Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[the sceptic]

hoggy this is the sky thread ........not your patronising lecture continued

thanks!
Mark L

Mark L, I personally think sky arent going to sue anybody. It would be horrible PR for them.

This is just something the fans like to hide behind to avoid uncomfortable questions.

 

[ebandit]

thanks!

thanks! sceptic i'm sure team sky will give plenty for members to talk about riding their bikes

we don't need a rundown on legal protocol they 'might' be involved with

Mark L

 

[thehog]

hoggy this is the sky thread ........not your patronising lecture continued

thanks!
Mark L

The Sky thread it is indeed.

Which is why its concerning that Moore was issuing or threatening legal proceedings on behalf of Sky.

If he's not paid by them nor has the authority to do so then he shouldn't be misrepresenting himself.

Perhaps he is paid them? If so he need to declare he is and is acting on behalf of Sky.

If he truly was offended by Digger's comments then he needs to write a letter to Sky.

Moore has no place in doing this upon himself. And should apologise to Digger for the threat.

And that's what the pre-action complaint letter would flesh out. Moore would be able to state what his relation to Sky was and why he was hurt by what was said and detail the resulting loss of those comments.

Until then Moore should apologise. That would he the right thing to do.

 

[ebandit]

thanks

thanks! for the patronising reply

Mark L

 

[RownhamHill]

The Sky thread it is indeed.

Which is why its concerning that Moore was issuing or threatening legal proceedings on behalf of Sky.

If he's not paid by them nor has the authority to do so then he shouldn't be misrepresenting himself.

Perhaps he is paid them? If so he need to declare he is and is acting on behalf of Sky.

If he truly was offended by Digger's comments then he needs to write a letter to Sky.

Moore has no place in doing this upon himself. And should apologise to Digger for the threat.

And that's what the pre-action complaint letter would flesh out. Moore would be able to state what his relation to Sky was and why he was hurt by what was said and detail the resulting loss of those comments.

Until then Moore should apologise. That would he the right thing to do.

You've lost me again thehog. What has Sky got to do with Richard Moore trying to sue Digger because Digger had impugned Moore's professional integrity?

It's OK, I'll save some time for you by answering directly: absolutely nothing.

 

[Digger]

You've lost me again thehog. What has Sky got to do with Richard Moore trying to sue Digger because Digger had impugned Moore's professional integrity?

It's OK, I'll save some time for you by answering directly: absolutely nothing.

In which case I will make a fortune from the bikeradar thread on me - 8 pages!!! I am going to be rich!!!

Will Greymanrod represent me I wonder.

 

[thehog]

You've lost me again thehog. What has Sky got to do with Richard Moore trying to sue Digger because Digger had impugned Moore's professional integrity?

It's OK, I'll save some time for you by answering directly: absolutely nothing.

Trying to sue? He didn't even try to do anything.

He just threatened to sue.

Moore was so deeply offended he took the time to list out his issues on paper.

Then again he didn't.

Non-issue and just threats from Moore. Or censorship. However one chooses to look at it.

 

[the sceptic]

In which case I will make a fortune from the bikeradar thread on me - 8 pages!!! I am going to be rich!!!

Will Greymanrod represent me I wonder.

reading that thread makes me appreciate our skybots. they are nothing compared to the madness that goes on over there.

 

[RownhamHill]

Trying to sue? He didn't even try to do anything.

He just threatened to sue.

Moore was so deeply offended he took the time to list out his issues on paper.

Then again he didn't.

Non-issue and just threats from Moore. Or censorship. However one chooses to look at it.

Quite possibly all true.

Nothing to do with sky though. . .

 

[thehog]

Quite possibly all true.

.

That it is.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Quite possibly all true.

Nothing to do with sky though. . .

Except Moore works for Sky Sports... ;-)

http://www.skysports.com/opinion/0,25219,16299,00.html

 

[RownhamHill]

Except Moore works for Sky Sports... ;-)

http://www.skysports.com/opinion/0,25219,16299,00.html

Not really ;-)

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Not really ;-)

He writes on sport, specialising in cycling, and is a regular contributor to the Guardian, skysports.com, the Scotsman and Procycling magazine.

"Regular contributor" not the same as "works for"? He does get paid for his contributions yeah?

And he wrote, " SKY’S THE LIMIT: British Cycling’s Quest to Conquer the Tour de France (HarperCollins, 2011)."

The point being: any chance he'd be vocally defensive of the people who pay his bills? Or the team by the same name? He has a page at sky sports dedicated to his "journalism".

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Good grief. Talk about a love-in with DB:

Dave Brailsford has spearheaded the track cycling revolution in Britain, helping turn the nation into a superpower. He is also head of Team Sky and oversaw Bradley Wiggins’ victory at the 2012 Tour de France.
But who is the man behind the mask?
This is a portrait of one of the most enigmatic presences in world sport; an exploration of his background, a unique insight into the formation of his methodology and an analysis of how he has forged a new path in a sport riven with controversy.
Order your copy of Mastermind: How Dave Brailsford Re-invented the Wheel [authored by Richard Moore] now from Amazon.co.uk

http://richardmoore.co/?page_id=65

 

[RownhamHill]

"Regular contributor" not the same as "works for"? He does get paid for his contributions yeah?

And he wrote, " SKY’S THE LIMIT: British Cycling’s Quest to Conquer the Tour de France (HarperCollins, 2011)."

The point being: any chance he'd be vocally defensive of the people who pay his bills? Or the team by the same name? He has a page at sky sports dedicated to his "journalism".

Sigh.

Yes I'm sure he gets paid by Sky for the work he does for them.

But he is a freelance writer, who also gets work from other outlets. So he gets paid as a contractor. Being a self-employed contractor is not the same thing as working for a company in a number of very fundamental ways (sick leave, pension rights, tax regimes etc).

The most relevant of these differences, to this particular discussion, is that if Richard Moore did really want to take forward his threat of legal action against 'Digger', then as a self-employed free agent, this legal action would have nothing to do with Sky. A point I think thehog (the person who made the suggestion and I queried) seems to have conceded by omission.

Now I may well be wrong about this. If I am could you explain how Sky would be involved in any prospective legal action between Richard Moore and Digger for Digger allegedly (in the mind of Moore at least) impugning Moore's professional reputation? Really, I'm all ears.

The point being: Moore is a freelance journalist who relies on his reputation for work. So someone accusing him of being dishonest is his work - if that accusation is untrue - could possibly effect his standing as a journalist, and in turn effect his earning power, and then in turn could leave the accuser open to some kind of slander/libel suit (if of course the accusation is untrue. . .). So his threat to sue Digger isn't an example of him being vocally defensive of the people who pay his bills, but an example of him being vocally defensive of himself.

Please do try and keep up.

 

[del1962]

I think you give Digger too much credit thinking he could impunge someones reputation

 

[thehog]

I think you give Digger too much credit thinking he could impunge someones reputation

I'm sure Digger would know that "impunge" is not even a word.

I am giggling at my screen that you have no idea what you are talking about and using a word that doesn't exist nor has meaning.

 

[Digger]

I think you give Digger too much credit thinking he could impunge someones reputation

Well I was trying to impunge but realised I couldn't...but he did threaten me with court...feb 2013.

 

[GuyIncognito]

I'm sure Digger would know that "impunge" is not even a word.

I am giggling at my screen that you have no idea what you are talking about and using a word that doesn't exist nor has meaning.

Joke's on you, it's totally a word in romanian.
At least judging by Digger's posts I assume he's romanian, since clearly english can't be his first language.

 

[thehog]

Sigh.

The point being: Moore is a freelance journalist who relies on his reputation for work. So someone accusing him of being dishonest is his work - if that accusation is untrue - could possibly effect his standing as a journalist, and in turn effect his earning power, and then in turn could leave the accuser open to some kind of slander/libel suit (if of course the accusation is untrue. . .). So his threat to sue Digger isn't an example of him being vocally defensive of the people who pay his bills, but an example of him being vocally defensive of himself.

Please do try and keep up.

Sigh indeed.

I'd like to see Moore, a public figure, who published his work publicly, attempt to convince the court that his work wasn't open to criticism. Moore a writer whom uses a degree of "creative license" in his work and a style whereby he embellishes actual events so his writing is more entertaining to the reader. ie to sell more books/papers etc.

Therefore I'd see a good few hours/days lawyers from both sides attempting to establish the exact meaning of the word "dishonest".

Then finding how the specific tweet applied to specific passages in Moore's work, then how that tweet diversely impacted his ability to maintain income and or procur future work.

Digger would get on the stand and be asked what he meant by "dishonest". And he'd give a lengthy response of examples whereby Moore selectively choose to leave parts of the "actual" story out if his writings, embellish real life events, not ask questions in realtion to doping and that Moore would make his own interpretation on the events and thus that interpretation is open to fair critisim from the general public.

The court would tell Moore that he's wasting everyone's time and he should drop his suit against Digger and pay his costs or the court will find against with costs and a fine.

 

[thehog]

Joke's on you, it's totally a word in romanian.
At least judging by Digger's posts I assume he's romanian, since clearly english can't be his first language.

It's actually funny. I'm sitting next to a fluent Romanian speaker as I read this.

If one wanted to use the Romanian word they would have placed the accent above the I, additionally the word has an entirely different meaning.

Împunge in Romanian is to "***", "goad", "pinch.; I'm sure Del meant something else?

 

[Digger]

Joke's on you, it's totally a word in romanian.
At least judging by Digger's posts I assume he's romanian, since clearly english can't be his first language.

Sky fan by any chance!

 

[thehog]

Good grief. Talk about a love-in with DB:

This is just funny but odd.

Britain a country famous for its ******* journalists can only produced this type of merde in cycling?

What is wrong with them? Did they all of sudden get an invite into the Sky Bus and it's the first time they've seen a cycling team?

They all appear ga ga and in love. I just hope they all don't get their hearts broken.

 

[bobbins]

Richard Moore is Sky Sports choice of talking head on matters cycling, he won't bite the hand that feeds him. His story about bc / sky and Dave B might has well have been written by their PR machine he missed out so much obvious stuff.

Anyone who thinks he's a serious journalist should listen to his Humans Invent podcast with David Walsh. It was embarrassing.

He's a dirty teams wet dream!

 

[RownhamHill]

Sigh indeed.

I'd like to see Moore, a public figure, who published his work publicly, attempt to convince the court that his work wasn't open to criticism. Moore a writer whom uses a degree of "creative license" in his work and a style whereby he embellishes actual events so his writing is more entertaining to the reader. ie to sell more books/papers etc.

Therefore I'd see a good few hours/days lawyers from both sides attempting to establish the exact meaning of the word "dishonest".

Then finding how the specific tweet applied to specific passages in Moore's work, then how that tweet diversely impacted his ability to maintain income and or procur future work.

Digger would get on the stand and be asked what he meant by "dishonest". And he'd give a lengthy response of examples whereby Moore selectively choose to leave parts of the "actual" story out if his writings, embellish real life events, not ask questions in realtion to doping and that Moore would make his own interpretation on the events and thus that interpretation is open to fair critisim from the general public.

The court would tell Moore that he's wasting everyone's time and he should drop his suit against Digger and pay his costs or the court will find against with costs and a fine.

Yes, I think you're absolutely right on the potential merits of Moore's threatened law-suit - especially with regards to Moore showing that criticism from Digger could have led to loss of earnings or led to a reasonable person to think worse of Moore. Indeed this is probably why it didn't happen.

It's still not got anything to do with Sky though, has it?