Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[spetsa]

My social circle includes past and present continental and domestic pros, olympic and pro tour coaches and team managers, sports journalists, leisure cyclists, amateur racers, officials and plain old civilians.

My social circle is more than comprehensive enough to gain a fair opinion.

My social circle is almost the same

I call bullsh!t on these statements

lolz, now without the people you follow on twitter.

I did

 

[Darryl Webster]

"So Paul, why is it that other journalists are able to go about their business, without being universally disliked, by just about anyone they have come into contact with?"

"Don't you think you may get better results, by displaying just a semblance of social skill?"

Just asking....

" I think your getting me confused with a publicist", replied Paul,

 

[Escarabajo]

This is horrible. US Postal repeat all over again. And the worst part is having to cope with their fans. They just recently saw or heard what happened to Armstrong and US Postal and still come here to defend SKY. Unbelievable!!

 

[Ripper]

Wow, there are some interesting and intense responses about Kimmage's comments. Interestingly, it is a question a lot of folks on this forum and others have asked - why/how has Sky literally transformed a number of riders, while someone who was heralded to be uber strong, the next big thing, not only has not been transformed, but has actually not even performed to basic expectations and most of the time is purely a dom? And BTW, I'm pretty sure the question had a few layers to it

It's a very good question to ask and one that Sky leadership totally blew in their response. The latter is not Kimmage's fault.

The process/venue was not the best as it definitely results in collateral damage, namely EBH's feelings on the matter. Also, Kimmage is a knownl entity and disliked by more than a few folks. This said, EBH is a professional athlete and is paid quite well. This type of question comes with the territory - why have you not performed? Why have others? It's asked of lots of athletes deemed talented. Sports is the ultimate business, it's all about your performance.

Should be interesting to see if any more curve ball questions are asked of Sky and what the response is.

 

[Dazed and Confused]

Gotta say Froome's mission does look harmful. Hopefully he will come out of this in relatively good health.

 

[martinvickers]

Wow, there are some interesting and intense responses about Kimmage's comments. Interestingly, it is a question a lot of folks on this forum and others have asked - why/how has Sky literally transformed a number of riders, while someone who was heralded to be uber strong, the next big thing, not only has not been transformed, but has actually not even performed to basic expectations and most of the time is purely a dom? And BTW, I'm pretty sure the question had a few layers to it

It's a very good question to ask and one that Sky leadership totally blew in their response. The latter is not Kimmage's fault.

The process/venue was not the best as it definitely results in collateral damage, namely EBH's feelings on the matter. Also, Kimmage is a knownl entity and disliked by more than a few folks. This said, EBH is a professional athlete and is paid quite well. This type of question comes with the territory - why have you not performed? Why have others? It's asked of lots of athletes deemed talented. Sports is the ultimate business, it's all about your performance.

Should be interesting to see if any more curve ball questions are asked of Sky and what the response is.

i'm not sure why 'both' sides in here are so b*tthurt

Kimmage can ask and say what he likes, he's entitled to think Sky are a team of dopers. doesn't mean he's right, but he's entitled to think and say it. Sky aren't immune from criticism.

Kennaugh or any other cyclist can respond how he likes. He's just as entitled to think Kimmage is an ars*hole. doesn't mean he's right, but he's entitled to think and say it. Kimmage isn't immune from criticism.

All the other fangirls on both sides, grow up ffs.

 

[Zam_Olyas]

i'm not sure why 'both' sides in here are so b*tthurt

Kimmage can ask and say what he likes, he's entitled to think Sky are a team of dopers. doesn't mean he's right, but he's entitled to think and say it. Sky aren't immune from criticism.

Kennaugh or any other cyclist can respond how he likes. He's just as entitled to think Kimmage is an ars*hole. doesn't mean he's right, but he's entitled to think and say it. Kimmage isn't immune from criticism.

All the other fangirls on both sides, grow up ffs.

Or You will spank us, daddy?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Nope, you misread, made an assumption, tried to make s mart point that wasn't so smart, and are now trying to cover your ***.

I stated that a story was up within minutes. It was. I was right.

You then asked, and I quote



- my emphasis, but your wording.

You did NOT ask how long passed between tweet and story. You asked how long it took me to see it. I answered, quite directly.

Less than ten. Which it was. I was right. Again.

Now, how about you show just enough humility to accept you got this one wrong, and walk away with a bit of dignity, ok?

I am not wrong.

I did not need to ask how long between tweet and publication because you had stated this already:

Em, yes they did. I was reading an article via google translate within minutes of the Kennagh tweet.

That is why I then asked how many minutes it took for you to read it.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I'd like to agree with you but I can't. I just don't think it was a neutral question. Deeply inside I believe he was referring to the Sky "Program". IMHO.

Just to clarify - I agree PK was angling about a program, or PEDs in his compare and contrast with EBH.
It was the conspiracy that it was an attempt to break EBH to reveal a secret program -that he is missing out on - that I found far fetched.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I call bullsh!t on these statements



I did

I have no problem if you do.

Andy offered his "social circle" and I did not query it, because firstly I believe him.
And quite frankly I would expect many here to be involved at different levels as the cycling world is quite small.

 

[spetsa]

I have no problem if you do.

Andy offered his "social circle" and I did not query it, because firstly I believe him.
And quite frankly I would expect many here to be involved at different levels as the cycling world is quite small.

I do not doubt this at all, but the number of people with involvement at nearly all levels, such as both of you had stated, directly and implicitly, is very small. If you consider yourself part of this inner circle based solely on your social media exploits, I wish you and those close to you luck. If I am wrong about my assumption, I apologize.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I do not doubt this at all, but the number of people with involvement at nearly all levels, such as both of you had stated, directly and implicitly, is very small. If you consider yourself part of this inner circle based solely on your social media exploits, I wish you and those close to you luck. If I am wrong about my assumption, I apologize.

Neither Andy or I did that.
That was a strawman introduced by someone else.

 

[martinvickers]

I am not wrong.

I did not need to ask how long between tweet and publication because you had stated this already:


That is why I then asked how many minutes it took for you to read it.

Don't lie. You'll get caught out.

You asked me how long it took me to read it. I said less than ten minutes. you then replied...

it was more than 10 minutes, Kennaughs tweet was at 17:12 CET, Tv2 piece was not posted until 17:32 (assuming CET) is 20 minutes.

You expressly tried to contradict me, and tried to use the length of time between the tweet and the article to do so. A length of time that was in fact irrelevent to the previous answer to the previous question - how long did it take ME to read the article from first looking for the info.

You misread what I wrote because you were trying to make a smart point, but it turned out not to be so smart. It's blatantly obvious. You made a wrong assumption.

And you don't, it appears have the humility or honesty to admit it, but rather try to vortex your way out of being caught bang to rights.

Grow up, Dr. Anybody can make a mistake. But being too proud to admit it is a greater failing.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Don't lie. You'll get caught out.

You asked me how long it took me to read it. I said less than ten minutes. you then replied...



You expressly tried to contradict me, and tried to use the length of time between the tweet and the article to do so. A length of time that was in fact irrelevent to the previous answer to the previous question - how long did it take ME to read the article from first looking for the info.

You misread what I wrote because you were trying to make a smart point, but it turned out not to be so smart. It's blatantly obvious. You made a wrong assumption.

And you don't, it appears have the humility or honesty to admit it, but rather try to vortex your way out of being caught bang to rights.

Grow up, Dr. Anybody can make a mistake. But being too proud to admit it is a greater failing.

Lots of petty ad hominens in there - just to end this and show I am not lying, here is the full exchange:

Who are the Sky haters??

And I first noticed a lot of anguish from Sky fans on twitter because of Keannaughs tweet - even though at the time no-one knew what Kimmage had said or done.
Rapha should design a kelvar gillet for the Sky fans.

Anyone with a decent grasp of google could have found out pretty quickly - the Norwegian press went big on it within minutes...

No, they did not. And anyone I asked on twitter what was it that Kimmage said had no idea and were reacting to Kennaughs tweet.

Em, yes they did. I was reading an article via google translate within minutes of the Kennagh tweet.

The people I read and asked had no idea what Kimmage had said, none. They reacted solely to Kennaughs tweet.
How many minutes did it take for you to see it?

Less than 10. and I wasn't trying all that hard, because i was actually looking up whether Brian Gregan was running tonight.

A simple News google for, if memory serves kimmage+sky+press and a past hour filter did the trick instantly. The main hit was a norwegian news site which had a rather mournful picture of Eddy, Kimmage and the header : kimmage : Sky ruined Eddy. Google translate did the needful.

You can stop digging.

 

[US Patent Exploding Cyclist]

Both of you are a$$holes for high jacking this thread to have a pi$$ing contest.

How neither of you has been banned or at the very least warned by an admin is beyond me.

No one cares which one of you is right or wrong, keep it out of the thread.

 

[spetsa]

Both of you are a$$holes for high jacking this thread to have a pi$$ing contest.

How neither of you has been banned or at the very least warned by an admin is beyond me.

No one cares which one of you is right or wrong, keep it out of the thread.

Agreed 100%. On the other hand, be careful what you wish for. I am sure a mod is lurking right around the corner to actually participate and make it a three ring circus.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Both of you are a$$holes for high jacking this thread to have a pi$$ing contest.

How neither of you has been banned or at the very least warned by an admin is beyond me.

No one cares which one of you is right or wrong, keep it out of the thread.

While I don't wish to derail a thread - I am not going to sit back and be called a liar.

Did you report any of the offending posts?
And, if you wish to go along the high road, probably best not to use cuss words and ad hominens - they can result in bans.

 

[BroDeal]

While I don't wish to derail a thread - I am not going to sit back and be called a liar.

I'm sure Vickers will come with some sort of rational for playing the victim.

 

[martinvickers]

While I don't wish to derail a thread - I am not going to sit back and be called a liar.

Did you report any of the offending posts?
And, if you wish to go along the high road, probably best not to use cuss words and ad hominens - they can result in bans.

Having read the thread, I'm willing to concede you merely made an honest mistake, rather than lied. But you still made it. I'll leave it at that. My point is clearly made.

That aside, if anyoneelse is unhappy with the posts, feel free to report them. Admins and mods can step in if they please; the rest of your opinions matter not a jot.

 

[BroDeal]

That aside, if anyoneelse is unhappy with the posts, feel free to report them. Admins and mods can step in if they please; the rest of your opinions matter not a jot.

Yeah, sure. "Matter not a jot." That is why you just spent post after post arguing over it then used the childish tactic of trying to get in a parting shot when ending the argument. Grow up.

 

[spetsa]

Yeah, sure. "Matter not a jot." That is why you just spent post after post arguing over it then used the childish tactic of trying to get in a parting shot when ending the argument. Grow up.

He is auditioning for a moderator spot.

 

[andy1234]

I call bullsh!t on these statements

Call BS all you like. How about we discuss this via PM, and if you are proven wrong, the deal is that you come back on here with the following statement "I am andy1234's b***h, and am a very naughty girl"

OK?

 

[spetsa]

Call BS all you like. How about we discuss this via PM, and if you are proven wrong, the deal is that you come back on here with the following statement "I am andy1234's b***h, and am a very naughty girl"

OK?

Real mature. This thread has turned into a moderator audition on many fronts.

 

[andy1234]

Real mature. This thread has turned into a moderator audition on many fronts.

You called BS. I'm giving you the opportunity to test your theory.
Don't worry, you can replace the word B1**h with gimp if its more palatable.

 

[cocteau_ireland]

Tragically, I just read the last ten pages. As I write this have no idea what the chuff this thread is about!