preferred-google-button
log in
register

Are cracks appearing in the Walsh / Sky love affair?

  • Creator
    Topic
  • June 22, 2014 at 9:57 pm #21744
    daddyELVIS

    Walsh has been very quiet since puffer-gate and the subsequent revelations about Froome’s TUE at the TdR – but today, in an article for the Sunday Times, he broke his silence.

    I’ve only seen quotes from the article on the CN website, but the following is quite telling:

    “What has happened to the team’s belief that TUEs should not be sought for riders in competition? Farrell says he was unaware this ethical position existed within the team. Froome says he never heard of it. But Peters has said it did exist at one point and the team are in only their fifth year,” Walsh writes. “As in the case of the appointment of (former Rabobank doctor) Leinders, Team Sky talk the talk of high ethical standards but do not walk the walk.”

    Finally, from Walsh’s own mouth – Sky talk the talk, but do not walk the walk!

    I’m sure Walsh hasn’t delved too far below the surface in this article, but it’s a start!

  • Creator
    Topic
Viewing 15 replies - 31 through 45 (of 88 total)
1 2 3 4 5 6
  • Author
    Replies
  • June 25, 2014 at 8:46 pm #800589
    0
    daddyELVIS

    mooleur wrote:I think their

    mooleur wrote:
    I think their statements were actually around having none of their *riders* having had past links to doping – back office staff-wise I think we can all agree that’s nigh on impossible.

    Sorry, you’re mistaken – they even went so far as to say they wouldn’t even employ docs from cycling.

    June 25, 2014 at 3:12 pm #800587
    0
    mooleur

    I think their statements were
    I think their statements were actually around having none of their *riders* having had past links to doping – back office staff-wise I think we can all agree that’s nigh on impossible.

    June 25, 2014 at 1:30 pm #800585
    0
    glynr36

    farrell wrote:It’s when Dave

    farrell wrote:
    It’s when Dave Brailsford started coaching British Cycling.

    If Sky do indeed have such a sophisticated doping programme and receiving special treatment from the UCI then Brailsford must be involved. It would be inconceivable that he isn’t.
    If Sky have the techniques to dope and disguise it, then British Cycling have them and have been using them too.

    So, which truth is it you want?

    I’ve not inferred that I think Sky are doping, all I’ve said way way back at the start of the thread was that I thought Sky were niave in the past to make the statements about having no one involved with doping (we’ve already established this is nigh on impossible), and then the one about the use of TUEs they made too.

    Nor did I say I thought they got special treatment, just that the UCI hadn’t followed the rules for the issue of a TUE.

    June 25, 2014 at 1:17 pm #800583
    0
    farrell

    It’s when Dave Brailsford
    It’s when Dave Brailsford started coaching British Cycling.

    If Sky do indeed have such a sophisticated doping programme and receiving special treatment from the UCI then Brailsford must be involved. It would be inconceivable that he isn’t.

    If Sky have the techniques to dope and disguise it, then British Cycling have them and have been using them too.

    So, which truth is it you want?

    June 25, 2014 at 11:59 am #800581
    0
    glynr36

    farrell wrote:DaddyElvis,

    farrell wrote:
    DaddyElvis, GKam, Glynr – Do you think all British riders, from 1997 onwards, should be stripped of every medal they have won?

    Curious to the significance of 1997 here.

    June 25, 2014 at 11:58 am #800579
    0
    glynr36

    crazy-legs wrote:Quote:I’m

    crazy-legs wrote:
    I’m not entirley implying guilt by association, but if they were keen on a clean (as possible) team, you’d avoid guys linked to people who were dirty.

    someone connected to USPS/Festina/Ferrai/Puerto and so on should have been an instant no.

    Ever heard of the phrase “innocent until proven guilty”?
    Besides which if you took the “guilt by association” to it’s logical conclusion, you’d rule out the entire pro peloton. It’d be very easy to link pretty much any rider back to doping via some sort of association.

    There are certain instances where you can deny someone a job due to “guilt by association” but by and large, it’s illegal.

    As true as that may be, some of the associations are ‘stronger’ than others, I guess the benfit now this is all said with hindsight with the out come of the USADA USPS investigation and so on. At the time, it would have been a lot harder to make these statements.

    June 25, 2014 at 11:06 am #800577
    0
    crazy-legs

    Quote:I’m not entirley

    I’m not entirley implying guilt by association, but if they were keen on a clean (as possible) team, you’d avoid guys linked to people who were dirty.

    someone connected to USPS/Festina/Ferrai/Puerto and so on should have been an instant no.

    Ever heard of the phrase “innocent until proven guilty”?
    Besides which if you took the “guilt by association” to it’s logical conclusion, you’d rule out the entire pro peloton. It’d be very easy to link pretty much any rider back to doping via some sort of association.

    There are certain instances where you can deny someone a job due to “guilt by association” but by and large, it’s illegal.

    June 25, 2014 at 10:36 am #800575
    0
    farrell

    DaddyElvis, GKam, Glynr – Do
    DaddyElvis, GKam, Glynr – Do you think all British riders, from 1997 onwards, should be stripped of every medal they have won?

    June 25, 2014 at 10:12 am #800573
    0
    glynr36

    crazy-legs wrote:Pretty much

    crazy-legs wrote:
    Pretty much everyone was doping in pre-Sky days hence why it was so difficult for Sky to employ a known clean team.

    True, but they employed people complicit to USPS/LA.

    crazy-legs wrote:
    They did the best they could using the available information as to who was clean – none of the people involved at the time the team was formed had ever been found guilty of any crime.

    See above, but they didn’t seem to look in backgrounds that much, it just seemed like they asked ‘Ever doped?’ got a ‘No’ and left it at that, I’m not entirley implying guilt by association, but if they were keen on a clean (as possible) team, you’d avoid guys linked to people who were dirty.

    crazy-legs wrote:
    And when they admitted their past they were fired (or they retired then admitted it, end result is the same) unlike all the other teams where, as I said earlier, numerous riders and/or admin staff linked to doping in the past are still on the roster.

    I’m not saying Sky are the only ones (many people do though) but when they came into the sport spouting the ‘no dopers’ ‘clean team’ lines, then they should have really done some home work and really erred on the side of caution, someone connected to USPS/Festina/Ferrai/Puerto and so on should have been an instant no.

    June 25, 2014 at 10:05 am #800571
    0
    Stumps

    daddyELVIS wrote:stumps

    daddyELVIS wrote:
    stumps wrote:

    You feel the need to comment but with nothing constructive to counter what I’ve said – probably because I’ve stated the truth. I don’t expect you to accept that as your rose-tinted specs are more lopsided than mine!
    =))

    errr – every comment you’ve ever written about Sky is all just pie in the sky without fact or foundation and as i said is just 2+2 = 10. I get it you dont like Sky but there’s no need to lie just to get your point over because all it does is make you look rather silly and your inability to include other pro teams in the arguement who, like other posters have stated, are still more heavily involved in drug users both past and present is quite sad.

    June 24, 2014 at 9:03 pm #800569
    0
    crazy-legs

    Key words there being “in
    Key words there being “in pre-Sky days”.

    Pretty much everyone was doping in pre-Sky days hence why it was so difficult for Sky to employ a known clean team.
    They did the best they could using the available information as to who was clean – none of the people involved at the time the team was formed had ever been found guilty of any crime.

    And when they admitted their past they were fired (or they retired then admitted it, end result is the same) unlike all the other teams where, as I said earlier, numerous riders and/or admin staff linked to doping in the past are still on the roster.

    June 24, 2014 at 8:30 pm #800567
    0
    glynr36

    crazy-legs wrote:
    And you’re

    crazy-legs wrote:

    And you’re all up in arms about Sky employing one doctor for a few months or about an alleged misuse of a TUE? Christ, get over yourselves!
    http://cyclingtips.com.au/2014/06/wada-says-uci-followed-rules-in-granting-froome-tue-for-corticosteroid/

    Nothing to see here, move along.

    Juillich, Barry, Rogers, Yates.
    All Sky and have admitted, or been heavily linked to doping (Ferrari Clients etc), in pre sky days.

    June 24, 2014 at 7:26 pm #800565
    0
    crazy-legs

    Quote:5) Sky do not operate

    5) Sky do not operate to the same high ethical standards as many other teams, despite the BS PR they spout

    Sorry, please enlighten me on this one?
    Astana have a certain Alexandre Vinokourov as their Manager who you may well remember as having several doping convictions and accusations of paying off rivals. A quick look through the Astana team roster reveals several other riders who have at various times been suspended or banned for doping.

    Cannondale have Ivan Basso who although never admitting actually doping did admit to planning to dope and was linked to Operacion Puerto and served a 2-year ban.

    Garmin Sharp I’ll let off as although it’s got a fair few former dopers at least they’ve all admitted it and now campaign for clean sport – I’ve got a lot of time and respect for David Millar and Jonathan Vaughters.

    Team Tinkoff-Saxo have former doper Bjarne Riis at the helm and convicted doper Alberto Contador still riding.

    Trek Factory Racing have Frank Schleck who served a 1-year ban for testing positive for xipamide (a masking agent) and he too was linked to Operacion Puerto.

    That’s just a quick glance through the team rosters.

    I mean, the list goes on and on – most of the teams still to this day have former dopers involved in the management or actually riding. Some have admitted it, some continue to deny any involvement and protest their innocence.

    And you’re all up in arms about Sky employing one doctor for a few months or about an alleged misuse of a TUE? Christ, get over yourselves!
    http://cyclingtips.com.au/2014/06/wada-says-uci-followed-rules-in-granting-froome-tue-for-corticosteroid/

    Nothing to see here, move along.

    June 24, 2014 at 6:25 pm #800563
    0
    daddyELVIS

    stumps wrote:
    Roll on the TdF

    stumps wrote:

    Roll on the TdF when Froome will win again and Sky will prevail. I would love to be a fly on the wall in your house when it happens.

    You feel the need to comment but with nothing constructive to counter what I’ve said – probably because I’ve stated the truth. I don’t expect you to accept that as your rose-tinted specs are more lopsided than mine!

    If you’re right about Froome at this year’s TdF, and if Contador goes the distance, then I’ll most probably enjoy the spectacle of Froome and Brailsford getting more and more agitated in the press conferences, as they try to explain super-human performances with mattresses, pineapple juice, and Nutella bans =))

    June 24, 2014 at 4:00 pm #800561
    0
    Stumps

    daddyElvis, oh how you make
    daddyElvis, oh how you make me giggle with your incessant digs at Sky which clearly show your viewing this with very tainted and very lopsided glasses and to be honest everything you say gets taken with a pinch of salt because in your world 2+2 = 10 when it comes to Sky.

    Roll on the TdF when Froome will win again and Sky will prevail. I would love to be a fly on the wall in your house when it happens.

  • Author
    Replies
Viewing 15 replies - 31 through 45 (of 88 total)
1 2 3 4 5 6
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.