Maybe I am overly Machiavellian in my outlook but I wonder if some of you here aren't missing the bigger picture regarding sponsorship, media exposure and the value of controversy to selling newspapers/airtime? Sky is 49% owned by News International. News International is is wholly owned by News Corp. News Corp is the most influential, manipulative and corrupt media organisation that has ever existed it the English speaking world (and it's tendrils extend far beyond).
Certainly there was at least one and possibly two stages last year where Froome could have been allowed to go for the stage win without having any noticeable effect on the GC and probably should have been given his head to do so. This caused Michelle Cound to whip up a twitter storm and suddenly the News Corp. controversy magnet is in full force.
Given that Team Sky was largely started as a vanity project for James Murdoch and by the 2012 TdF he was heavily embattled by the Leverson Inquiry (his own sister, Elisabeth, describing him as having ruined the family business), he saw a sliver of light. Whip up the controversy, create interest in the sport, sell more papers & airtime and above all save some reputation within the family that Tom Watson MP described as mafia-like.
I don't think Wiggins will ride the Tour this year (unless he crashes out of the Giro very early) and I don't think it has ever been the intention of anyone at Team Sky, BSkyB, News International or News Corp. that he should. I do think however there has been a brilliant artificial controversy created for media consumption that has superbly served the purpose of giving the Sky brand name massive exposure, both in and beyond it's key target markets.
I suspect Wiggins will go from the Giro to the Vuelta and the World TT champs, having announced sometime in June that he is too fatigued to help Froome at the Tour.
Of course I might be wrong. I might be very wide of the mark. As I say, Machiavellian.
Certainly there was at least one and possibly two stages last year where Froome could have been allowed to go for the stage win without having any noticeable effect on the GC and probably should have been given his head to do so. This caused Michelle Cound to whip up a twitter storm and suddenly the News Corp. controversy magnet is in full force.
Given that Team Sky was largely started as a vanity project for James Murdoch and by the 2012 TdF he was heavily embattled by the Leverson Inquiry (his own sister, Elisabeth, describing him as having ruined the family business), he saw a sliver of light. Whip up the controversy, create interest in the sport, sell more papers & airtime and above all save some reputation within the family that Tom Watson MP described as mafia-like.
I don't think Wiggins will ride the Tour this year (unless he crashes out of the Giro very early) and I don't think it has ever been the intention of anyone at Team Sky, BSkyB, News International or News Corp. that he should. I do think however there has been a brilliant artificial controversy created for media consumption that has superbly served the purpose of giving the Sky brand name massive exposure, both in and beyond it's key target markets.
I suspect Wiggins will go from the Giro to the Vuelta and the World TT champs, having announced sometime in June that he is too fatigued to help Froome at the Tour.
Of course I might be wrong. I might be very wide of the mark. As I say, Machiavellian.