Wiggins, Clinic respect?

[richtea]

Do you want me to show my ID card or something? What good would that do? The point is I'm a nobody. What I say carries the same weight whether or not I use my actual name.

This the real point: anonymity is not the issue here, most of us can say we whatever we think about cyclists doping as it won't have any material implications. It must be clear the same cannot be said for the cyclists themselves though - any expectation that they should be 'on message' with regard to anti-doping sentiment at all times, is perhaps a touch unrealistic. That said, actively supporting someone with such a cloud over them is slightly out of the ordinary, and to me seems ill advised whether you are clean or doping.

 

[Morbius]

the BBC have a different interview but obviously the same day and topic. No swearing. What is interesting in this one is BW explains how he was a big fan of Armstrong since he won the WC - which might go some way to explaining his feelings later
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/21190542

 

[BroDeal]

Great. Aside from mountrman stinking up the joint again, about every other post is by argumentative salad tossers, the same type of clowns that spent years defending Armstrong's fraud..

 

[Bat Man]

Sky had a press day at their Mallorca traning camp. There is going to be a lot of material from Sky over the next few days.

 

[D-Queued]

When did Wiggins say that? I recall other people saying it, but I never saw it directly attributed to Wiggins.

Can anyone clear that up for me? A link to a story with Wiggins saying that would be great.

Yes, he did say that he didn't even ride the Tour with Armstrong.

It was recent, but before the Reasoned Decision.

It may be almost impossible to locate now, though. Searching on anything related to Armstrong has become difficult to sift through.

Dave.

 

[cineteq]

Cancellara - absent
Martin - absent
Phinney - absent
Pinotti - absent
Durbridge - absent
Larsson - absent

He won by two minutes because there was hardly anyone there

None of these guys would have been his GC competitors.

 

[Joachim]

the BBC have a different interview but obviously the same day and topic. No swearing. What is interesting in this one is BW explains how he was a big fan of Armstrong since he won the WC - which might go some way to explaining his feelings later
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/21190542

I've just watched the Wiggins and the Froome videos from that link. One comes across as open and honest, the other one shifty as hell

 

[Morbius]

One comes across as open and honest, the other one shifty as hell

I guess I'm not very perceptive, because I can't even work out which you think is which

 

[coinneach]

I think Clinic Respect is exactly what is called for: both Wiggins & Froome on the BBC come over so well.
OK Wiggins can be a mass of contradictions, and he ain't perfect but he's cut enough slack from that interview to be given the benefit of the doubt, in my book anyway.
I think he always sounds better to me than his spoken words read, so I'd be careful about reading too much into a transcribed "interview" unless you see the circumstances.
And he's his own man (as is Froome) neither polished perfection, but real and, to me, genuine.
I felt like cheering..... a feeling reduced by reading all the comments above.

 

[Mellow Velo]

Great. Aside from mountrman stinking up the joint again, about every other post is by argumentative salad tossers, the same type of clowns that spent years defending Armstrong's fraud..

Must admit I like the carpet bomb personal attack method.
Effective and sanction free.

Wiggins: Damned here if he says nothing, more damned if he opens his mouth.
Meh.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

That said, actively supporting someone with such a cloud over them is slightly out of the ordinary, and to me seems ill advised whether you are clean or doping.

This. Guys like Alejandro Valverde (and guys without such obvious clouds hanging over them, like Samuel Sánchez and Alex Dowsett) got dragged over the coals for coming out with relatively defensive responses to the Armstrong situation.

Wiggins' position (and the extremely polarising nature of him and his team) means his statements come under scrutiny, and his messages are mixed.

I don't know if that makes it better or worse, but it does mean there's more to talk about.

 

[workingclasshero]

Being quoted on the record as saying "I love him" goes beyond the call of allowing all the processes to play out.

correct.

Wiggins either lies now when he says he thought LA was doping in '09

or he lied when he said "I love him. I think he's great" in '10.

Either way: We have a current patron who is not afraid to lie in public.

What a dope.

 

[Grandillusion]

Ha ha

Top post Parker

Good on yer Wiggins!

A few posts before that you were lecturing somebody along the lines of "of course he can't comment on the UCI, nothing has been proved yet"!

 

[Morbius]

Wiggins' position (and the extremely polarising nature of him and his team) means his statements come under scrutiny, and his messages are mixed.

I don't know if that makes it better or worse, but it does mean there's more to talk about.

It probably means that unlike many of the people here on The Clinic, he doesn't spend every waking hour thinking about it

 

[Parker]

None of these guys would have been his GC competitors.

Exactly. They would have focused on the TT and got closer than 2 minutes to Wiggins.

 

[cineteq]

Wiggins: Damned here if he says nothing, more damned if he opens his mouth.
Meh.

That's not the issue. His consistency is. His credibility is close to zero. Have you ever analyzed his comments?

 

[Parker]

That's not the issue. His consistency is. His credibility is close to zero. Have you ever analyzed his comments?

Normal people change their mind and views as the world changes around them. It's the ones that say exactly the same thing regardless that you need to worry about.

For example, his comments about people being right to ask questions in 2007 pre-dated Twitter, this forum and various sensationalist blogs. Back then it was mostly journalists and reasonable people he was refering to. Since then a loud, extremist element has risen. The question that prevoked his outburst specifically mentioned Twitter - just have a look at the amount of crap some high profile people gets tweeted. Any old moron now has access and a voice.

 

[BroDeal]

Must admit I like the carpet bomb personal attack method.
Effective and sanction free.

I prefer to think of it as the Jaochim attack.

 

[armchairclimber]

Whatever folks on here think of Wiggins...and positions seem to be fairly entrenched (natch)...I don't recall any other current high (or medium) profile rider coming out with such strong statements about Armstrong.

OK, he's in the luxurious position that riding clean has put him in (other high profile riders might have fates that they don't feel like tempting) but still..

Anyone point me towards a stronger public reaction?

 

[coinneach]

That's not the issue. His consistency is. His credibility is close to zero. Have you ever analyzed his comments?

Have you ever listened to his comments, and thought about the circumstances of someone putting a microphone under his nose?

Have you ever changed you mind about something?

Or had heros who disappoint you?

Talking or riding: Wiggins can't win with some folk: their narrative is already made up, but think about it, what would have liked him to say?

On second thoughts, don't bother; you'll analyse it too much.

 

[Joachim]

You misspelt analyse. Or maybe not

 

[hrotha]

Talking or riding: Wiggins can't win with some folk: their narrative is already made up, but think about it, what would have liked him to say?

I would have liked him to condemn Armstrong since the beginning. His current statements can't erase the past, and I can't just pretend he's consistent when he isn't.

 

[coinneach]

I would have liked him to condemn Armstrong since the beginning. His current statements can't erase the past, and I can't just pretend he's consistent when he isn't.

The beginning?

Well, that would have been the end of his career then

 

[workingclasshero]

I don't recall any other current high (or medium) profile rider coming out with such strong statements about Armstrong.

Anyone point me towards a stronger public reaction?

you mean stronger than stronger statement about Armstrong than

"I thought, 'You lying bast*rd'" ??

well, what about:

"I love him. I think he's great. I don't think this sport will ever realise what he's brought it or how big he's made it."

sounds stronger to me.

The former is what he now claims he was thinking in 2009.
The latter is what he actually came out and said in 2010.

Did he lie in 2010 or now?
Either way, he's another patron not afraid of lying to fans and the media.

File with Lance.

Go away please, mr. brad.

 

[Bat Man]

correct.

Wiggins either lies now when he says he thought LA was doping in '09

or he lied when he said "I love him. I think he's great" in '10.

Either way: We have a current patron who is not afraid to lie in public.

What a dope.

You've misunderstood what he said. During the comeback he gave him the benefit of the doubt. Now, due to the USADA report and his confession, he believes he was doping in 09.

I'd advise you to watch the BBC interview linked above to get a better understanding of his views.