Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[Don't be late Pedro]

Please stop trolling.

Twisting my post into meaning something it didnt is a clear violation of the forum rules.

All you do is troll and accuse other people of trolling.

Hoggy could be entertaining once in a while.
Ok, he was entertaining once.
Maybe.

Anyway, at least he tried.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

Daryl, had some misunderstanding with the laws, last time i heard.

Ironically, it was doping related I believe.

 

[neineinei]

And being the SKY thread, how has this one from a Sky rider not been noticed or mentioned yet???

"Birger Hungerholdt told Verdens Gang that Boasson Hagen is happy at Team Sky but listed the criteria any new team has to offer his client. These included peace of mind, good teammates, an English speaking team, a good programme and the chance to ride for himself in some races."

'a good programme' is a sloppy translation of 'et godt løpsprogram'
løp=race

http://www.vg.no/sport/sykkel/boasson-hagen-med-sky-avklaring-foer-tour-de-france/a/10139357/

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

'a good programme' is a sloppy translation of 'et godt løpsprogram'
løp=race

http://www.vg.no/sport/sykkel/boasson-hagen-med-sky-avklaring-foer-tour-de-france/a/10139357/

It would be somewhat surprising if he blatantly put 'A good doping programme' as criteria into the media.

Is 'peace of mind' a reasonable translation? I am more curious as to what this alludes to.

 

[Archibald]

Maybe because it doesn't mean what you want it to mean ...

who said what I wanted it to mean? or that I want it to mean anything?
obvious context for the Clinic and thought it'd have been mentioned at some point - most likely tongue-in-cheek at least...

 

[42x16ss]

Ironically, it was doping related I believe.

Yes, he was busted with a very small amount of marijuana which he proved was for personal, medicinal use IIRC

 

[JimmyFingers]

The marijuana was for medicinal use, but it wasn't a small amount, it was about seven or more plants being grown IIRC. But nothing morally wrong with what he was doing, and he came onto the forum to explain it to us, which was appreciated.

And even if it was recreational, there still isn't anything morally wrong with it.

 

[Netserk]

Is 'peace of mind' a reasonable translation? I am more curious as to what this alludes to.

Safety/security

A little further down:

I trygghet ligger også økonomien til det laget han eventuelt vil signere for. Hans første proffkontrakt ble skrevet med tyske T-Mobile, like før sponsoren trakk seg og hele laget ble kastet ut i en usikker fremtid.

So it's important that the economy of the team is secure. He probably wants a three-year contract so his future will be secure and he can focus on the road (my take on it).

 

[martinvickers]

During his time at Ambrosio whilst racing in the UK. Can't be any more specific than that as it would link directly to individuals who have no wish to be named.

I find it hard to believe that no one here has any knowledge of the UK scene in the 90s and what used to go one there. There are rider(s) who used to rattle and have had at least one positive covered up who are now part of the establishment and seen as a victim of those nasty european / us dopers. Anyone with half a brain or an insight into UK racing in the 90s will know about this. It won't take long to find out either.

No DM received from Martin yet. I won't hold my breath. I have a feeling he is close to Sky / Team Sky and is keen on finding out who knows what so that they can take appropriate steps.

I didn't DM you because, to be honest, I've no more desire to be s****ed to in private than in public. When you feel like naming the cheat, do let us know, but forgive us if we don't hold our breath. Though, by the sudden introduction of 'telling team Sky' we can now assume your athlete is a Sky cyclist, no? So probably Swift, possibly Stannard or Kennaugh. Did you not state previously you thought Stannard was clean?

As for close to Team Sky or Sky, you must be having a laugh. Seriously. I have no personal link with the team whatsoever, nor any desire to have one, and while I have some vague 2nd hand connections to a Sky TV staffer or two, I know far more people far better in other media outlets in Ireland and GB.

But I do enjoy the paranoia.

 

[martinvickers]

F*k that attitude.

So if AICAR or an analogue was in use but not yet banned, that's OK with you? It wasn't cheating?

If Aicar is not banned, then it's legal. If it's legal, it can't be cheating. That's just basic logic. Doesn't stop being logic if you get upset.

It may be dangerous, ill-advised, stupid, unpleasant and destructive of the sport - all reasons to MAKE it illegal. But if it' were not illegal yet, it's not cheating yet. And that's the case for Sky, Tinkoff, Movistar...any team.

Of course, it IS banned, so it's a foolish example.

You need to learn to separate "Is illegal" form "Should be illegal"

Because...and let's take this slowly....

Breaking the rules actually in place = cheating
Breaking the rules autologous thinks ought to be in place = nothing

Now, the rules are drafted a lot more generically than they used to be, to try to avoid 'loopholes' and chemical innovation - trying to squeeze new drugs or techniques that attempt to replicate banned ones without being on a specific list. And that is an excellent thing, both for fair sport and rider health. But what is and isn't 'doping' is not measured by how you feel about it. your feelings don't matter a jot.

 

[martinvickers]

If it's any consolation, I got it.



I think he means of the accused riders, no?



sounds a bit familiar to "never tested positive"



And being the SKY thread, how has this one from a Sky rider not been noticed or mentioned yet???

"Birger Hungerholdt told Verdens Gang that Boasson Hagen is happy at Team Sky but listed the criteria any new team has to offer his client. These included peace of mind, good teammates, an English speaking team, a good programme and the chance to ride for himself in some races."

Oh dear, I think you misunderstand.

 

[bobbins]

I didn't DM you because, to be honest, I've no more desire to be s****ed to in private than in public. When you feel like naming the cheat, do let us know, but forgive us if we don't hold our breath. Though, by the sudden introduction of 'telling team Sky' we can now assume your athlete is a Sky cyclist, no? So probably Swift, possibly Stannard or Kennaugh. Did you not state previously you thought Stannard was clean?

As for close to Team Sky or Sky, you must be having a laugh. Seriously. I have no personal link with the team whatsoever, nor any desire to have one, and while I have some vague 2nd hand connections to a Sky TV staffer or two, I know far more people far better in other media outlets in Ireland and GB.

But I do enjoy the paranoia.

Stop making assumptions please Martin. Enjoy your black and life world, the rest of us have to live and survive in the real world.

 

[Netserk]

As anticipated bobbins gives some details, and still gets nothing but **** thrown at him. So predicable.

 

[bobbins]

As anticipated bobbins gives some details, and still gets nothing but **** thrown at him. So predicable.

Can't win can you.

I know of some specific details and have told some appropriate people, nothing gets done and nothing will get done. It's not worth my livelihood being affected to become the lone voice or one of very few love voices.

Look at how many people out there are fawning over Armstrongs tyre change video - far more than would even admit to possible thinking Floyd Landis might have been telling the truth.

Cheats prosper and will do until there is a step change in culture from the top down.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

Can't win can you.

That's the point. If you won't name names here then you can never win the debate. So best not to have raised the subject here in the first place as you're basically just setting yourself up for failure and criticism.

 

[JimmyFingers]

As anticipated bobbins gives some details, and still gets nothing but **** thrown at him. So predicable.

Netserk, everyone throws **** around in here. People are simply asking him to name names rather than being all smoke and mirrors. It's incredibly easy to come onto an anonymous internet forum and make these sort of innuendos. If you choose to take everything he says at face value that is your perogative, other's want a little more before they are convinced.

Hypothetically how do you think you or other's here would react if someone came on saying they have connections with BC and know for a fact there is no doping going on? Don't believe someone simply because it suits the narrative you want, everyone should be asking the same questions.

This isn't a case of us and them you know, we want the same thing, a clean sport to enjoy. I give riders the benefit of the doubt until the evidence and facts point the other way. I do not support or deny or esxcuse cheating in anyway, whoever does it. I don't care if he is my favourite rider, if he is cheating I want him punished and banned. I tired of being told I'm a Skyfan or a Skybot or a dufus Brit, or that I work for Sky, or that I'm a nationalist simply because my approach and my opinion is different to people utterly convinced that x or y is doping, and if you don't agree you get baited, trolled, condenscended to, get someone coming on and dismissing your entire contribution to this board as spam, as autologus did.

If you want people who disagree to be more polite in their approach then you need to be polite in turn. I've noticed several mentioned of skyfans' 'aggression': this board breeds aggression, through all the trolling and baiting of people with different opinions.

I'm no mug: there is plenty of doping still going on, and possibly at Sky, I'm just not prepared to condemn them out of hand, or to accept what Babbins says without further information. Him playing the MV is a Sky spy card just makes me further doubt him. It sounds like a good story someone looking for attention on a board like this would come up with.

 

[Netserk]

That's the point. If you won't name names here then you can never win the debate. So best not to have raised the subject here in the first place as you're basically just setting yourself up for failure and criticism.

No, people accepted that he couldn't name names, but then asked him to give more details. He then gives details, but people now says it doesn't matter without names.

 

[martinvickers]

No, people accepted that he couldn't name names, but then asked him to give more details. He then gives details, but people now says it doesn't matter without names.

I didn't. I accepted he couldn't name sources, i never accepted or suggested he couldn't name guilty rider, for example.

 

[Netserk]

Netserk, everyone throws **** around in here. People are simply asking him to name names rather than being all smoke and mirrors. It's incredibly easy to come onto an anonymous internet forum and make these sort of innuendos. If you choose to take everything he says at face value that is your perogative, other's want a little more before they are convinced.

Hypothetically how do you think you or other's here would react if someone came on saying they have connections with BC and know for a fact there is no doping going on? Don't believe someone simply because it suits the narrative you want, everyone should be asking the same questions.

This isn't a case of us and them you know, we want the same thing, a clean sport to enjoy. I give riders the benefit of the doubt until the evidence and facts point the other way. I do not support or deny or esxcuse cheating in anyway, whoever does it. I don't care if he is my favourite rider, if he is cheating I want him punished and banned. I tired of being told I'm a Skyfan or a Skybot or a dufus Brit, or that I work for Sky, or that I'm a nationalist simply because my approach and my opinion is different to people utterly convinced that x or y is doping, and if you don't agree you get baited, trolled, condenscended to, get someone coming on and dismissing your entire contribution to this board as spam, as autologus did.

If you want people who disagree to be more polite in their approach then you need to be polite in turn. I've noticed several mentioned of skyfans' 'aggression': this board breeds aggression, through all the trolling and baiting of people with different opinions.

I'm no mug: there is plenty of doping still going on, and possibly at Sky, I'm just not prepared to condemn them out of hand, or to accept what Babbins says without further information. Him playing the MV is a Sky spy card just makes me further doubt him. It sounds like a good story someone looking for attention on a board like this would come up with.

No you don't. You (seemingly) don't care about evidence. As long as there is no proof, it's a case of 'maybe they do, maybe they don't'.

 

[martinvickers]

Stop making assumptions please Martin. Enjoy your black and life world, the rest of us have to live and survive in the real world.

If you think I'm sort of Sky spy, as you clearly do, you and the real world have very little in common.

ITK's. Have to love 'em, dontchya?

 

[martinvickers]

As anticipated bobbins gives some details, and still gets nothing but **** thrown at him. So predicable.

Bobbins has given damn all detail, that's the problem. How about YOU take the blinkers off and stop with the partisan b******t?

 

[Netserk]

Bobbins has given damn all detail, that's the problem. How about YOU take the blinkers off and stop with the partisan b******t?

How about you open up your eyes and read what he has written?

 

[JimmyFingers]

No you don't. You (seemingly) don't care about evidence. As long as there is no proof, it's a case of 'maybe they do, maybe they don't'.

Unless evidence and proof are completely different things, you have just contradicted yourself. But thank you for engaging in my post in such a superficial way.

 

[Netserk]

Unless evidence and proof are completely different things, you have just contradicted yourself. But thank you for engaging in my post in such a superficial way.

We've had this discussion countless times. Evidence =/= Proof. I think there's a tread about it too. How about you read up on it.

 

[JimmyFingers]

How about I not bother. Evidence is a fact or situation that suggests something might be true. Proof is a fact or situation that removes all doubt. Sometimes more than one evidence can add up to proof.

And this thread is evidence of how, despite all your best efforts, you can't put scraps of evidence together to form a definitive proof. Hence why I stay on the fence and don't join your little lynch mob.

I remember you whooping for joy in this forum when a rumoured positive from last year's Giro turned out not to be Nibali. When asked you said you thought he was doping, but you were glad he wasn't positive. Forgive me if I don't take your anti-doping credentials too seriously.