thehog
BANNED
- Jul 27, 2009
- 31,285
- 2
- 22,485
You're reaching and frankly I'm offended.
The point being at Saxo he'd be part of a winning team. At Sky he has prepared twice for Bradly and Wiggo has not come through with the goods. That's the difference and the point you missed.
The point being at Saxo he'd be part of a winning team. At Sky he has prepared twice for Bradly and Wiggo has not come through with the goods. That's the difference and the point you missed.
canyonball said:Sorry, but your changing your arguments here. You said Sky guy's were leaving because They were tired of working for a leader who wasn't.I pointed out one example were the leader he worked for actually delivered. Dauphine. The Tour will always be a question mark.
Now you say it's a question of him having more chances.
Well, I fail to see what would be that much different if he went to Saxo- Bank. They both have very similar dynamics when it comes to leadership: one guy that puts the Tour as his main goal. So if he went to Saxo, according to your logic, he wouldn't have won those two stages as well...because he would be working for Contador!
Other than that, what races would he get as a leader/ free rider that he is not getting at Sky? (Serious question, I'm discussing ideas here). And let's not say Vuelta 2011, because, wether you like the guy or not, a collarbone is a misfortune and not some caracter trait. It can happen everywhere and to everyone.
As I pointed out on the first post. Things are finally working out for him, sporting-wise. I don't think it's worth all the hassle of accomodating yourself in a new team, specially when the other team won't give you any more assurances. (Leadership and collective, which is a question I now realize I diddn't even brought up, but could be valid when comparing Saxo and Sky)