Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[JimmyFingers]

Because they don't need to outsource their PR.

Quote of the day

 

[Benotti69]

Mike Kaltoft Jensen ‏@MikeKaltoft 6h
Apparently, it was Geert Leinders who helped Rasmussen cover-up his suspicious values

Wonder was he doing it for Sky

 

[Grupetto1]

Why arent Sky members of MPCC?

Im sure brailsford has said that the rules of the MPCC would actually be softening some of their antidoping policies

 

[sniper]

Wonder was he doing it for Sky

luckily he got fired before he could lay his hands on any of those young, unblemished sky diamonds

 

[Netserk]

Im sure brailsford has said that the rules of the MPCC would actually be softening some of their antidoping policies

What's stopping them from joining whilst still being harsher?

 

[thehog]

Wonder was he doing it for Sky

Mike Kaltoft Jensen ‏@MikeKaltoft 6h
Apparently, it was Geert Leinders who helped Rasmussen cover-up his suspicious values

80 days? Hardly at any races.

i think he role was well defined at Sky.

Never tested positive

 

[Netserk]

80 days? Hardly at any races.

I thought you earlier posted a pattern of which races he attended in 2012?

 

[thehog]

I thought you earlier posted a pattern of which races he attended in 2012?

My theory is he was not "the" doping doc at Sky.

That he was there to ensure no one gets snared and limits are in the bio range and never test positive.

 

[martinvickers]

What's stopping them from joining whilst still being harsher?

I wonder if joining would place them in mild legal difficulties in the event of wanting to sack someone? - "legitimate expectation" is the phrase that comes to mind. Just an idle thought.

 

[Netserk]

My theory is he was not "the" doping doc at Sky.

That he was there to ensure no one gets snared and limits are in the bio range and never test positive.

Then why did he attend to most of the big races (except the Tour) in 2012, and why do you say 'hardly any races', when you already knew which races he attended?

 

[Netserk]

I wonder if joining would place them in mild legal difficulties in the event of wanting to sack someone? - "legitimate expectation" is the phrase that comes to mind. Just an idle thought.

I'm not sure I understand

Like the sacking of Rogers???

 

[thehog]

Then why did he attend to most of the big races (except the Tour) in 2012, and why do you say 'hardly any races', when you already knew which races he attended?

He didn't attend many. And not the Tour, Giro or any of the classics (bar GW).

Splitting hairs here really.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

What's stopping them from joining whilst still being harsher?

This.
It was the oddest thing to claim they would not join MPCC because it had a more lenient stance on certain issues.

 

[del1962]

So if they joined the MPCC it would mean they are not doping

 

[martinvickers]

I'm not sure I understand

Like the sacking of Rogers???

It's an idle thought, i haven't fleshed it out entirely myself, but if their riders and staff are bound in the first instance by an internal policy document (the 'thing' they signed), then joining MPCC, which in some small issues has a slightly softer policy might, might, be seen as 'replacing' their internal doc for contractual purposes.

More likely (occam/Ocham) they just think any pros are outweighed by cons of 'guilt by association'. can't see MPCC have any 'powers' that would strand Sky. Seems mostly PR/management disagreement. I don't get the feeling Sky are overly impressed with MPCC in theory or practice. Seems silly, but can't really see any more sinister reason - if they're b*****ing, the could just as easily b***** inside as outside.

 

[Netserk]

It's an idle thought, i haven't fleshed it out entirely myself, but if their riders and staff are bound in the first instance by an internal policy document (the 'thing' they signed), then joining MPCC, which in some small issues has a slightly softer policy might, might, be seen as 'replacing' their internal doc for contractual purposes.

Huh? That seems extremely unlikely to me.

 

[leon7766]

Another moth and nothing

 

[martinvickers]

Huh? That seems extremely unlikely to me.

You haven't seen as many messy industrial tribunals as I have

I'm not saying it's at all likely; it was, as i said, an idle thought. I still think more likely Sky just don't see any benefit, and perhaps don't much like the others much...It's not a secret sky and some of the other teams don't always rub together that well.

 

[leon7766]

Another month and nothing

 

[Benotti69]

Wonder why Sky hired Doctor Geert Leinders.....

His reputation by word of mouth amongst the anglo saxons is good

 

[the sceptic]

Amazing coincidence that someone that knows this much about doping happened to find himself at the cleanest team in the peloton isnt it.

 

[thehog]

Wonder why Sky hired Doctor Geert Leinders.....

His reputation by word of mouth amongst the anglo saxons is good

I'm not following. What does EPO have to do with saddle sores?

 

[the sceptic]

I'm not following. What does EPO have to do with saddle sores?

Leinders was doping riders and connecting them with dealers against his will. All he ever wanted to do was to treat saddle sores, but unfortunately it was a dark era of the sport so he had no choice.

Luckily though, this was a mistake that he did more than 10 years ago in a different time. He has done nothing but treat saddle sores since.

 

[Benotti69]

I'm not following. What does EPO have to do with saddle sores?

Leinders checked the saddles to make sure riders weren't trying to sneek epo into their marginal gains

 

[mroli74]

This.
It was the oddest thing to claim they would not join MPCC because it had a more lenient stance on certain issues.

I think this is probably because if they join MPCC, they are lumped in with the other MPCC teams. Including those who take a "more lenient" view of things including the more lenient MPCC stance on certain issues. They are about control and can control what they do, but not what Astana (for example) are doing (they won't hire a convicted doper) for example.