Re:
Freddythefrog said:
It is informing to read the comments on various sites at the departure of Wiggins. Looking at the level of ignorance of many of the "I discovered cycling through Sir Bradley and I know more than you" posters, it is easy to understand how the 1.0 version "LA - its not about the bike", took such a grip. 2.0 The Brit version, wasn't anywhere near as good but the hold it takes on those so afflicted that they feel they must "pledge an oath", is similar.
So this is a guy who showed in PR that he still could not put together a realistic tactical challenge for a multi-faceted race scenario that required quick thinking whilst the race was hot. Going to the front some significant time before the vital moment and putting the hammer down is not a statement of tactical intent. It is a sop to those who don't understand road racing.
Richard Moore shows over at Cycling Weekly
http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/lat ... ory-165925 that he has all the vision of a blind man, wearing a balaclava the wrong way round in a blacked out room. That he can actually write about Sir Bradley losing 10 kgs at the same time the undetectable drug aicar was ripping through the peloton, without any counter comment, is mind boggling. But then he is a bone idle, journo who can't even get his facts right about when Brailsford took over after Keen was shoved out.
Then there are all the fan boy posters comparing Sir Bradley to Merckx or any of the other dopers held up as paragons. The guy won the most boring GT in years, on a course designed for the latest "its all clean now" team to win. And even then Froome 2.2 should have taken the win, but Team Sky/BC/Sutton/Yates/Leinders/ program controlled by the patron saint of coaching, Sir David Brailsford needed to be seen to have masterminded the whole "success". A Froome win would not fit the bill like a Wiggins one would. After that he was a flop in the Giro and in many instances, eg his amnesia that comes and goes as needed,has shown he has all the attributes of a doping cheat with few morals.
I think my top site for comedy comment is Bike Radar.
http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtop ... 0&start=60
You just have to marvel at how any functioning human could simultaneously hold with the concept that Sir Bradley is clean whilst despise Contador as a doper. I used to be baffled how those from the other side of the pond could possibly think that Ulrich, Pantani and the rest were dopers and yet Lance was clean. Now I see so many Brits coming out with the same totally illogical nonsense that appears to be based mainly on something akin to a religious belief system.
I only pray - who will be the Brit Floyd ?
There is good news though.
The party is over.
Now that he is gone, the whole wiggo myth is now in decline.
His retirement and stories like that from moore and I assume the other hacks who wrote sky books and want to squeeze another few pennies out, were the last hoorah, and it was fairly limited.
From now far less stories about wiggins. they will still mention him now and again, but a retired cyclist who won one tour 3 years ago isn't going to get that much attention in sport which ultimately survives on what have you done for me lately.
The public appetite for more wiggo stories is declining. It was a massive bubble. 2 weeks as the biggest star in the country. But next to no one actually watched his TDF win and his only claim to charisma was having sideburns and swearing a lot.
The attention he so much craved and got to enjoy so much for a few months in 2012, is never going to come back. Hell get glimpses of it if he breaks the hour record or uses the power of "marginal gains" to win another olympic gold as a grandpa.
His own joy at having won has declined. At first he said he was happy to win 1 tour, not contend again and let froome take the next one. That lasted a few months before he realized he wanted another tour afterall and got quite desperate in his attempts to steal Froomes leadership.
He also relapsed back into intense depression less than a year after winning the TDF. Very telling.
In short it was painful while it lasted, but now most of the good things that came wiggos way have passed.
I do hope one day he falls like his hero did, its always sweet to see bad guys pay for their actions. But if not, well, with a few exceptions no more *** to read about wiggins anyway and its good to know he still is mostly the same miserable person he was before he cheated his way to a TDF. Kimmage and Landis seem to be in better places mentally, which is a pleasant thought to have.
As Landis said wiggins knows what he did, even if he is a sociopath when it comes to guilt, the fear of getting caught and the knowledge that most of the cycling world never believed him for a second probably eat away at him at least a little.
In short, the party is over, but the bill may still have to be paid. Best case scenario, he is made to pay for their sins. Worst case scenario, he continues to fall into relative irrelevancy and gets into a few tabloids a few times for his signature outbursts at whatever unlucky sod gets in his way when he is in a bad mood.
Either way crime hasn't paid anywhere near as much as I feared it would in July 2012 when we had to sit through wiggos hypocritical *** and hear nonesence about how he was the most loved and most trusted person in the history of cycling bla bla bla.
As for the forums where people believe in wiggins. Well let them be. Everyone has the right to believe what they want. Plenty of places on the internet where people believe fairytales. Many of the same people were the ones who believed in lance for so long. And if they got their little corner to do it, good for them.