Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[northstar]

The timeline for Leinders’ removal from Sky is confusing.

May 5, 2012 - Mark Miserus’ article about Rabobank’s doping programme
July - Brailsford said they were conducting an investigation
Oct. 9, 2012 - Sky announces they are not renewing Leinders’ contract

Walsh’s article seems to indicate that Leinders was let go before the investigation. If that’s the case, why didn’t Brailsford just come out and say that in July.

 

[martinvickers]

The timeline for Leinders’ removal from Sky is confusing.

May 5, 2012 - Mark Miserus’ article about Rabobank’s doping programme
July - Brailsford said they were conducting an investigation
Oct. 9, 2012 - Sky announces they are not renewing Leinders’ contract

Walsh’s article seems to indicate that Leinders was let go before the investigation. If that’s the case, why didn’t Brailsford just come out and say that in July.

Have to say, I read it as a 'suspension' pending investigation...

 

[northstar]

Have to say, I read it as a 'suspension' pending investigation...

“Leinders’ contract was paid up for 2012 and he was told the team would not use him again.” I don’t think that’s a suspension.

When it says “paid up for 2012”, do you think he was paid for the 44 days he actually worked or the full contract of 80 days?

 

[martinvickers]

“Leinders’ contract was paid up for 2012 and he was told the team would not use him again.” I don’t think that’s a suspension.

When it says “paid up for 2012”, do you think he was paid for the 44 days he actually worked or the full contract of 80 days?

Oh, absolutely the whole 80. I expressed my self badly, my apology - my point was not the exact nature of the break in legal terms - more simply that the 'break' with Leinders was not necessaily permanant at that stage, pending investigation - i.e. if he checked out clean, he could have been invited back.

If we look at the phrase -

"Sky’s boss judged that to keep him on while this allegation was being investigated would damage the reputation of the team. Leinders’ contract was paid up for 2012 and he was told the team would not use him again"

I read the bolded bit as implying that post investigation he might be invited back. He wasn't sacked as such; he was essentially sent on gardening leave (we wont use you, but we will pay you - which is tantamount to suspension, really) for the rest of his contract while investigations took place, and then not renewed.

The underlined bit, however, can certainly be interpreted as a more clean cut immediate and permanant end to the relationship, regardless. I entirely accept that.

I'm not sure how much really turns on it to be honest; there are bigger issues, i think.

He's repeating/clarifying the 40 days thing that a lot in here went ballistic about. The idea floated by some that he was contracted 80 but worked 40 - thus rendering the brailsford statement not an actual, you know, lie - seems to be the point they are making too, and is internally consistent a such. not that it will move the needle in here...

 

[martinvickers]

I think the last paragraphs are startling - the admission, indeed, the complaint, about lack of testing. For Sky to even raise this, when they're having issues in terms of being clean, is odd, but possibly a good thing. Not that they've been tested so little, but that they are willing to be public about it.

It makes UCI/Doping authorities look very bad, tho.

 

[northstar]

I think Sky tried to play the nothing-to-see-here PR game with Leinders’ removal. Dismiss him privately but not announce it publicly until much later. Dangerous (and dishonest) move for a team that's supposed to be transparent.

Also why pay Leinders his full contract amount (if true)? He worked half the contract. Leinders lied to Sky management in his initial job interview and lied again when he denied any involvement in the Rabo doping programme. Contract not fulfilled. Good reasons not to pay him in full. Hush money??

Sky should sue Leinders for the damage he has done to their reputation as a clean team. I'm kidding (sort of).
.

 

[the sceptic]

They should fire Failsford for being the most incompetent DS in cycling.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

Unreal.

Most transparent and open team in cycling?

What Walsh didn't say speaks volumes. The last paragraph is beautiful irony...

 

[Cavendash]

Honest question, if Sky are on some big team wide doping program all year round, how are they getting away with it in todays enviroment? and what drugs are they most likely using?

 

[Ferminal]

What environment?

 

[oldcrank]

Actually the only thing that really strikes me about all of Team Sky is the fact that almost no journalist or DS wonders where the **** The Dog came from in the Vuelta '11. Two years before that he still needed training wheels to go in a straight line uphill, but suddenly he's one of the best GT-riders?

Dr. Peters convinced Froome that he had a 96 VO2 max.
The rest is history.

 

[manafana]

Hoping old walshe comes out when he finishes spending time with sky, me thinks hes biting his lip while hes still up their with the team

 

[bobbins]

Sorry did either of those guys come out voluntarily or did they get caught ?
Besides Millar? Who has Millar outed ?

Slightly OT, sorry. Millar apparently gave the UCI information on riders he thought dodgy. Mayo was one of those apparently.

 

[bobbins]

I think the last paragraphs are startling - the admission, indeed, the complaint, about lack of testing. For Sky to even raise this, when they're having issues in terms of being clean, is odd, but possibly a good thing. Not that they've been tested so little, but that they are willing to be public about it.

It makes UCI/Doping authorities look very bad, tho.

I wonder if the lack of testing is related to how fond Maquaid is of team sky?

 

[northstar]

I think the last paragraphs are startling - the admission, indeed, the complaint, about lack of testing. For Sky to even raise this, when they're having issues in terms of being clean, is odd, but possibly a good thing. Not that they've been tested so little, but that they are willing to be public about it.

It makes UCI/Doping authorities look very bad, tho.

Seven training camps without being tested.

Maybe there’s some truth to that crazy Tenerife thread after all....

 

[manafana]

Seven training camps without being tested.

Maybe there’s some truth to that crazy Tenerife thread after all....

To be fair its so remote that it must be a pain to test their, easily could limit the amount of none racing time someone can spend in remote locations for testing purposes.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

To be fair its so remote that it must be a pain to test their, easily could limit the amount of none racing time someone can spend in remote locations for testing purposes.

But so many teams over the years have held camps there, it might be logical to have some testers based there. As things stand, they can quite easily be monitored by any team that has somebody keeping tabs on who's coming in and out of the airport.

 

[peace in middle east]

.(snipped)
Mr Jan Van Eijden (suspended from the German sprint team for doping infringements - that duly ended his career back in the late 1990's to free him up for a coaching career as sprint tactics advisor). Now has a certificate that proves his naturally high levels of haematocrit of over 50%?
Even this being the case, I'm sure he was not employed for his charming looks, good grasp of the English language and his pretentious English accent - to adhere him to the British public.

What I read about van Eijden is that he got suspended in 1999 shortly before the Worlds 2000 because of suspicious (51,5 (!)) hematocrit values, but received a TUE from UCI, so he could start anyway (don't know if he actually started). Back then the case aroused some discussion about whether the 50 HTC limit should be upped(!).

http://www.berliner-zeitung.de/arch...hnrad-wm-ausgeschlossen,10810590,9724506.html
http://www.rp-online.de/sport/jan-van-eijden-ist-den-doping-makel-los-1.1546407

...
Reading the autobiographies of various GB and Sky riders, it's pretty clear that DB isn't a coach. Sir Chris refers frequently to Iain Dyer, Jan van Eijden and Scott Gardner, whilst Sir Brad refers to Sutton and Tim Kerrison...

Doesn't speak in Sir Chris' favor.

If i'm correct, Van Eijden was Victoria Pendleton's head coach in 2008 and 2012.

 

[bobbins]

Dace B is an administrator / businessman. He isn't a coach by any stretch of the imagination, he'll happily pick up coaching awards though.
Van Eijden and Dyer are sprint coaches
Gardner works at the EIS
Sutton is head coach

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

What I read about van Eijden is that he got suspended in 1999 shortly before the Worlds 2000 because of suspicious (51,5 (!)) hematocrit values, but received a TUE from UCI, so he could start anyway (don't know if he actually started). Back then the case aroused some discussion about whether the 50 HTC limit should be upped(!).

http://www.berliner-zeitung.de/arch...hnrad-wm-ausgeschlossen,10810590,9724506.html
http://www.rp-online.de/sport/jan-van-eijden-ist-den-doping-makel-los-1.1546407


Doesn't speak in Sir Chris' favor.

If i'm correct, Van Eijden was Victoria Pendleton's head coach in 2008 and 2012.

And how is this related to Sky? I am sure there is a British cycling thread.

 

[peace in middle east]

I just saw Van Eijden went on to become World Champion in 2000.
So a guy with 51,5 HTC value in 2000 and a TUE for it from UCI becomes Olympic Sprint Coach for the Great Britain Cycling Team.


Brailsford patting Van Eijden on the head.

More on Van Eijden & Fair play:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/aug/03/philip-hindes-british0cycling-crash

 

[peace in middle east]

And how is this related to Sky? I am sure there is a British cycling thread.

I looked for van Eijden, and this was the only thread that came up (apart from a thread in the road forum). Hence I posted here. The link between van Eijden & Brailsford might warrant more scrutiny. But moderators feel free to relocate of course.

 

[martinvickers]

They should fire Failsford for being the most incompetent DS in cycling.

Well, he isn't a DS for starters, so you might want to consider yourself for most incompetent call for sacking.

 

[martinvickers]

I wonder if the lack of testing is related to how fond Maquaid is of team sky?

Perhaps, but it seems mighty odd, if that is the case, to air it publically in a disapproving manner - why make your protector look bad?

 

[Cavendash]

What environment?

You know exactly what i mean, but hey posting that **** avoids the question doesn't it.