Wiggins/Froome Asthma

pedro_colnago

Lumen wrote: »

Writing for money is his job.

I know he is a professional journalist, it's his methods of playing the naive fanboy journalist and then later being the cynical hack is tiresome. He has been doing it years, it's fake and plays to the gallery when it suits. I thinking he's been "duped" a few many times to be genuine at this stage.

MPFGLB

Here is Tinkov with a more measured approach

https://www.instagram.com/p/BK1PKpKgHGL/?taken-by=olegtinkov&hl=en

pelevin

I could give a long post with thoughts on David Walsh & Kimmage - and maybe there'd be nothing wrong with that - but to go a slightly different route, for all the talk of them it's actually another Irish journalist who deserves most praise here and that's Shane Stokes. There was a time-gap between the leak of these TUEs and the story and its implications really gathering momentum & becoming an unstoppable force. Maybe this would have happened anyway but the key element in it becoming so big seems to me to have been Stokes' two articles in Cycling Tips, his interviews with Dr Jeroen Swart and Jorg Jaksche respectively, and then in the mainstream media particularly The Telegraph latching onto these pieces and really running with them, which then helped bring the rest of the cycling media and mainstream media inevitably in their wake. That might be a bit simplistic and someone like Walsh may have written his pieces regardless but it does seem to have been the way things happened, and perhaps otherwise even if Walsh had written his stuff, it wouldn't have been amidst something that already had such momentum.

In fairness to add, I'm not much familiar with that mentioned newspaper, & I was surprised how firmly The Telegraph got stuck into the issue. I'd have thought their reputation as an establishment bastion might have had them slow to take on so fervently such an 'unpatriotic' story. No idea of what may be deeper backgrounds as to why but anyway well done especially to Shane Stokes and someone like Jeroen Swart also for raising his voice. Each without the other may have been in a much weaker position to help flag up how much wrong there was in all this.

happytramp

MPFGLB wrote: »

So we all now Dan Martin is clean for sure how ?? KImmage has decreed it !!! ..And yet the whole of SKY are bad.or anyone he takes again is wrong ..as I said these one dimensional biased views are not in the interest of sport.

What are you talking about? I never implied Dan Martin was clean. I was just pointing out that you said "there are clean riders in cycling....just not in paul kimmage's world"..... and that is categorically incorrect. In 'Paul Kimmage's world' there ARE clean riders.

From the language and level of anger expressed in your posts it seems like you're more angry with the supposed damage Paul Kimmage is doing to the sport than you are about SKY's flagrant abuse of the TUE system. I'm not implying you're condoning Sky, it's just your anger seems to be directed in the wrong direction.

pelevin

Just out of interest to add a few things I came across yesterday when googling about a bit. To say first I don't think there's any debate about this Wiggins TUE being dodgy or not. I think it very obviously as Dumoulin said "stinks."

Below Brailsford in response to the Froome TUE story in 2014:

'Addressing the recent controversy over Froome’s TUE at the Tour de Romandie — where it was leaked to the media that he had been granted a TUE for a course of corticosteroids to treat an illness — Brailsford says he has no regrets: “The decisions that the team’s doctors took, I back them 100%. Do I understand why there was a breach of medical confidentiality? No I don’t.”
“I’m not comfortable with that, not because we have anything to hide, but because it doesn’t feel right to me."'

I can see why it mightn't have felt right to you there, Dave, & agree of course you had nothing to hide.

David Walsh quotes from 2014 about that incident.

'"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."
Walsh makes a point out of the fact that the other four riders in the top five in the Tour of Romandie would not have been able to apply for the TUE that Froome received, due to them being members of teams involved in The Movement For Credible Cycling, whose rules forbid that option.
"Team Sky like to portray themselves as the most ethical team in the peloton. The evidence says otherwise."'

This below is someone describing Brailsford's response in interview as to why Sky hadn't joined the MPCC, so how fair a description obviously a bit up in the air without hearing the interview though it does seem an entirely plausible account - and all the more so now.

'For the benefit of people who haven't seen this interview...

The most absurd thing was his response to the question of why Team Sky aren't part of the MPCC. He picked up one point (and specifically one point only) of their charter to explain why Sky was not a member: the rule that you cannot sign a rider within 2 years who has served more than a 6th month suspension. He twisted this so that his objection was that MPCC members were allowed to sign riders who had served a sentence shorter than 6 months, which goes against Sky's zero tolerance policy.

It's quite simple, Dave. 1) You become part of the MPCC 2) You don't sign anyone who contradicts your supposed zero tolerance. You have the power.

I'm quite sure the MPCC don't bully people into signing dopers. That would be slightly counterintuitive.'

CramCycle

+1 on Stokes. Genuinely measured approach that shows off impartial journalism IMO. I am not a fan of Walsh because he has not been impartial regardless of what side of the fence he was on. Don't get me wrong, I understand his hatred of one person more than others but even accepting him for what he is, a tabloid sports writer, his writing doesn't draw me in. Kimmage on the other hand does draw me in. His writing is bitter and filled with inaccuracies. There are occasions where he is a great journalist, reading back on the things he has gotten people to say over the years but they are bits of genius that are so long in the build up, they get missed by todays social media immediate news as it happens readers. there are more times where he is a great columnist, and he generally admits thats what he is when it happens, he can't seem to hide it. I remember reading the opening to "The fall and rise of Matt Hampson" many years ago. He admits to things, many of us of a certain age are often guilty of, it was nice to get a bit of refreshing honesty.

As for Wiggins and his TUE. I don't pity him, he was on the outside looking in. He made his opinions clear on what he felt to be cheated. He then went as close as he could to the line with SKY without crossing it, that in my opinion he is no better. He is no different than those he claimed to despise, and as can be seen from comments from him, like all those seduced by power, it took a part of his soul. He was only better than those he once despised on a technicality. Should SKY bear the brunt of this. Yes, without doubt, they knew what he was at. If they didn't then they are lying about their attention to detail. No matter what way they paint it, their management are liars. They realised pretty quick that their methodology would not work in the short space their funding bodies needed and so they changed to make it work, bent the rules but technically did not break them.

Reminds me of this, although who the devil is, is open to such interpretation:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7DMDscGOUpg

Not the whole thing but the idea.

MPFGLB

happytramp wrote: »

What are you talking about? I never implied Dan Martin was clean. I was just pointing out that you said "there are clean riders in cycling....just not in paul kimmage's world"..... and that is categorically incorrect. In 'Paul Kimmage's world' there ARE clean riders.

From the language and level of anger expressed in your posts it seems like you're more angry with the supposed damage Paul Kimmage is doing to the sport than you are about SKY's flagrant abuse of the TUE system. I'm not implying you're condoning Sky, it's just your anger seems to be directed in the wrong direction.

I never said you implied Dan martin was clean .(can you tell me where this is written) ..I said how do we know that Dan martin is clean ? by what Kimmage told us ? You were never mentioned ? My point is Kimmage has a view that is pertinent to him without the inside knowledge and with a biased slant

( I donlt know if Martin is clean but I would guess he is but I would not make proclamations that he is not more than I would the SKY are all dirty...This is my point the one dimentional arguments of Kimmage have a negative over tone for the sport ...

But if I disagree with Kimmage and how he goes about things I am condoning doping on here. But for me he is not the saviour of he sport, You can be against doping and against Kimmage

BTW I am not angry.. I have said what I think about Kimmage and I have been told everything I have written is bollix and ludicrious

However if I defend my points then its I am angry ...

CramCycle

MOD VOICE: Tensions are rising in this thread. Not aimed at any poster in particular, but more advisory to all posters in the thread. Attack the post, not the poster. It is too much at this point to go back and see which posts fall on which side of the line so this is more of a going forward point.

Go for the post, not the poster. If the post went for you, let it go. It is not a reasonable excuse going forward. If you are unsure when replying to certain posts, PM me for clarification. I am not going back to issue cards but I have plenty here for future posts.

MPFGLB

Here is Walsh on Newstalk

http://www.newstalk.com/david-walsh-reacts-to-paul-kimmage


What strikes me is what he said on how being inside SKY he broke the JTL story, how he also was given him access to doctors who are unhappy with Brailsford and how does not like celebrity and given Kimmages approach to the story he is made out to be the villina of the piece

pedro_colnago

ThisRegard wrote: »

Well he did say he may have been duped.

How manyy times has he been duped at this stage? He couldn't be that naive. "What? Pro cyclist teams engaging in doping.... Well I never....!!"

pedro_colnago

ThisRegard wrote: »

I'm not defending him, just giving his answer when the question was put to him.

Brailsford coming up on 5Live at 7 anyway.

Yeah i know you were but to be honest his answer was utter bollocks IMO. For a much lauded investigative journalist to say that he was duped on this occasion is laughable, ive heard it all before from him waxing lyrical about his faux love of cycling and his fanboy approach as regards Stephen Roche, Lance Armstrong and Team Sky, only to switch sides afterwards and make more stories about it with an opposing slant. Great way to make a living by skinning a cat two different ways. Parasitic individual and an odious self serving person. David always has an agenda every time he picks up a pen.

1bryan

highbury1913 wrote: »

I just don't agree with him on this when he personalizes things as he done again here or even with Nico Roche who he is always singling out.

I'd certainly agree on that point. Nico has come in for some ridiculous attacks from him, and they've been totally unwarranted. Nico would be one of the pros I'd have most admiration for in cycling today.

Likewise, some of the attacks on Kimmage, such as those by stickybottle, have been unwarranted and ridiculous.

Maybe people lose the run of themselves a bit when tensions and emotions run high. Not that that's any kind of excuse.

Macy0161

pedro_colnago wrote: »

Yeah i know you were but to be honest his answer was utter bollocks IMO. For a much lauded investigative journalist to say that he was duped on this occasion is laughable, ive heard it all before from him waxing lyrical about his faux love of cycling and his fanboy approach as regards Stephen Roche, Lance Armstrong and Team Sky, only to switch sides afterwards and make more stories about it with an opposing slant. Great way to make a living by skinning a cat two different ways. Parasitic individual and an odious self serving person. David always has an agenda every time he picks up a pen.

He ghost wrote A Man for all Seasons which explained away Kelly getting popped iirc!

omri

I'm wondering why would any big team (today not back in the golden years) risk setting up a doping scheme. With all the money involved from sponsors is there really no big financial (or other apart from being banned by UCI) penalty for management and the riders ? If Wiggins or Froome or Quintana were suddenly confirmed cheating apart from being banned what else would happen? Milions of euro fines, jail terms, obviously some reputation damage. I'm not speculating by any means but just so that I can form a better question - why or if SKY when it was formed decided that we will talk the talk but not walk the walk and use all the clever tricks TUEs and whatnot ? Was it because they wanted to become biggest force in pro peloton and they knew that this is the way to go if you want to be the number one these days ? Or is it because if they went 100% clean they'd be far behind everyone else, which could mean that cycling still isn't clean. Is there any confirmed difference in performance between two guys who are equally skilled and trained but one is clean and the other isnt ? Is it right to think that some sponsors that are not in cycling business don't really care if the sponsored teams are clean or not as they get their exposure (or whatever else theyre paying for) and they will not loose the business over doping scandal ?

ednwireland

Brailsford basically saying we broke no rules everything was sanctioned by specialists and doctors at the uci so ok then.

terrydel

MPFGLB wrote: »

Here is Walsh on Newstalk

http://www.newstalk.com/david-walsh-reacts-to-paul-kimmage


What strikes me is what he said on how being inside SKY he broke the JTL story, how he also was given him access to doctors who are unhappy with Brailsford and how does not like celebrity and given Kimmages approach to the story he is made out to be the villina of the piece

Good interview that. Not a huge fan of Chris O'Donighue, but he asked some good questions there, did a bit of research clearly.

terrydel

ednwireland wrote: »

Brailsford basically saying we broke no rules everything was sanctioned by specialists and doctors at the uci so ok then.

Sure the uci were facilitating LA at one stage, so using their sanctioning of this as vindication does not fly at all!

Carawaystick

MPFGLB wrote: »

As for my point is is very simple ..You can doubt SKY AND still think Kimmage is part of the problem with the sport

I'm unclear how a journalist saying cyclists are doping cheats is making cyclists cheat ?
What next reporters saying the ioc/oci are at shennanigans is making Pat hickey do all the bad things he is accused of doing? I suppose Kimmage reporting on Pat Hickey hounding a rape victim in the courts means Kimmage is part of the problem there too?

Weepsie

I think he problem with Kimmage (and not him in isolation) is that he's quick to accuse or maybe just insinuate that someone or something people are cheating, however he often can't back it up. He relies heavily on hearsay and his gut, but journalism also requires a degree of research and hard evidence.

Ive respect for him in that he has his ideals, and hes not for turning the way walshe is. He did the pro cycling thing, I genuinely believe his regret and having doped however incidental it was, whereas with the likes of Miller I always thought he was using it as a launchpad for a post cycling career

pelevin

I'm kind of half-expecting an upcoming headline of "Dave Brailsford claims never to have heard of Lance Armstrong."

"He sounds like someone very bad for the sport," said Mr Brailsford after the Sky News interviewer filled him in on Mr Armstrong's renown and actions in the course of a glittering career that ended in disgrace."

terrydel

pelevin wrote: »

I'm kind of half-expecting an upcoming headline of "Dave Brailsford claims never to have heard of Lance Armstrong."

"He sounds like someone very bad for the sport," said Mr Brailsford after the Sky News interviewer filled him in on Mr Armstrong's renown and actions in the course of a glittering career that ended in disgrace."

Brailsford is the absolute poster boy for the modern corporate world.
All spin and bull****, not a shred of honesty or principle about him.

Fur coat, no knickers to a tee.

MPFGLB

Carawaystick wrote: »

I'm unclear how a journalist saying cyclists are doping cheats is making cyclists cheat ?
What next reporters saying the ioc/oci are at shennanigans is making Pat hickey do all the bad things he is accused of doing? I suppose Kimmage reporting on Pat Hickey hounding a rape victim in the courts means Kimmage is part of the problem there too?

Jasus...Where dio I write that ...seems people only read what they want

I said Kimmage is part of the promlems with cycling

And that is more than doping and his presence does not for all his vocla inputs uncover the issues on dpoing ....no where did I say Kimmage is making cyclist dope...c'mon...that is some leap ....unless you think cycling has only one problem

DanDublin1982

MPFGLB wrote: »

Jasus...Where dio I write that ...seems people only read what they want

I said Kimmage is part of the promlems with cycling

And that is more than doping and his presence does not for all his vocla inputs uncover the issues on dpoing ....no where did I say Kimmage is making cyclist dope...c'mon...that is some leap ....unless you think cycling has only one problem

Lots of confusion about what you did mean, perhaps you could tell us what exact problems it is you feel Kimmage is contributing to and how?

mr spuckler

an interesting excerpt from a kimmage interview with nico that's marked as december 2015 on the indo website;

PK: Another concern highlighted in the report is the abuse of cortisone and TUEs (therapeutic use exemptions).

NR: Well, that's something I can give out about.

PK: Go on.

NR: I do think that's one of the problems to be solved - the abuse of TUEs. I find it very unusual that a rider can have a sore knee three days before a main classic at the same time every year. There has to be a clearer line on how the TUEs are given and when they are given and on the consequences for the event. For example, with the MPCC (a union of 11 of the top teams) it's two weeks (without competition if you need a TUE), the other is two days. That can't be right. It has to be the same law for everyone.

CramCycle

mr spuckler wrote: »

an interesting excerpt from a kimmage interview with nico that's marked as december 2015 on the indo website;

At least we can see another reason why NR is not at Sky. Honesty.

Carawaystick

MPFGLB wrote: »

Jasus...Where dio I write that ...seems people only read what they want

I said Kimmage is part of the promlems with cycling

And that is more than doping and his presence does not for all his vocla inputs uncover the issues on dpoing ....no where did I say Kimmage is making cyclist dope...c'mon...that is some leap ....unless you think cycling has only one problem

What specifically would get better about cycling if Kimmage retired today?

Kaisr Sose

ednwireland wrote: »

Brailsford basically saying we broke no rules everything was sanctioned by specialists and doctors at the uci so ok then.

The aggregation of Marginal truths = one big cover up!

Killergreene

Lads these guys are upto their gills in diesel. No doubt about it. The shroud of secrecy is slowly being pulled back.

Lumen

This thread is all kinds of cranky.

Anyway, awk-ward...

Chris Froome offers his view on the Sir Bradley Wiggins' use of TUEs and the system as a whole
Froome said the TUE system "urgently" needed reform, which is the opposite of what his Team Sky boss Dave Brailsford said
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/other-sports/cycling/chris-froome-offers-view-sir-8922509

bryangiggsy

Lumen wrote: »

This thread is all kinds of cranky.

Anyway, awk-ward...

Chris Froome offers his view on the Sir Bradley Wiggins' use of TUEs and the system as a whole
Froome said the TUE system "urgently" needed reform, which is the opposite of what his Team Sky boss Dave Brailsford said
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/other-sports/cycling/chris-froome-offers-view-sir-8922509

You lost me at Mirror.