• 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!

will Barry be the first to stand up and be counted?

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
A

Anonymous

Guest
Dave Brailsford has made a good start.. no other DS has come out and said anything, and he has said he would talk to barry etc and take it from there.

If barry is clean now which i beleive he is, i dont think he would anything to gain by lying to DB and say he didnt dope at postal. Now the fact that he has told the press he didnt dope means that that is what he has said to DB to. From what i know, Sky have a pretty strong policy that the riders dont say anything without permission.

On the other hand, sky have made much of their policy of investigating riders histories, looking at blood passport profiles etc, and if the rider is clean now that is one thing, but for sky even if it turned out barry was a former doper it could be pretty embarassing.

I think if sky wish to be one of the leaders in clean cycling as they claim to, then it is up for them to take the lead. While RS deny, Garmin say nothing, Sky should be, i think, making the positive moves.

My belief is barry is clean, and my gut says he wasnt doping at postal but was aware of doping going on. Then again, that discredits landis's claims. It does dissapoint me than Barry has rubished landis as a liar etc, i would much prefer him to say, "what floyd is saying should be investigated, but personally i have nothing to fear as i have never doped."

Basically, i would like sky being the pro investigation team, not the Landis is a nut team.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
BroDeal said:
They will force Barry to take the ridiculous position that he never saw any doping, never heard about doping, never even knew anyone who knew a rider who dopes. He was deaf, dumb, and blind his entire career before he was hired by Sky.

and thats why, in the short term, i think he should be non-active
 
No Chain said:
If anyone comes forward it will be GH. Just my opinion.

Really? He does have his clothing company to fall back on, but he would have to be worried about what the fallout would do to the company. Potentially he has a lot to lose. He also has huge respect from most U.S. fans that would give anything he says weight.

I would like to see a rider make an oblique confirmation. Something like, "I am riding clean. There was stuff that happened on other teams I was on, but that is the distant past. Read into that what you will."
 
Jul 30, 2009
1,735
0
0
Visit site
icebreaker said:
yes, I did as well.

I don't know if it's what Brailsford meant - but it's the implication one would take.

I don't know what to think of all this now. Any real cyclist knew what was going on, but we didn't walk away, even when young men were dying in their sleep. At least that is all sorted out.

All this 'never tested postive' rhetoric is for the casual cyclist and cancer victim who needs some hope.

It will be bad for them.

We, on the other hand, knew it all along, and will still watch and ride and race, and is there so much pleasure in saying 'I told you so'? Not for me, so far people I know who were of the 'never tested positive' mindset are asking 'why arent you saying I told you so?' and its because it feels like rubbing salt in an open wound.

The only fair way out of it that I can see is an amnesty, get it all out in the open and start fresh.

That's not going to happen with Pat in charge.

Meanwhile, the most exciting GT in my adult lifetime is on, and the UK press could not care less, but today's papers are full of 'cycling'.

(PS much as I like Kimmage these days, the idea that other sports do not cover up doping is an utter joke. They dont even do the tests to have to cover them up. Imagine if some superstar from a big sport with improbable fitness or physique eg Beckham, Chabal, Nadal tested positive. It would never come out. Puerto told us that.)
 
Jul 30, 2009
1,735
0
0
Visit site
BroDeal said:
I would like to see a rider make an oblique confirmation. Something like, "I am riding clean. There was stuff that happened on other teams I was on, but that is the distant past. Read into that what you will."

Yes, that would be about right. I am not up for lynchings and burning people at the stake for stuff from a decade ago. Average speeds are down, races are not so controlled, the riders are really hurting. It looks a lot better. I can get by thinking Cancellara is just a freak with a rocket up his ar5e.

I dont see people with yellow wristbands buying Hincapie's kit. Like you wouldnt see them in Castelli. I reckon he could give the word to the wise and we could all just move on.

His stuff looks pretty good, considering its from the wrong side of the Atlantic. I'm guessing XXS is a L in Italian sizing?
 
BroDeal said:
They will force Barry to take the ridiculous position that he never saw any doping, never heard about doping, never even knew anyone who knew a rider who dopes. He was deaf, dumb, and blind his entire career before he was hired by Sky.

And if they do then Sky is no different than any other team and all this clean cycling talk is nothing but chin wagging.
 
Jul 30, 2009
1,735
0
0
Visit site
Hugh Januss said:
And if they do then Sky is no different than any other team and all this clean cycling talk is nothing but chin wagging.

That is the corner they appear to be in. While I very much doubt it will happen, DB could say 'we're a new team, we needed some experienced riders/road captains, while we didn't hire anyone whose bio-passport is dodgy now, we still needed some mature guys from the old days...'

He doesn't need to go on 'and lets face facts they were all on the juice back then' those of us who know, know and those who dont need to know, dont know.

But it would be great if someone could say that, and we could all forgive and forget. Many of us have anyway, its time for the public face of the sport to fess up and move on.

Amnesty!!!
 
Jul 23, 2009
2,891
1
0
Visit site
dutchmegently said:
I dont' for a second believe that Michael has ever doped. In the absence of evidence - and don't for a second think that there is any evidence, merely the frothy rantings of a deeply unhappy and disgraced man - we rely on character.

I have never met Michael Barry but I do hold him in high regard from following his writings and interviews. I've also cheered him on like a mad fool when he's raced with the maple leaf on his chest. But I don't think any of this helps me assess if he ever used PEDs.

In the absence of concrete evidence I look for corroborating evidence, and here I find none. So I look at Landis's comments and try to determine his motive for saying that Michael Barry used PEDs.

What does Landis hope to gain from outing Barry? Why Michael? Barry has never finished high in a GT and he has, to my knowledge, never been associated to PEDs except by riding in the shadow that is cast over any USPS rider. If Landis wanted another USPS name to support his allegations, why not pick on Ekimov? Face it, most people would buy this story. Ekimov - who rode strongly in all those Tours de France. Barry didn't even ride in the only race that Lance Armstrong cared about. Ekimov - the man who spat at Simeoni. Olympic medal winning Eki. Cagey old Russian Ekimov. Humble Canadian Barry. Ekimov is still on Armstrong and Bruyneel's payroll. Barry hasn't been associated to them in years.

So why would Floyd name Michael Barry of all former teammates? There is nothing to gain in dragging Barry into this mess. Perhaps because he is telling the truth.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Visit site
Sounds like Davey is going to subject Michael to Team Sky's foolproof anti-doping test of "looking him in the eye".

If he has doped - then I would be hoping DB is asking MB to co-operate with the relevant authorities - and that after he has served his dues that Sky will rehire him.

If MB maintains his innocence and Team Sky are as snow white as they say they are it is quite easy to fix.

Get the Lawyers to draft a document asking Michael a series of questions - from did he dope at USPS to how often he trained with Floyd. If he signs he continues racing - if he doesn't put him on non active status.

Any discrepancies in the statement would allow Sky to release him.
 
Dr. Maserati said:
Sounds like Davey is going to subject Michael to Team Sky's foolproof anti-doping test of "looking him in the eye".

If he has doped - then I would be hoping DB is asking MB to co-operate with the relevant authorities - and that after he has served his dues that Sky will rehire him.

If MB maintains his innocence and Team Sky are as snow white as they say they are it is quite easy to fix.

Get the Lawyers to draft a document asking Michael a series of questions - from did he dope at USPS to how often he trained with Floyd. If he signs he continues racing - if he doesn't put him on non active status.

Any discrepancies in the statement would allow Sky to release him.


That would be the proper way to do it but I think that Dave B might just go with a whitewash. Very disappointing if he does as things like this have a tendency to come back to haunt you in the future.
 
Apr 16, 2010
36
0
0
Visit site
Dr. Maserati said:
If he has doped - then I would be hoping DB is asking MB to co-operate with the relevant authorities - and that after he has served his dues that Sky will rehire him.

Aye, definitely an interesting point about what should DB do if MB does have a history. DB is obviously aware that the basis of preventing doping in cycling has to be by giving riders a reliable contract, security in their earnings and prospects for the future - not dependant on one-off performances.

So, if MB had doped previously (I haven't met him, and I am not biased, and i'm not going to call it either way) and SKY got rid of him - I agree DB would be propagating the problem of the Omerta etc. If he kept him on the team, he'd be in trouble for going back on his promise to not have anyone previously involved with doping riding on the team.... bummer.

pedaling squares said:
So why would Floyd name Michael Barry of all former teammates? There is nothing to gain in dragging Barry into this mess. Perhaps because he is telling the truth.

Also, very true pedaling squares, I don't see any obvious motive for Landis to specifically name Barry unless it was true. It's not as if he even said "oh everyone on USPS was doing it, Lance, Levi, Barry, etc" - he did actually say "I spoke with Barry about it at length and shared my EPO with him". Maybe Barry talked the talk to get on with the team and flushed his EPO down the lav?

Unlikely, admittedly, but if that was his take on events and he made a statement to that effect then he'd be in not too bad a place - i.e. he was clean, but knew about it going on, and it would be some corroborating evidence to get things going and stop FLandis looking like a bit of a lying dufus...
 
I find it amazing that anyone honestly believes that the members of the USPS blue train were riding clean.

The choices that Barry, Zabriskie and Hincapie make now will see that these allegations either sink or swim.

Dave B knew the risks of hiring someone with history at USPS, how he handles it will go some way to showing the world how ethical and clean Team Sky really are.