• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Wiggins, Clinic respect?

Page 9 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
martinvickers

martinvickers

BANNED
Oct 15, 2012
4,903
0
0
Visit site
The Hitch said:
Except no one is asking riders to do any of that. No one is asking or demanding riders to say anything.
Click to expand...

I don't think that's entirely true, either, Hitch.

After all, this was an interview from an all day media session for Sky - so presumably the media are asking riders to 'do any of that'. and quite possibly the team too...

you can't forget the position of the media, between the public and the rider....
 
thehog

thehog

BANNED
Jul 27, 2009
31,285
2
22,485
Visit site
roundabout said:
What website is that?

Wonder who will be the first to risk their access privilege and call out Wiggins?
Click to expand...

You see. Job done. Clean.

o5x0g3.jpg
 
Dr. Maserati

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Visit site
Parker said:
But whenever a rider says something that doesn't tally with what is expected, then they get savaged. Even Nicole Cooke got savaged (a jumping the shark moment - again).

This forum is just a vestibule for vitriol and with every turn justifies Wiggins's sweary invective.
Click to expand...

3 or 4 posters remarked on Cooke, (the same posters who believe most dope) - that is not even a blip of representation of this forum.
So by attempting to portray some amazing "savagery" by The Clinic shows you are the one to jump the shark.
 
BroDeal

BroDeal

Mar 18, 2009
14,644
72
22,580
Visit site
Ferminal said:
What does he mean by "wasn't the same bike rider" (Ventoux was only one week after Verbier but whatever).
Click to expand...

I know the fanbois will say I am imagining it, but I seem to recall a certain Lance Armstrong dropping Wigans on the way to La Grand-Bornand and the only reason it did not happen earlier is because Armstrong had a teammate up the road. Wiggins was holding Armstrong back.
 
P

Parker

Mar 4, 2011
3,346
449
14,580
Visit site
Libertine Seguros said:
I don't expect my views to match up to those of the pro péloton. They'd hate my views on parcours design unless they weigh about 50kg anyway.

What I do expect, however, is that if a rider wants the fans to trust them when they say they're clean, that rider shouldn't have a track record of contradicting themselves. If what Vaughters says is true and Wiggins definitely knew Lance was doping back in 2009, it makes his 2010-11 statements all the more a cause for concern. Because he wasn't being non-committal or even politely praising him - he was explicitly praising him. That is hard to reconcile with what he's had to say. What he's had to say today, taken in isolation, was good. But in the grand scheme of Wiggins' quotes, it's another line to further confuse where his standpoint is on the subject, because he's been all over the place on the issue, from fully pro-Lance to fully anti-Lance, and almost everywhere in between. If he can't decide where he stands, how can we trust his statements not to change if he's in a different mood in 10 minutes' time?
Click to expand...

Yeah. Lot's of people said great things about Michael Jackson, Jimmy Saville, Gary Glitter and Stuart Hall too. I did for some of them.

And you know what - I still think Michael Jackson was a genius, Stuart Hall was a great commentator and Rock and Roll Part 2 is a great song. (Saville I never liked but he did support cycling).

Opinions aren't black and white. They change and have shades. And it's decent behaviour not to 'call out' people if you don't know.

People can trawl over historical quotes and present them out of full context as much as they like, but you haven't lived that life - some respect for that should exist.

Otherwise, your posts are exercises in hatred of cyclist and cycling, based on what trolling opportunties they provide.


Seeing as Wiggins is so terrible, I challenge anyone to name a cyclist (pro conti or above) who has criticised both Armstrong and the UCI/McQuaid. Wiggins has. Who else?
 
P

Parker

Mar 4, 2011
3,346
449
14,580
Visit site
Dr. Maserati said:
3 or 4 posters remarked on Cooke, (the same posters who believe most dope) - that is not even a blip of representation of this forum.
So by attempting to portray some amazing "savagery" by The Clinic shows you are the one to jump the shark.
Click to expand...

There were a few big contributers on that thread and you know it. Not you, I know. But did you think that thread, which featured several regulars, showed the forum in a good light? Appearance rather than actuality seems to be the currency here after all. That was the forum's Leinders moment.
 
P

Parker

Mar 4, 2011
3,346
449
14,580
Visit site
cineteq said:
Let me guess...it contradicts the previous one, right?
Click to expand...

Yes. Just as those who gave Bernie Madoff a great reference changed their minds later.

It's a good job science doesn't work like this. Politics does though. 'Flip-floping' is attacked, even if it's sensible. There are WMDs. There are WMDs. There are WMDs. (Where there WMDs?)

"Once you in it, you in it. If it's a lie, then we fight on that lie. But we gotta fight" - that's it, right? No changing opinions.
 
Dr. Maserati

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Visit site
Parker said:
There were a few big contributers on that thread and you know it. Not you, I know. But did you think that thread, which featured several regulars, showed the forum in a good light? Appearance rather than actuality seems to be the currency here after all. That was the forum's Leinders moment.
Click to expand...
What does "big contributors" even mean?

There were 3 or 4 posters - that was it.
And actually as threads went it was ok, as there was a debate and people backed up their opinions with links, it wasn't just talk. Thats what forums are for.
 
The Hitch

The Hitch

Jun 14, 2010
34,930
60
22,580
Visit site
martinvickers said:
I don't think that's entirely true, either, Hitch.

After all, this was an interview from an all day media session for Sky - so presumably the media are asking riders to 'do any of that'. and quite possibly the team too...

you can't forget the position of the media, between the public and the rider....
Click to expand...

My point is silence is an option. The implication was that fans are demanding riders to say certain things. and while.maybe some.are, the riders who dont say anything don't get attacked.

Even in the clinic.
Even the most reactionary posters.

Cadel Evans and Chris froome for example never criticised lance either. But they havent said much on the doping at all. And even the most trigger happy posters barely mention them in these discussions ( about attitude to doping)

Which shows that it isn't about what you don't say, but about what you do say.
 
roundabout

roundabout

Jun 7, 2010
19,137
3,025
28,180
Visit site
Parker said:
Yes. Just as those who gave Bernie Madoff a great reference changed their minds later.

It's a good job science doesn't work like this. Politics does though. 'Flip-floping' is attacked, even if it's sensible. There are WMDs. There are WMDs. There are WMDs. (Where there WMDs?)

"Once you in it, you in it. If it's a lie, then we fight on that lie. But we gotta fight" - that's it, right? No changing opinions.
Click to expand...

What?

How about admitting being wrong. Then he can say whatever he wants.
 
P

Parker

Mar 4, 2011
3,346
449
14,580
Visit site
Dr. Maserati said:
What does "big contributors" even mean?

There were 3 or 4 posters - that was it.
And actually as threads went it was ok, as there was a debate and people backed up their opinions with links, it wasn't just talk. Thats what forums are for.
Click to expand...

Big contributors: Benotti69, thehog, sniper, blackcat and a couple of others not on that thread.

You and other sensible contributors may think you set the tone and agenda of this forum, but you don't. They do. This forum has its own 'omerta' keeping the status quo which some aren't fully comfortable with.
 
Dr. Maserati

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Visit site
Parker said:
Big contributors: Benotti69, thehog, sniper, blackcat and a couple of others not on that thread.

You and other sensible contributors may think you set the tone and agenda of this forum, but you don't. They do. This forum has its own 'omerta' keeping the status quo which some aren't fully comfortable with.
Click to expand...
So when I call them on their BS I am actually breaking Omerta, how cool.

That is a load of nonsense. I certainly dont believe I set the tone, as there is none.
Why do pages go in to a 2nd or 3rd page? Because there is a difference of opinion.
 
P

Parker

Mar 4, 2011
3,346
449
14,580
Visit site
Dr. Maserati said:
So when I call them on their BS I am actually breaking Omerta, how cool.

That is a load of nonsense. I certainly dont believe I set the tone, as there is none.
Why do pages go in to a 2nd or 3rd page? Because there is a difference of opinion.
Click to expand...

No. I'm not saying that you set the tone. You don't - it would be nice if you did. I'm telling you those that do. You can deny it all you want - but those four posters largely set the tone of this forum. (You are nicknamed the Asylum elsewhere - that's not down to you)
 
Dr. Maserati

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Visit site
Parker said:
No. I'm not saying that you set the tone. You don't - it would be nice if you did. I'm telling you those that do. You can deny it all you want - but those four posters largely set the tone of this forum. (You are nicknamed the Asylum elsewhere - that's not down to you)
Click to expand...

Ok, This actually what you wrote: "You and other sensible contributors may think you set the tone and agenda of this forum"

My point was simple - no-one here sets a tone.
The only reason you (and those others) think so is because you are here to push one side of an argument and you object to the 'tone' of the opposite.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom