Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[ianfra]

This is an Internet forum, no one here is prosecuting anyone.

If your beliefs are so strong then I suggest not reading here, or even the main media and only check official sites for your doping news.

Dr Maserati: I think all of you posting allegations as fact are guilty of persecuting people if not prosecuting them. The poster to whom you refer made a very valid and necessary point. I'd have no issue with all the garbage in the Clinic if posters were to be a bit more careful with their language. I've said many times that it is wrong to say that "rider A is doping", but OK to say "I think that rider A may be doping" or "It is my personal opinion that Rider A may be doping, but off course I have no proof". You are entitled to opinion, absolutely! But you are not entitled to libel people by saying that they are doping when in fact you have no idea whether they are or not - in spite of the babble you write which in your (collective) opinion counts as facts. Indeed if you were more careful with your words there would be a higher entertainment value in The Clinic!

 

[the sceptic]

Only one rider on the podium and not even a british one. Bad giro for sky.

Expecting at least 1-2 in the tour.

 

[thehog]

Dr Maserati: I think all of you posting allegations as fact are guilty of persecuting people if not prosecuting them. The poster to whom you refer made a very valid and necessary point. I'd have no issue with all the garbage in the Clinic if posters were to be a bit more careful with their language. I've said many times that it is wrong to say that "rider A is doping", but OK to say "I think that rider A may be doping" or "It is my personal opinion that Rider A may be doping, but off course I have no proof". You are entitled to opinion, absolutely! But you are not entitled to libel people by saying that they are doping when in fact you have no idea whether they are or not - in spite of the babble you write which in your (collective) opinion counts as facts. Indeed if you were more careful with your words there would be a higher entertainment value in The Clinic!

Posting "opinion" is very different from posting "fact".

Everybody is entitled to their opinion. Few are entitled to the facts.

 

[Franklin]

Dr Maserati: I think all of you posting allegations as fact are guilty of persecuting people if not prosecuting them.

And you want to hurt innocent people who happen to work in a company in which a suspected doper has invested... you don't even have the decency to wait for the B sample.

My oh my, how will you weasle out of this one eh? Your rant is for all here to see, so your veneer is all gone.. you are even more spiteful than anyone else.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

Posting "opinion" is very different from posting "fact".

Really?

Also I never said Sky are working with Ferrari. I said Wiggins is. Which he is. 100%.

Tell me more...

 

[thehog]

Really?



Tell me more...

Sure. Opinion.

In Wiggins case it's fact.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

In Wiggins case it's fact.

When do we see the proof? Or are you working with one of the anti-doping agencies and can't say anything? You said you worked at the AIS so you probably have contacts for that sort of thing, right?

 

[thehog]

When do we see the proof? Or are you working with one of the anti-doping agencies and can't say anything? You said you worked at the AIS so you probably have contacts for that sort of thing, right?

Awesome.

Never worked at the AIS.

Did Loads of drugs at the AIS though.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Dr Maserati: I think all of you posting allegations as fact are guilty of persecuting people if not prosecuting them. The poster to whom you refer made a very valid and necessary point. I'd have no issue with all the garbage in the Clinic if posters were to be a bit more careful with their language. I've said many times that it is wrong to say that "rider A is doping", but OK to say "I think that rider A may be doping" or "It is my personal opinion that Rider A may be doping, but off course I have no proof". You are entitled to opinion, absolutely! But you are not entitled to libel people by saying that they are doping when in fact you have no idea whether they are or not - in spite of the babble you write which in your (collective) opinion counts as facts. Indeed if you were more careful with your words there would be a higher entertainment value in The Clinic!

Thats an interesting charge - can you point to any of these "allegations" that I have passed off as a "fact"?

Or did you just do what you claim to resent?

 

[horsinabout]

Awesome.

Never worked at the AIS.

Did Loads of drugs at the AIS though.

Sure. Opinion.

In Wiggins case it's fact.

Well Hog you now got all of our attention?

 

[andy1234]

Awesome.

Never worked at the AIS.

Did Loads of drugs at the AIS though.

I have no doubt you did loads of drugs somewhere, you crazy kid.

Just in case you are confused, the AIS reffered to by other posters, is the Australian Institute of Sport, not the Affable Imbicile Society.

 

[horsinabout]

I have no doubt you did loads of drugs somewhere, you crazy kid.

Just in case you are confused, the AIS reffered to by other posters, is the Australian Institute of Sport, not the Affable Imbicile Society.

derrrrr and there is me thinking it stood for the Australian Institute of Suppliers. Suppliers of all manner of stuff, not to mention coaches to the GB track squad.

Also can supply you with a Phd in Track Sprinting, such as with Pendletons hubby to be....... Mr Gardener, who I understand has one.

Excuse me whilst I curl into a foetal position and rock for the next five hours.

 

[andy1234]

derrrrr and there is me thinking it stood for the Australian Institute of Suppliers. Suppliers of all manner of stuff, not to mention coaches to the GB track squad.

Also can supply you with a Phd in Track Sprinting, such as with Pendletons hubby to be....... Mr Gardener, who I understand has one.

Excuse me whilst I curl into a foetal position and rock for the next five hours.

Forget to log off Hoggy?

 

[andy1234]

derrrrr and there is me thinking it stood for the Australian Institute of Suppliers. Suppliers of all manner of stuff, not to mention coaches to the GB track squad.

Also can supply you with a Phd in Track Sprinting, such as with Pendletons hubby to be....... Mr Gardener, who I understand has one.

Excuse me whilst I curl into a foetal position and rock for the next five hours.

Forget to log off Hoggy?

 

[DirtyWorks]

Why would I do that? Existing news sites are perfectly adequate at reporting doping-related stories.

If the sports federation announces a positive. They don't process/announce all positives.

Also be aware, the template for reporting a positive is well used. It's a "bad athlete" story. Always.

Finally, the IOC or the federation's role in doping threatens the media property's access to athletes/events. The UCI assisting Armstrong barely got any traction and the UCI provided the incriminating evidence on at least two occassions! Why wasn't USA Cycling brought to task for Levi's second doping violation instead of pretending the first violation didn't happen? The list is endless. If you look at the procedural structure of WADA, you'll see that there is no direct method to address sports federations enabling doping.

In fact, they probably don't in a lot of cases. **** Pound might well be right. But I'm in favour of reinforcing those organisations charged with catching cheaters with more money and more experts with a genuine conviction to catch cheaters.

Pound is exactly right.
WADA needs the authority to open cases on their own with the sports federation relegated to athlete advocate. Do that before throwing more money at WADA. They'll need the money later to prosecute the traffic jam of AAF's if they had the authority to open cases.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

derrrrr and there is me thinking it stood for the Australian Institute of Suppliers. Suppliers of all manner of stuff, not to mention coaches to the GB track squad.

Also can supply you with a Phd in Track Sprinting, such as with Pendletons hubby to be....... Mr Gardener, who I understand has one.

Excuse me whilst I curl into a foetal position and rock for the next five hours.

Rocking horse!

This is a good point, however. The multicultural, internationalised flotsam and jetsam that flows through BC / Sky in terms of management and coaching staff, makes a mockery of the claim that the BC culture is clean.

BC is not British, that's for sure.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Rocking horse!

This is a good point, however. The multicultural, internationalised flotsam and jetsam that flows through BC / Sky in terms of management and coaching staff, makes a mockery of the claim that the BC culture is clean.

BC is not British, that's for sure.

Now, now doesn't that make a nice point! There's no boundary between BC and Sky.

Sure, there actually is one, you either are a Sky rider or not. But, once the Sky contract is signed, where does BC end and Sky begin? The head of BC operates the sky organization. What better "Get out of a doping positive with no positive" is there? Exactly like USA Cycling Development Fund and Postal Service. But, that's just a crazy coincidence recently replicated by Astana, and soon the French Cycling Federation.

 

[MaxVO2]

It is basically like this. Everyone with more than two brain cells can see the blatant Stephen Schumacher-like doping except for the Brits who refuse to believe the obvious, so the thread is one long exercise in fanboys trying to convince people black is white, truth is lie, and war is peace. The truly sad cases have convinced themselves that everyone else is crazy.

Beautiful! Phew...thank you Bro, because for a second while trying to skim these posts in this thread I thought the Sky fanboys were delusional.

...Now I know they are.

 

[MaxVO2]

The main thing driving this thread is ridiculous transformation of a grand tour squad and the replies looking for any excuse possible to disregard Sky's transformation.

My gift to you and the other poster looking for a summary: http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=1219094&postcount=19119 I edited it a bit. I dropped some boring business-side allegations and added Wiggo's past performances against Armstrong.

Nice! Thank you for your public service gift. You just composed my thoughts.

 

[horsinabout]

Rocking horse!

This is a good point, however. The multicultural, internationalised flotsam and jetsam that flows through BC / Sky in terms of management and coaching staff, makes a mockery of the claim that the BC culture is clean.

BC is not British, that's for sure.

Tell me someting I don't know Dear Wiggo!

 

[horsinabout]

Originally Posted by thehog
Posting "opinion" is very different from posting "fact".

Originally Posted by thehog
Also I never said Sky are working with Ferrari. I said Wiggins is. Which he is. 100%.

100% facts? and Walsh?......the big troll extraordinaire.

 

[ebandit]

fact?

Sure. Opinion.

In Wiggins case it's fact.

so it's fact that wiggo is working with ferarri?

seems complete bs to me

please either validate or stop repeating your lies

Mark L

 

[horsinabout]

so it's fact that wiggo is working with ferarri?

seems complete bs to me

please either validate or stop repeating your lies

Mark L

Tell him about British libel laws.

 

[Matty_Tucks]

Wiggins working with Ferari = Total unqualified lie.

 

[ebandit]

no need

Tell him about British libel laws.

no need members will see hoggy for what they are.............a stirrer

who deserves to be mocked

Mark L