• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

Page 1107 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
Rod, ripping out Virenques photo while kissing Simpson's ***, Ellingworth.

These fakes are worse than the likes of Bruyneel, Riis, Lefevere and Saronni....
 

martinvickers

BANNED
Oct 15, 2012
4,903
0
0
Visit site
The Hitch said:
Ricco. But let's just call it a non corporate speak personality and praise him for honesty like we do with wiggo.

Actually, let's not. Let's stick with things aren't strawmen. Given Wiggins is known to actually support a women's team, and has called for Sky to field one in addition, it's absolutely farcical to pull Ricco's misogyny into the conversation.


You are acting as if Wiggins attacked Landis cos he was a doper. That's not what happened though.

I said, and suggested, nothing of the sort.

Strawman, yet again.

What is your f***ing problem that you keep trying to put words into people's mouths?

Landis may have been all those things

May?? May?? That's pretty pathetic of you right there, Hitch.

but what you ignore is that wiggos attack on him was not in defense of clean cycling or an attack on doping. It was in defense of Lance Armstrong a man who was all the bad things you say about Landis and worse. Wiggins attacked Landis for breaking omerta.

I don't ignore it, not at all. I just don't care that much, because frankly, I hoped, and hope, both Landis and Armstrong fry. You know, if Wiggins supported Armstrong, he supported a doping, cheating c***. If he supported Landis, he supported a doping, cheating c***. Makes no difference to me. I just want rid of doping cheating c****. When you can find some actual evidence Wiggins, or anyone else, is among those doping cheatring c****, I'll want rid of them too.

I don't pick 'nice' dopers to like, Hitch. I accept not all dopers are the type of sociopath that Armstrong was. But Landis ain't one of the 'good' guys.

That is why we all see his attack on Landis as such a big deal. Because he was doing it in defense of lance. Everyone who was anti doping sided with landis and everyone who was pro omerta sided with lance.

"we all". Take a poll, of that, did you? OR is that just you assuming everybody 'nice' must agree with you?

It's pretty simple really. The man who won 7 tdfs doped and bullied anyone who spoke out for clean cycling gets called out by a former teammate as a doper. Wiggins, who knew lance doped takes his side anyway. And you claim this is irrelevant?

No. I claimed I don't care. That I found other things about Sky and Wiggins much more important, and worth worrying about. Not the same, not the same at all. If you can't see the difference, that's your problem. Strawmen are your speciality, Hitch. I don't have to tolerate them.

Frankly, let's cut to the chase here. IF, at the time Wiggins had sided with the proven doper over the strongly suspected doper, he'd likely have been crucified for it. The common sense answer was not to support Landis. And no-one could ever accuse Wiggins of being brave.

Of course, this rather ignores the fact that, just as it was ex colleagues of Armstrong who informed Wiggins that he was dirty, it was also ex colleagues of Landis (Barry) who informed him Landis was bitter, had lost it and was drunk all the time.

Maybe it would be better if ex colleagues took their f***ing stories to WADA in the first place, rather than in an English ex-trackie.
 
Mar 25, 2013
5,389
0
0
Visit site
Freddythefrog said:
I enjoyed that one so much. You obviously don't know Herety.

My "moment" of the day - Herety being held up as the determinant and sage spokesman for honourable behaviour.

[John Hartson appears on BBC TV as a football pundit and sage. It amazes me what pea sized brains and zero memory capacity Sports TV producers have. Try asking Eyal Berkovic for an opinion on Hartson, or the photographer that captured the training ground incident. Bringing the game into disrepute was what he was charged with. Berkovic could not eat anything for two days. Assault and a jail term were more like what was required. Just cos they appear on the telly dosn't mean a jot.]

But I have to say, thank you so much for the image.

Congratulations on the most ridiculous of comparisons.

I do know what happened with Hartson and Berkovic. Hartson used to do a lot of work on Setanta that was in existence years ago in the UK and he's still an odd time does a bit over here for the Irish version. I don't find much issue with his opinions today and the sins of his past doesn't mean his analysis of the game now should be any less wrong now as a result. While we're at it, Roy Keane's accurate analysis on ITV last Saturday for Arsenal v Wigan can't be taken serious due to his Alfe Inge Haaland tackle.:rolleyes:

Take your agenda with Hartson(and that's what it is, no relation to the topic of the thread) somewhere else.
 
Jul 21, 2012
9,860
3
0
Visit site
Lets get back to the topic at hand.

If marginal gains is real, why doesnt it work on the riders you would think it would work on?

Like someone who has been riding for euskaltel their entire career. Seems like a perfect example of someone who should benefit greatly from marginal gains.
 

EnacheV

BANNED
Jul 7, 2013
1,441
0
0
Visit site
the sceptic said:
Lets get back to the topic at hand.

If marginal gains is real, why doesnt it work on the riders you would think it would work on?

Like someone who has been riding for euskaltel their entire career. Seems like a perfect example of someone who should benefit greatly from marginal gains.

Nieve's 10th in TA already beats all his 2013 except 12th in TdF. And it's just the beginning, he will win Vuelta in a couple of years.
 
martinvickers said:
Actually, let's not. Let's stick with things aren't strawmen. Given Wiggins is known to actually support a women's team, and has called for Sky to field one in addition, it's absolutely farcical to pull Ricco's misogyny into the conversation.



I said, and suggested, nothing of the sort.

Strawman, yet again.

What is your f***ing problem that you keep trying to put words into people's mouths?


May?? May?? That's pretty pathetic of you right there, Hitch.

I don't ignore it, not at all. I just don't care that much, because frankly, I hoped, and hope, both Landis and Armstrong fry. You know, if Wiggins supported Armstrong, he supported a doping, cheating c***. If he supported Landis, he supported a doping, cheating c***. Makes no difference to me. I just want rid of doping cheating c****. When you can find some actual evidence Wiggins, or anyone else, is among those doping cheatring c****, I'll want rid of them too.

I don't pick 'nice' dopers to like, Hitch. I accept not all dopers are the type of sociopath that Armstrong was. But Landis ain't one of the 'good' guys.



"we all". Take a poll, of that, did you? OR is that just you assuming everybody 'nice' must agree with you?



No. I claimed I don't care. That I found other things about Sky and Wiggins much more important, and worth worrying about. Not the same, not the same at all. If you can't see the difference, that's your problem. Strawmen are your speciality, Hitch. I don't have to tolerate them.

Frankly, let's cut to the chase here. IF, at the time Wiggins had sided with the proven doper over the strongly suspected doper, he'd likely have been crucified for it. The common sense answer was not to support Landis. And no-one could ever accuse Wiggins of being brave.

Of course, this rather ignores the fact that, just as it was ex colleagues of Armstrong who informed Wiggins that he was dirty, it was also ex colleagues of Landis (Barry) who informed him Landis was bitter, had lost it and was drunk all the time.

Maybe it would be better if ex colleagues took their f***ing stories to WADA in the first place, rather than in an English ex-trackie.

Good day Martin? :eek:
 
Even more fun.

gooner said:
Congratulations on the most ridiculous of comparisons.

I do know ..............
Take your agenda with Hartson(and that's what it is, no relation to the topic of the thread) somewhere else.

How long was Herety GB team manager ? Did you ever have to experience him first hand ?

In the public domain - he was sacked for taking part of the bribe for Wegelius and Southam to ride for Italy.

This is nothing about what tactics were good or bad in a race [or a football match] - the point being made was "because Herety said Ellingworth would not be associated with drugs, it was somehow given gravitas." When you have a guy who is the only GB team manager from any sport, to my knowledge, to have been sacked, whilst still in post, for bribe taking, being held up as the source of wisdom, in an issue with ethics at the heart, is not a sound basis for progress.

The fact that the point was made, was testament to the power of the media image and the disinfecting balm brought by regular popular appearances.

Herety like Riis should not be allowed anywhere near the sport and that they remain connected, simply because they have no other life and keep on showing up, is a reflection of why problems remain with the sport. That the media pander to these individuals is just as bad as the BBC hiring a guy who would assault a team-mate.

"It's sport so we can suspend reality." No, these are criminals who should be treated as criminals.
 

martinvickers

BANNED
Oct 15, 2012
4,903
0
0
Visit site
Digger said:
Good day Martin? :eek:

ha-ha, Digger. Fair point.

It's sometimes hard to express on screen the irritation one feels with certain things. Landis lauding is one of them for me. I am DELIGHTED he took down Armstrong, and even more Bruyneel - I loathe Bruyneel, he's the absolute worst in my eyes - But I just can't have this sainthood for Landis; he literally did the right thing when it was the only thing left to do, having done ALL the wrong things. There's no moral courage in that.

Double agents are a necessity of war - but they are seldom heroic persons. Frankly, they're often scum; it's how they get the job.

As for Wiggins, he's a decent cyclist, as he showed yesterday. He's also, without equivocation, an utter sh!thead, on a regular basis. He may be a doper too; if he is, I hope to God he is slung out of the peloton in disgrace.

But I have to be honest, of all the things to get genuinely concerned or suspicious about with Wiggins/Sky - Leinders, Yates, De Jongh, Henao - his (poor) choice between Armstrong and Landis is SO far down my list I couldn't really five a toss. I want Wiggins taken down if, and/or because, he's a doper, and if so, taken down hard. I couldn't care less if he took one cheating ****s side over another cheating c***. I don't give it anything like the value as evidence others do, because frankly it proves only that he wanted to stay on the right side of the wrong person. Sorry, if that offends, but thems the breaks.

edit: p.s. if you can think of a better phrase than cheating c*** for Armstrong, I'm all ears. ;-)
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Visit site
Hugh Januss said:
He got caught. You can bet all these guys are a whole lot more careful any time they open their mouths than in the "good old days".
he got caught alright.
but MV somehow seems to despise bruyneel more than he despises Brailsford, and I wonder why.
Did Bruyneel do anything Braislford didn't do? (other than getting caught)
 
martinvickers said:
But I have to be honest, of all the things to get genuinely concerned or suspicious about with Wiggins/Sky - Leinders, Yates, De Jongh, Henao - his (poor) choice between Armstrong and Landis is SO far down my list I couldn't really five a toss. I want Wiggins taken down if, and/or because, he's a doper, and if so, taken down hard. I couldn't care less if he took one cheating ****s side over another cheating c***. I don't give it anything like the value as evidence others do, because frankly it proves only that he wanted to stay on the right side of the wrong person. Sorry, if that offends, but thems the breaks.

What a load of bull. Amazing how you continue to distort reality to defend Wiggins.

Wiggins didn't choose between two dopers. Wiggins didn't choose to stay on the right side of the wrong person.

Wiggins knew for a fact that Armstrong doped, and that Landis was telling the truth. Yet he felt the need to pile **** on Floyd and praise a rider he knew doped. He chose omerta over anti-doping.
 
martinvickers said:
I don't give it anything like the value as evidence others do, because frankly it proves only that he wanted to stay on the right side of the wrong person. Sorry, if that offends, but thems the breaks.

edit: p.s. if you can think of a better phrase than cheating c*** for Armstrong, I'm all ears. ;-)
.
Stay on the right side of a person? Since when does staying on the right side of a person require you to spend 3 years holding them up as the greatest thing to happen in cycling.

That is a disgusting sleight of hand wigo fanboys try to play. Staying on the right side of someone is when you are repulsed by their behaviour and want to speak out against them, biting your tongue and not saying anything.

To stand up and say the exact opposite, and praising them for 3 years when almost no one else in the peloton is, when allegedly deep down you hate them, is absolutely NOT - "staying on their right side":rolleyes:
 
Wiggins and lance - been covered already.

Then Wiggins and Contador.


For a guy who was outdone for a podium place by these guys, who he knew full well were doping, he was very tranquilo for a 'clean' rider.


BTW it's one thing to want to stay on the right side of someone. It's another thing to tell everyone you love that guy. And to deride someone you know full well is telling the truth.


Wiggins and Omerta.
 

TRENDING THREADS