Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[Dalakhani]

I see the Guardian has purged all the (completely non-libellous) negative comments about Wiggins from its article on Armstrong.

(And, of course, left in all the fanboi stuff!)

It's one thing to not ask the right questions - or to not ask any questions - but it's another thing to wilfully delete any question about their hero.

 

[JimmyFingers]

I see the Guardian has purged all the (completely non-libellous) negative comments about Wiggins from its article on Armstrong.

(And, of course, left in all the fanboi stuff!)

It's one thing to not ask the right questions - or to not ask any questions - but it's another thing to wilfully delete any question about their hero.

It's an article about Lance, who had a mountain of evidence against that he doped and ex-team mates willing to testify against him, while Wiggins has nothing but hearsay repeated ad-infinitum on forums like this. One has nothing to do with the other so I can see why the Guardian removed them.

If you don't like what the paper does, you don't have to read it.

 

[sniper]

Is it a coincidence that UCI has a foto of Froome during the Vuelta with the Sky label clearly visible on their website, or is that part of the deal?

http://www.uci.ch/Templates/UCI/UCI8/layout.asp?MenuID=MTYzMDQ&LangId=1

I'm still conjecturing significant deals have been made at some point between UCI and Sky on different levels.

 

[richtea]

Is it a coincidence that UCI has a foto of Froome during the Vuelta with the Sky label clearly visible on their website, or is that part of the deal?

That is fantasy land stuff, right up there with someone speculating that extended HGH use leads to a more triangular head. Although I notice with some amusement that the biggest story in cycling has somehow failed to make it to their news section.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

That is fantasy land stuff, right up there with someone speculating that extended HGH use leads to a more triangular head. Although I notice with some amusement that the biggest story in cycling has somehow failed to make it to their news section.

I am waiting for the 'UCI in Armstrong coverup' story to appear on their site.

 

[User Guide]

Is it a coincidence that UCI has a foto of Froome during the Vuelta with the Sky label clearly visible on their website, or is that part of the deal?

http://www.uci.ch/Templates/UCI/UCI8/layout.asp?MenuID=MTYzMDQ&LangId=1

I'm still conjecturing significant deals have been made at some point between UCI and Sky on different levels.

If fat Pat(or more to the point verdrugem thx whoever coined that btw) had anything on Froome he would be sold down the river no problem,to deflect away from the obvious questions coming their way.
"see we are rebust in our anti-doping efforts"
"no one is too big " etc etc etc

not that I think Froome is clean btw

 

[sniper]

That is fantasy land stuff, right up there with someone speculating that extended HGH use leads to a more triangular head. Although I notice with some amusement that the biggest story in cycling has somehow failed to make it to their news section.

so far it is of course fantasy land.
but i wouldn't be surprised that if one took the time to look at UCI sites and/or meetings, the Sky logo would come up as dominant over other logos and not just because they won the TdF.

I am waiting for the 'UCI in Armstrong coverup' story to appear on their site.

 

[sniper]

If fat Pat(or more to the point verdrugem thx whoever coined that btw) had anything on Froome he would be sold down the river no problem,to deflect away from the obvious questions coming their way.
"see we are rebust in our anti-doping efforts"
"no one is too big " etc etc etc

not that I think Froome is clean btw

interesting point. and yes they need deflection badly.

but me personally thinks UCI are sold to sky as they once were to USPS, so throwing Froome under the bus will be the last of all resorts.

 

[The Hitch]

It's an article about Lance, who had a mountain of evidence against that he doped and ex-team mates willing to testify against him, while Wiggins has nothing but hearsay repeated ad-infinitum on forums like this. One has nothing to do with the other so I can see why the Guardian removed them.

If you don't like what the paper does, you don't have to read it.

Lienders is hearsay?

Wiggins is important to the story, not only because he himself is a big Armstrong friend, but because he is the reigning tour champion and according to the guardian and the like, the biggest name in cycling and wiggins himself wants to be the patron of the peloton.

ANd he will have to understand that being patron of the peloton isnt just about swearing at and insulting who you want and telling the peloton to slow down when a rider 10 minutes down on gc punctures, in order to look like a gentleman. It will have to involve speaking on things like this as well.

But like Armstrong, he is a coward when it comes to that, as his answer to the doping question in the tour proved.

 

[The Hitch]

Walsh on Wiggins: "Does he say it’s a great day for cycling that Armstrong has been sanctioned or does he say he still admires Lance?"

When did Wiggins say anything?

When does Wiggins not say anything about Lance. He said he loves Lance. He said even his critics have benefited from him. He said training with Lance was his greatest lesson. Lance is on the cover of his book. EVen in interviews before the Tour its about doing everything the way lance did. even in post tour interviews he will find away to put god in there like when he talked about how much hard work went into the tour, then said he wouldnt be able to go through with that 7 times like lance did.

 

[Dalakhani]

It's an article about Lance, who had a mountain of evidence against that he doped and ex-team mates willing to testify against him, while Wiggins has nothing but hearsay repeated ad-infinitum on forums like this. One has nothing to do with the other so I can see why the Guardian removed them.

"One has nothing to do with the other"?

Are you suggesting the past has nothing to teach us for the future?

Armstrong hid behind the same "I've never failed a drug test", "I would never take drugs" fig leaves that Sky use to bat away questions about their sudden improvements over the winter of 2010-2011.

So, doesn't Armstrong's defeat add to the feeling that those are not compelling answers to those questions?

Does it not reinforce the feeling that drug testing is not an effective weapon against drug taking - and that, when performances are so good they're hard to explain, then explanations should be demanded... regardless of passed tests?

Maybe you'd say "no". Me, I'd say "yes".

 

[taiwan]

Damn, now that Lance has been mythbusted, I hope the UCI have another 'project' they can use to keep rich anglophones buying cycling. Oh wait.

 

[jilbiker]

New juice

I suspect that Sky/Wiggins/Froome has some new and fabulous. is this what they have????

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/undete...ve-of-the-performance-enhancement-future.html

 

[Cerberus]

I suspect that Sky/Wiggins/Froome has some new and fabulous. is this what they have????

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/undete...ve-of-the-performance-enhancement-future.html

Probably not, for my money gene-doping is still sci-fy.

 

[OldManThyme]

"....Armstrong hid behind the same "I've never failed a drug test", "I would never take drugs" fig leaves that Sky use ....

And? Got to be factual. Otherwise this is pointless. Someone who is innocent is going to say the same.

 

[ebandit]

LOve

When does Wiggins not say anything about Lance. He said he loves Lance. He said even his critics have benefited from him. He said training with Lance was his greatest lesson. Lance is on the cover of his book. EVen in interviews before the Tour its about doing everything the way lance did. even in post tour interviews he will find away to put god in there like when he talked about how much hard work went into the tour, then said he wouldnt be able to go through with that 7 times like lance did.

Hitch do You have a Link to Where Wiggins Says 'I LOve Lance'

Lienders without Doubt has a Past but He does NOT Create Policy at Team Sky He does His Job to Team Instructions

just because He has been involved with a Doping Team in the Past does Not mean that He is Part of a Doping Programme now
just as a Rider Who has previously Ridden for a Dodgy Team could well be now Riding Clean

unlike Pharmstrong for now Doubts about Sky are Not Backed Up with Real Evidence
I too have Doubts over Sky Performances and Repeat.............if They are Doping the Truth will come Out.......for now They are Clean

 

[OldManThyme]

unlike Pharmstrong for now Doubts about Sky are Not Backed Up with Real Evidence
I too have Doubts over Sky Performances and Repeat.............if They are Doping the Truth will come Out.......for now They are Clean

Good to hear it's not just bashing here.

 

[The Hitch]

Hitch do You have a Link to Where Wiggins Says 'I LOve Lance'

Lienders without Doubt has a Past but He does NOT Create Policy at Team Sky He does His Job to Team Instructions

just because He has been involved with a Doping Team in the Past does Not mean that He is Part of a Doping Programme now
just as a Rider Who has previously Ridden for a Dodgy Team could well be now Riding Clean

unlike Pharmstrong for now Doubts about Sky are Not Backed Up with Real Evidence
I too have Doubts over Sky Performances and Repeat.............if They are Doping the Truth will come Out.......for now They are Clean

what Lienders proves is that sky arent serious about their clean team policy, and that Wiggins has changed horribly from when he said - no dodgy doctors.

 

[The Hitch]

All day in Britain theyve been saying the whole - cycling is now clean, therefore Wiggins is clean.

Man is that a weak *** world view. all it takes is for someone like Contador to win another Tour.

 

[OldManThyme]

what Lienders proves is that sky arent serious about their clean team policy, and that Wiggins has changed horribly from when he said - no dodgy doctors.

or that wiggins doesn't consider him to be dodgy as that's not how he's behaving now? David millar doped. I don't think he is a doper any longer. Served his time and does a lot for anti doping. So garmin is a full on doping team because David's there?

 

[ferryman]

All day in Britain theyve been saying the whole - cycling is now clean, therefore Wiggins is clean.

Man is that a weak *** world view. all it takes is for someone like Contador to win another Tour.

I may have misinterpreted your post ..but...say rather than someone like FROOME

 

[OldManThyme]

All day in Britain theyve been saying the whole - cycling is now clean, therefore Wiggins is clean.

Man is that a weak *** world view. all it takes is for someone like Contador to win another Tour.

I'm in Britain and i don't hear anyone thinking that cycling is clean. Everyone i know or hear of online says cycling has a problem. Most brits will think Wiggins and sky are clean. But because they hope they are and have no reason (proper reason not some trumped up idle suspicion) to not give them the benefit of the doubt. We're not all black and white in our views, though you seem blacker than black in view

 

[the big ring]

or that wiggins doesn't consider him to be dodgy as that's not how he's behaving now? David millar doped. I don't think he is a doper any longer. Served his time and does a lot for anti doping. So garmin is a full on doping team because David's there?

But Millar can't get a gig at Sky, because of their policy of being completely above board and without blemish or spot.

 

[OldManThyme]

But Millar can't get a gig at Sky, because of their policy of being completely above board and without blemish or spot.

And?
Cyclist benefit individually from a raised performance. Their career only lasts a decade or two. And peaks over a few short years and luck is a major factor in getting a good team spot. So many factors. There is a recognised issue with riders going AWOL and privately seeking to dope externally from a team. So there is risk there.
Howerer, the doctor's role in a team is just to do what he's paid to do. There is not a performance stake involved in his role. He gets paid whatever and he works as a doctor for 60 years maybe. Far less risk. If he's not paid to dope a rider, he is not likely to be going AWOL. Why would he? And he's paid well enough to not get involved.

Sky have a strict rule it seems. Stricter than Garmin. On riders. But you are reading so much more in to this? And making quite strong judgements based on this? interesting.

 

[ferryman]

But Millar can't get a gig at Sky, because of their policy of being completely above board and without blemish or spot.

I assume this is very much tongue in cheek as that rubbish has been well and truly blasted out the water if you want to take the time to search this thread.