position where he has to decide, ‘Should I dope or should I not?’ If he or any of the others are not good enough to get to the level required by their contract, no one from this team will ever say, ‘Well, actually, there is another way’. That won’t happen.”

Did not know Vaughters was head of SKY

“We were too defensive,” he says. “ I see that now and we’re going to try to change that. How would you like to come and live with the team?”
So a clear PR move.

Walsh tweeting:
David Walsh ‏@DavidWalshST
First impressions are that this is a supremely well organised team. It will take more time to be definitive on other questions.
Looks fine by me. Walsh has a new book in line, perhaps ''Dope within the bandwith, the story of the new clean era of pro-cycling''.

 

[martinvickers]

Well thanks for just giving the definitive truth about everything Sky and everyone elses opinions are just plain wrong. That is a relief, we may as well close the thread now.

hahahah

Yeah, you might want to get that odd laughing looked at, could be catching...

as for the rest of it, would be nice if, you know, it was actually connected in some way with what i wrote rather than whatever was fluttering inside your skull...

 

[Rambo1970]

“We were too defensive,” he says. “ I see that now and we’re going to try to change that. How would you like to come and live with the team?”
So a clear PR move.

So you prefer that team are not investigated by journalist then.

Omerta.