Sky and David Walsh

Talk about competitive road cycling in all its forms
micron
Posts: 1834
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2003 16:26 pm
Contact:

Re: Sky and David Walsh

Postby micron » Fri Feb 08, 2013 18:57 pm

No, without 'doping' I'm not 'just' anything, as none of us are. I don't 'need' doping anymore than you do. If I see patterns it's because I've been following the sport since the mid 80s and seen that pattern repeating time and again. And it pisses me off. It pissed me off to see clean riders getting shafted in the 80s and it pisses me off now. I remember being at a hotel in cholet in 1998 getting mario cipollinis autograph when the gendarmes turned up and carted Bruno Roussel away in handcuffs. it's why I asked you the question about PDM? So you're right, I saw doping then and have seen it time and again - even when it was attributed to 'food poisoning'. As another poster said, very eloquently, doping humanises the beautiful spectacle of the sport - I was delighted that Walsh quoted Barthes on 'the spark' and doping. He articulates it perfectly.

And it's not about the doping, is it? It's about the corruption, the money laundering, the trafficking, the malfeasance, the poor governance. If sky are clean, I'm delighted - am I wrong to want them to shout it from the rooftops, to show strong leadership for the sport, to share good practice? Isn't that one very positive way that they could show the way. After all these are extraordinary times that demand extraordinary solutions. There was talk after Festina - I'm sure you remember - of setting the clock back to year zero. It didn't happen then, perhaps it needs to now. With a clear template for a better, cleaner cycling. Because you're right, we need to break the chain - we need to stop cynics like me seeing the patterns repeating.

As for the 'self aggrandizement' bit? Believe me, no one reads my blog & you can guarantee that, if I tweet anything detrimental about wiggins and sky I shed followers like dandruff - if I cared about perpetuating 'doping' to build my following I'd keep my mouth shut and play nice. None of us is using social media to be a 'somebody' - or would be a 'nobody' - without it. We use forums and twitters and blogs because we're passionate about the sport we love. I see doping as a scourge upon that sport.

micron
Posts: 1834
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2003 16:26 pm
Contact:

Re: Sky and David Walsh

Postby micron » Fri Feb 08, 2013 19:00 pm

Jon, I enjoyed yr post and thought you made a good point. After all, in 99 all people had were theory and conjecture. There were no facts just 'the evidence of your own eyes'. Sorry that commenting from work/getting kids tea/looking after my poorly mum and drinking wine stopped me from answering sooner and thus being branded a gobshite :wink:

User avatar
bockers
Posts: 140
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2003 12:36 pm
Contact:

Re: Sky and David Walsh

Postby bockers » Fri Feb 08, 2013 19:15 pm

This has been a very constructive thread for me. The discussion has been healthy and without serious personal insults.

What it has proven to me is how useless twitter is as an information tool. The ability to post comments, that if done in print press, would be seen as slander is just wrong. Spreading rumours and misinformation about people without any evidence, hard or otherwise, is disgusting and if i did the same in my work-life i would be justifiably dismissed for gross misconduct.

Cycling's record on doping stinks, but we have a UK team trying to do the right things and they are being falsely accused and slandered because of that... weird :?

I have seen people put across a lots of facts and evidence to suggest Sky are doing things right (and I agree we cannot be 100% sure) and dispel the slanderers, I have yet to see evidence from the other side to back up their slander.

Thus has been done largely like adults and in good debating manner, and both sides deserve credit for that.

So i now see twitter in its true light of irrelevance in the real world.

User avatar
YorkshireRaw
Posts: 396
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 09:57 am

Re: Sky and David Walsh

Postby YorkshireRaw » Fri Feb 08, 2013 19:20 pm

micron wrote:Jon, I enjoyed yr post and thought you made a good point. After all, in 99 all people had were theory and conjecture. There were no facts just 'the evidence of your own eyes'. Sorry that commenting from work/getting kids tea/looking after my poorly mum and drinking wine stopped me from answering sooner and thus being branded a gobshite :wink:


But there were facts in '99- there was the speed of the race, the speed of the climbs, a backdated TUE and comment from within the peloton (Bassons).

In '12 we can factualise 2 of those - speed of the race (2km/h slower than the Armstrong yrs, on arguably a less challenging route) and the climbing speeds / wattages - also lower.

The other 2 we have to point to as being absent in '12 so whilst not proof there isn't anything wrong - it isn't providing an argument that there is anything wrong either.

Stop making statements that aren't true, and stop ignoring glaring facts just to suit your own narrative.

User avatar
YorkshireRaw
Posts: 396
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 09:57 am

Re: Sky and David Walsh

Postby YorkshireRaw » Fri Feb 08, 2013 19:27 pm

bockers wrote:What it has proven to me is how useless twitter is as an information tool. The ability to post comments, that if done in print press, would be seen as slander is just wrong. Spreading rumours and misinformation about people without any evidence, hard or otherwise, is disgusting and if i did the same in my work-life i would be justifiably dismissed for gross misconduct.



This is a good point and asks the question - if people can be arrested for racist / homophobic remarks made on Twitter, why is the same not occuring in cases of slander? Not saying Police intervention is correct as it does sometimes seem an OTT response when the service provider should simply be deleting and blocking the user, unless they are a genuine threat to someone's safety, but surely the same standards should apply?
In addition, my understanding (happy to be corrected) is that if you make an untrue allegation / statement about someone verbally, that is slander. As soon as that allegation / statement is recorded / repeated in media - print, TV or radio, it becomes libel. Does the same standard apply online? Appreciate it's harder to apportion responsibility as the open nature means there is a lack of editorial control from the media owner.

micron
Posts: 1834
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2003 16:26 pm
Contact:

Re: Sky and David Walsh

Postby micron » Fri Feb 08, 2013 19:28 pm

Drheadgear you flatter me with all this talk of having the ear of vaughters and top journalists. Vaughters uses twitter because he's canny enough to know that engaging with people builds credibility for his brand of 'clean cycling' - you want his ear? Tweet him. He'll engage. He's a pragmatic, cool operator. He'll answer anybodys questions. As will seaton or rendell or fotheringham. They're all approachable - you too could 'have their ear' if that's what's important to you. Go on, make your opinion heard, drown out the empty vessels. Otherwise stop whingeing about it when there's a simple solution.

Now to revolutionary councils - Benjamin franklin, John Adams and all the founding fathers of the USA were part of a revolutionary council. Sometimes they get the job done. I take above's point but I repeat, extraordinary situations sometimes call for extraordinary solutions. Imagine, you have the invite, you care about trying to clean up the shoot, what do you do? And what would you do to clean up the sport? The thing about CCN is that there is no structure. You want to be part of it you can be a part of it. Again, instead of moaning about disproportionate influence, exert some of your own. Unless you think that hein & pat are doing a dandy job of ******* the sport over?

micron
Posts: 1834
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2003 16:26 pm
Contact:

Re: Sky and David Walsh

Postby micron » Fri Feb 08, 2013 19:39 pm

YR know what I tell my bad lads? Get on a bike. It gives you freedom, independence. I point to the success of GB/Sky/cav as something to aspire to - you know what? Turned a lot of them onto the sport, even had a few go up and see Hoy preview his new bike the other day. The thought that my home county will be hosting the TdF depart makes my heart sing. The thought of fireworks on the champs élysées for the centenary of the tour is thrilling. But I'm a fan of the sport first and foremost, not any team or rider. If I wanted to follow teams I'd watch football. Vaughters idea of franchises and the WSC - in which he was a prime mover - fills me with dread.

You say there was evidence against Armstrong in 99 - when did you acknowledge it? In 99? Or after USADA? Because in 99 there was rumour & suspicion & innuendo. Still, as Brailsford says, hindsight is a wonderful thing

User avatar
RichN95
Posts: 15977
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 00:36 am

Re: Sky and David Walsh

Postby RichN95 » Fri Feb 08, 2013 19:47 pm

micron wrote:And it's not about the doping, is it? It's about the corruption, the money laundering, the trafficking, the malfeasance, the poor governance. If sky are clean, I'm delighted - am I wrong to want them to shout it from the rooftops, to show strong leadership for the sport, to share good practice? Isn't that one very positive way that they could show the way. After all these are extraordinary times that demand extraordinary solutions. There was talk after Festina - I'm sure you remember - of setting the clock back to year zero. It didn't happen then, perhaps it needs to now. With a clear template for a better, cleaner cycling. Because you're right, we need to break the chain - we need to stop cynics like me seeing the patterns repeating.

I didn't know which bit to quote, so that paragraph will have to do.

The history of cycling demands a certain amount of scepticism, questions must be asked, but hope must not be excluded.

It's all well and good to have doubts over a team, but when you start trying to fit all the information to a doping plan without recourse to an objective mind, then you start to lose my respect and others.

For example, let's look at some of the 'evidence' levelled at Sky.

They look like US Postal. Yes, they ride on the front of the bunch to control the race. This is a blantantly obvious tactic. If you took four or five riders and asked them to get Wiggins (an unexplosive climber) from the bottom of mountain to the top in the shortest time possible, how would you do it? Sky have just boiled down stage racing to it's bare necessities - if you have a strong team and the best TTer then attacking becomes largely irrelevant. And they get the best team with money, not doping. They turned up at the Tour with six riders who had recently been top 20 in a GT, another WT top ten rider and the World Champ. Mostly that was done at other teams. Money talks, but is rarely mentioned in cycling circles.
And they didn't look like US Postal anyway. USP would demolish everyone. Riders hung on as long as they could until only Basso was left. With Sky, riders attack them -Evans, Nibali, Pinot. Eventually four beats one, but they still did it. And in the supposedly ET Dauphine performance, Peter Weening finished alongside them and Quintana took 40s out of them.

They go to Tenerife. Just like Armstrong and Vino. Apparently it's remote and inaccessible - difficult for doping testers. It's not. It has 12 million visitors a year and is accessible from a dozen airports in the UK alone. It is a perfect training facility - altitude, but not far from sea level either, quiet roads, great weather etc. But because Armstrong went there they're supposed to train on the Penines. (And if Vino wanted inaccesible - he'd go to Kazakhstan)

Rogers was better than ever. Rogers was the same as ever. In 2012 he was 23rd on CQ ranking, in 2010 he was 23rd on CQ ranking. At HTC he tried to ride for GC, got half way up the mountain, blew and lost 5 minutes, at Sky he rode for Wiggins, got half way up the mountain, blew and lost 10 minutes

Wiggins said this and then he said that. Yeah, he's an inconsistent person - doesn't make himn a doper.

Wiggins peaked for six months. No he didn't. He peaked every month enough to perform on two or three stages once a month - about three hours of full on effort - from February to June. For a pro sportsman on a seven figure salary this should be the bare minimum, not exceptional.

Then there's made up nonsense like Ferrari having Wiggins's SRM files, DSs riding for PDM.

Really, all there is against Sky is Leinders. It's not great but it seems far more likely that the screwed up than them hiring a doping doctor likely to be named in ongoing investigations, naming him on the website, and not taking him to the Tour and taking Danny Pate to the races he was at.

Sorry for rambling.
Twitter: @RichN95

Squirrelpie
Posts: 78
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2012 11:46 am

Re: Sky and David Walsh

Postby Squirrelpie » Fri Feb 08, 2013 19:53 pm

This thread has been well and truly hijacked.

Despite the massive majority that use their brain to reason, there is a loud voice spinning a load of old cobblers.
Its like I have just walked in to the cynic asylum's sky thread.

What happened to David Walsh getting all access of sky?

Did you know my mum is a lovely woman and is believed to be sane?
She goes about her life like all other people, goes to work and looks after the family.

But there is a secret side to her.
Its born out of wanting to know something secrete.
Add that to the wacky world of surfing the internet.

She is now totally convinced, without any shadow of doubt, shore as putting her life on it...etc

Wait for it drum roll ..dum dum dum.. believes that aliens are constantly watching us and that they are following her around were ever she goes!!

(don't worry she says they are not here to harm us!)

My point, if you truly want to believe in something no matter how unlikely or ridiculous. You can always find some codswallop on the internet to convince yourself that it is true.

User avatar
bockers
Posts: 140
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2003 12:36 pm
Contact:

Re: Sky and David Walsh

Postby bockers » Fri Feb 08, 2013 19:56 pm

u say there was evidence against Armstrong in 99 - when did you acknowledge it? In 99? Or after USADA? Because in 99 there was rumour & suspicion & innuendo. Still, as Brailsford says, hindsight is a wonderful thing


Oh pleeeaaase, there is no rumour about Sky/Wiggins, and that is the point which has been ably voiced in this thread many times.

When there is it will be the cause of great debate and deservedly so. I and others have repeatedly asked for such evidence and yet to see a thing.

I thought Lance was doping after his first tour and that was without all the subsequent info on doping. i see no similarity with Bradley or Sky. A few cowards on twitter shouting unfounded accusations is not rumour it is just lies, jealousy and slander.

To get back on topic, shall we let Mr Walsh see what he can find and wait till then before muck spreading.

User avatar
ratsbeyfus
Posts: 2713
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 12:45 pm

Re: Sky and David Walsh

Postby ratsbeyfus » Fri Feb 08, 2013 20:03 pm

RichN95 wrote:
micron wrote:Some stuff


Sorry for rambling.


Rich, your posts are great. You're not rambling at all... your making things crystal clear for those that don't want to see.
----------------------------------------------------------------

I had one of them red bikes but I don't any more. Sad face.

@ratsbey

User avatar
RichN95
Posts: 15977
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 00:36 am

Re: Sky and David Walsh

Postby RichN95 » Fri Feb 08, 2013 20:03 pm

Squirrelpie wrote:This thread has been well and truly hijacked.

What happened to David Walsh getting all access of sky?


In this forum we like to go where the mood takes us rather than rigidly sticking to the topic.

When Walsh writes something else, I'm sure we will discuss it/call him a Murdoch lackey sell-out.
Twitter: @RichN95

User avatar
RichN95
Posts: 15977
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 00:36 am

Re: Sky and David Walsh

Postby RichN95 » Fri Feb 08, 2013 20:04 pm

ratsbeyfus wrote:
RichN95 wrote:
micron wrote:Some stuff


Sorry for rambling.


Rich, your posts are great. You're not rambling at all... your making things crystal clear for those that don't want to see.


I'm slightly drunk though. I was on strike this afternoon. I'm not entirely sure why - pensions I think.
Twitter: @RichN95

User avatar
ratsbeyfus
Posts: 2713
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 12:45 pm

Re: Sky and David Walsh

Postby ratsbeyfus » Fri Feb 08, 2013 20:06 pm

bockers wrote:
u say there was evidence against Armstrong in 99 - when did you acknowledge it? In 99? Or after USADA? Because in 99 there was rumour & suspicion & innuendo. Still, as Brailsford says, hindsight is a wonderful thing


So, rumours from that time turned out to be true...big deal. It's asinine to use that to justify rumour-mongering based upon a hunch.
----------------------------------------------------------------

I had one of them red bikes but I don't any more. Sad face.

@ratsbey

User avatar
ratsbeyfus
Posts: 2713
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 12:45 pm

Re: Sky and David Walsh

Postby ratsbeyfus » Fri Feb 08, 2013 20:07 pm

RichN95 wrote:
ratsbeyfus wrote:
RichN95 wrote:
micron wrote:Some stuff


Sorry for rambling.


Rich, your posts are great. You're not rambling at all... your making things crystal clear for those that don't want to see.


I'm slightly drunk though. I was on strike this afternoon. I'm not entirely sure why - pensions I think.


OK... now you're rambling.

:D
----------------------------------------------------------------

I had one of them red bikes but I don't any more. Sad face.

@ratsbey

User avatar
OCDuPalais
Posts: 2229
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2012 23:10 pm

Re: Sky and David Walsh

Postby OCDuPalais » Fri Feb 08, 2013 20:07 pm

micron wrote:Now to revolutionary councils - Benjamin franklin, John Adams and all the founding fathers of the USA were part of a revolutionary council. Sometimes they get the job done.


Pffft...And look how that ended up! The paradigm for unsustainable capitalist greed that has coated the globe in a suffocating slime of intellectual algae whilst arming every one of its paranoid inhabitants that can write 'muslims', 'commies',or 'want gun', as their reasons for wanting a gun...

The only good things to have come of the US are the blues/folk country & jazz, the end of slavery/segregation and Noam Chomski. In other words, the powerful human responses to idiots and repression.

And Charles Grodin - as we were saying the other day - he's good. Quite fond of Woody Allen, too - before the whole strange adopted-daughter relationship thing, though. Bill Hicks - could do with a few more like him. Oh - and Greg Lemond! What was I thinking!?! And Andy Hampsten - classy... Have I missed anything?

Richmond Racer
Posts: 8475
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 17:11 pm

Re: Sky and David Walsh

Postby Richmond Racer » Fri Feb 08, 2013 20:09 pm

Rich, you're following the fine tradition of Winston Churchill - wrote many of his finest speeches after a few libations.

AntiTroll
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 19:28 pm

Re: Sky and David Walsh

Postby AntiTroll » Fri Feb 08, 2013 20:10 pm

As someone who follows a number of you on twitter (Inc FG) and dips into the BR forum and the clinic now and then, after trawling through all 35 pages of this thread I felt compelled to finally sign up and do a summary to justify the time spent reading it all and for anyone joining now who doesn't want to endure it.

Here's my two cents/summary (in brief as on phone).

Back to how the thread started, Walsh with open access to sky = good to the majority and a pat on the back to sky. Others won't be happy unless kimmage is handcuffed to wiggo (tandem?) for the giro and the tour.

Micron says she has secret evidence, but then says she doesn't. Everyone is a bit WTF was that all about.

Next twenty pages is mostly micron saying that sky COULD be cheating as they are doing well and others slamming her due to her lack of factual basis. As far as I can recall the sum facts were that they are winning, were consistent, worked with leinders and LA knew wiggins's power for a stage of P-N. I don't think she mentioned tenerife which was a surprise.

Anyway circular arguments followed for a Loooong time with FF sticking up for micron and little else emerging apart from the fact that Wiggins COULD be a Martian, have a motor in his bike or be taking cera or actually have an identical twin who does the mountains for him (may have used creative license there). Peaking was also discussed but came to the conclusion that whatever you do you could be doping.

Women's racing was briefly discussed, market forces got a bashing (bye bye economics MSc of mine).

Finally we are onto CCN and it's legitimacy.

There is one question that I am really struggling to get my head around at the end of all this.

FG/Micron, how did you not get voted in as councillor? Your arguments, often based on vague ambiguities are astounding, and often convincing despite some of their flaws, Mandleson would be proud! I think that's sort of a compliment-ish.

Sorry for typos - done on the phone as said before!

Richmond Racer
Posts: 8475
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 17:11 pm

Re: Sky and David Walsh

Postby Richmond Racer » Fri Feb 08, 2013 20:12 pm

OCDuPalais wrote:
micron wrote:Now to revolutionary councils - Benjamin franklin, John Adams and all the founding fathers of the USA were part of a revolutionary council. Sometimes they get the job done.


Pffft...And look how that ended up! The paradigm for unsustainable capitalist greed that has coated the globe in a suffocating slime of intellectual algae whilst arming every one of its paranoid inhabitants that can write 'muslims', 'commies',or 'want gun', as their reasons for wanting a gun...

The only good things to have come of the US are the blues/folk country & jazz, the end of slavery/segregation and Noam Chomski. In other words, the powerful human responses to idiots and repression.

And Charles Grodin - as we were saying the other day - he's good. Quite fond of Woody Allen, too - before the whole strange adopted-daughter relationship thing, though. Bill Hicks - could do with a few more like him. Oh - and Greg Lemond! What was I thinking!?! And Andy Hampsten - classy... Have I missed anything?



I'll put in a good word for Ray LaMontagne

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3pltmw6cmI
Last edited by Richmond Racer on Fri Feb 08, 2013 20:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
RichN95
Posts: 15977
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 00:36 am

Re: Sky and David Walsh

Postby RichN95 » Fri Feb 08, 2013 20:14 pm

Richmond Racer wrote:Rich, you're following the fine tradition of Winston Churchill - wrote many of his finest speeches after a few libations.

I may be drunk - but in the morning I will be sober. But you will still be in Richmond.

(Not that that is a bad thing - Richmond, London or Richmond, Yorkshire?)
Twitter: @RichN95


Return to “Pro Race”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Joelsim, The_Boy and 8 guests