Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[Ferminal]

No one is being investigated.

 

[Rambo1970]

Walsh is investigation journalist. Of course he is investigating

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

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

Omerta.

I'll be a good boy and try to answer this for you with this:

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.


Guess you just read over that part?

A real question now, do Kimmage and Walsh have some sort of relationship? Friends? Good collegues? I know it was back in the time of Rough Ride, but what is the status now?

 

[martinvickers]

I'll be a good boy and try to answer this for you with this:

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.


Guess you just read over that part?

A real question now, do Kimmage and Walsh have some sort of relationship? Friends? Good collegues? I know it was back in the time of Rough Ride, but what is the status now?

I understand they remain very close.

 

[Ferminal]

Walsh is investigation journalist. Of course he is investigating

He has been invited to look at the operations of team, and will write about it.

If was actually investigating the team wouldn't he be interviewing Sutton Yates De Jongh Rogers Leinders Barry?

 

[Rambo1970]

But you call it PR move. Do you want Sky to be ready to answer question or not?

What other team are doing this (I dont know)

 

[Benotti69]

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.

He called out Armstrong's performance in an article in 1999 during the TdF.

He has done lots. Enough to warrant a libel case against him by UCI.

After Kimmage spat in the soup he was never gonna be allowed near races. He went of to become a fantastic jouranlist interviewing some of the biggest names in sport. He also spent a few years in Dublin learning his new trade a a journalist after leaving cycling.

 

[Benotti69]

Walsh is investigation journalist. Of course he is investigating

Walsh is The Sunday Times Chief Sports Reporter.

Where does it say investigation?

 

[Rambo1970]

He has done lots. Enough to warrant a libel case against him by UCI.

exact......

 

[martinvickers]

He called out Armstrong's performance in an article in 1999 during the TdF.

He has done lots. Enough to warrant a libel case against him by UCI.

After Kimmage spat in the soup he was never gonna be allowed near races. He went of to become a fantastic jouranlist interviewing some of the biggest names in sport. He also spent a few years in Dublin learning his new trade a a journalist after leaving cycling.

Benotti, it's not that great a palmares in relation to investigative journalism - that's not his schtick

Rough ride was essentially witness testimony. He called out Armstrong - but Walsh did LA confidential. Emma o'Reilly, the Andreus, they all came to prominance through David rather than Paul, no?

He called out Phat and Heinous, hence the fund - has he done much in the way of investigation of them, though?

 

[Benotti69]

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.

What are you basing this on?

Not as popular with who?

Being a journalist is not a popularity contest.

 

[Benotti69]

Benotti, it's not that great a palmares in relation to investigative journalism - that's not his schtick

Rough ride was essentially witness testimony. He called out Armstrong - but Walsh did LA confidential. Emma o'Reilly, the Andreus, they all came to prominance through David rather than Paul, no?

He called out Phat and Heinous, hence the fund - has he done much in the way of investigation of them, though?

Read my last paragraph.

I never said he was better than DW.

DW is longer in Journalism than PK.

I think the reaction Kimmage got from cycling after Rough Ride kept him away from cycling for a long time. Also he is not the same as Walsh. Both very different journalists.

They were journalists working for papers and the papers set the agenda of what they reported on a lot of the time, not so much now Walsh and we know Kimage is back in the world of freelance.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

But you call it PR move. Do you want Sky to be ready to answer question or not?

What other team are doing this (I dont know)

I did not see any questions in the article, or I must have missed them since English is not my native tongue.

A lot of teams have PR budgets Rambo.

But still, the tweet from Walsh is the essential part, for me at least.

What are you basing this on?

Not as popular with who?

Being a journalist is not a popularity contest

Must be why LeMond called people to sponsor that nasty fellow Paul against the UCI.

 

[martinvickers]

Walsh is The Sunday Times Chief Sports Reporter.

Where does it say investigation?

He wrote LA Confidentia,l Benotti, THE seminal early investigative piece on Armstrong.

Look, come on, please, B, stop flogging a dead horse. Paul's bloody brilliant, we love him. But David Walsh is just a better investigative journo - it's not an insult, you know.

You're just arguing for arguing's sake now. Sky getting in walsh is just a good move, like it or not. Jeez, one would ALMOST think you don't want them to be clean....

 

[Rambo1970]

He has been invited to look at the operations of team, and will write about it.

If was actually investigating the team wouldn't he be interviewing Sutton Yates De Jongh Rogers Leinders Barry?

Rogers is only left with Sky. For the other, I don't think they will talk to nobody.

Sky do this because of promoton/PR but it is good thing. No?

 

[martinvickers]

I did not see any questions in the article, or I must have missed them since English is not my native tongue.

It's clearly the first of a series, FGL, just an 'opener'. Later ones will probably go into more depth. Don't try and read too much into this one article, eh?

 

[SundayRider]

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.

Walsh's Sky article was very poor, no probing questions at all. Cycling has changed now run along nothing to see hear, that's what that article was.

 

[martinvickers]

Walsh's Sky article was very poor, no probing questions at all. Cycling has changed now run along nothing to see hear, that's what that article was.

FFS, SR, it's obviously the first in a series. You don't shoot your bolt first up - it's obviously a process of imbedding. And as such it was his usual high standard of journalism.

Seriously, SR, if you want Sky actually proved dirty, you have to allow the for the possiblity of the opposite.

 

[Rambo1970]

Walsh's Sky article was very poor, no probing questions at all. Cycling has changed now run along nothing to see hear, that's what that article was.

Paris ne s'est pas fait en un jour

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

It's clearly the first of a series, FGL, just an 'opener'. Later ones will probably go into more depth. Don't try and read too much into this one article, eh?

No, I didn't, it was an answer to Rambo. Let us see what the next series of articles will be/bring. That's why I put the tweet by Walsh in.

And really, Walsh has SOME credit in my book. Bringing down the biggest PR scam in pro-cycling stands for itsself.

 

[Benotti69]

He wrote LA Confidentia,l Benotti, THE seminal early investigative piece on Armstrong.

Look, come on, please, B, stop flogging a dead horse. Paul's bloody brilliant, we love him. But David Walsh is just a better investigative journo - it's not an insult, you know.

You're just arguing for arguing's sake now. Sky getting in walsh is just a good move, like it or not. Jeez, one would ALMOST think you don't want them to be clean....

Martin, I am not arguing. Walsh is not an investigative reporter. he did do that on Armstrong. But half his life he is writing match reports on Rugby, Football, Tennis etc. He does do investigation by being a journalist but he does not specialise.

I think he is great journalist, one of the few who live up to the true meaning of the word and job, along with Kimmage.

 

[SundayRider]

FFS, SR, it's obviously the first in a series. You don't shoot your bolt first up - it's obviously a process of imbedding. And as such it was his usual high standard of journalism.

Seriously, SR, if you want Sky actually proved dirty, you have to allow the for the possiblity of the opposite.

Of course there is a possibility. However in the UK at the moment there is a massive love fest for Wiggins and Sky and no article criticizing them openly will be published in the mainstream press. Yes I a might be a bit biased for believing that Sky are not clean however there are many British people who are far more biased the other way i.e. not evening questions Wiggins/Sky AT ALL, not even slightly for second - blind faith if you like.

 

[Mellow Velo]

It's clearly the first of a series, FGL, just an 'opener'. Later ones will probably go into more depth. Don't try and read too much into this one article, eh?

Has to be, doesn't it.
Understandable, folk's desire for Walsh to deliver some form of concrete conclusion, but expecting him to arrive there, before really embarking on the journey of discovery, is totally unrealistic.

Benotti, it's not that great a palmares in relation to investigative journalism - that's not his schtick

Rough ride was essentially witness testimony. He called out Armstrong - but Walsh did LA confidential. Emma o'Reilly, the Andreus, they all came to prominance through David rather than Paul, no?

He called out Phat and Heinous, hence the fund - has he done much in the way of investigation of them, though?

Walsh makes more bullets, Kimmage fires more shots, maybe?

 

[martinvickers]

Martin, I am not arguing. Walsh is not an investigative reporter. he did do that on Armstrong. But half his life he is writing match reports on Rugby, Football, Tennis etc. He does do investigation by being a journalist but he does not specialise.

I think he is great journalist, one of the few who live up to the true meaning of the word and job, along with Kimmage.

Well, we are in agreement then!

 

[thirteen]

Well, we are in agreement then!

agree as well!

is the ST article anywhere online or do i need to pick it up tomorrow?

also, is it a multi-parter? (my whereabouts in the next fee weeks will make getting it difficult.)