Ljungqvist joins Sky as sports director.

sonny73

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest/427324/marcus-ljungqvist-confirmed-as-team-sky-sports-director.html

moray_gub

As he rode alongside with Sunderland and was employed by CSC........is that enough to diss him by means of the Forum Guilty By Association Rule article 12 ?

dave_1

Moray Gub wrote:

As he rode alongside with Sunderland and was employed by CSC........is that enough to diss him by means of the Forum Guilty By Association Rule article 12 ?

well...on the forum recently it seems that simply working for a team of what 70 or 80 employees spread out over a continent is enough evidence to claim that any or all must have "links to doping" cause of the actions of a few individuals over years within the 70 or 80 who are mostly at other ends of the continent and rarely meet collectively. Take a look at rider 4142's schedule and we learn that the bulk of the doping was done away from races in training blocks which gives some hints as to the secrecy riders try ensure...the idea that all and even the CSC tea lady, bus driver, mechanic and flight booker are all in on it is not the case. head in the sand is what some are guilty of...but not more than that

iainf72

Moray Gub wrote:

As he rode alongside with Sunderland and was employed by CSC........is that enough to diss him by means of the Forum Guilty By Association Rule article 12 ?

Nah. In this case we've invoked the Moray Gub clause, section 3. That's the one where which allowed us to look at Di Luca's performances in the Giro this year and think they were natural.

moray_gub

iainf72 wrote:

Moray Gub wrote:

As he rode alongside with Sunderland and was employed by CSC........is that enough to diss him by means of the Forum Guilty By Association Rule article 12 ?

Nah. In this case we've invoked the Moray Gub clause, section 3. That's the one where which allowed us to look at Di Luca's performances in the Giro this year and think they were natural.

That clause isnt applied though as in that instance his perfomances in the Giro this year were nothing out of the ordinary as was agreed by others at the time despite what they found in his piss later. Section 3 of the MG clause is only applied if his performances are way out of left field with what he previously achieved.

iainf72

I think that clause must be applied as Di Luca was of course linked by association to dubious doctor. That's association, isn't it?

alanmcn1

iainf72 wrote:

Moray Gub wrote:

As he rode alongside with Sunderland and was employed by CSC........is that enough to diss him by means of the Forum Guilty By Association Rule article 12 ?

Nah. In this case we've invoked the Moray Gub clause, section 3. That's the one where which allowed us to look at Di Luca's performances in the Giro this year and think they were natural.

calvjones

Moray Gub wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

Moray Gub wrote:

As he rode alongside with Sunderland and was employed by CSC........is that enough to diss him by means of the Forum Guilty By Association Rule article 12 ?

Nah. In this case we've invoked the Moray Gub clause, section 3. That's the one where which allowed us to look at Di Luca's performances in the Giro this year and think they were natural.

That clause isnt applied though as in that instance his perfomances in the Giro this year were nothing out of the ordinary as was agreed by others at the time despite what they found in his wee-wee later. Section 3 of the MG clause is only applied if his performances are way out of left field with what he previously achieved.

Don't recall you winning that argument at the time. It was the very transition from good Classics rider to GT contender in earlier Giros that fingered him for me.

moray_gub

calvjones wrote:

Moray Gub wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

Moray Gub wrote:

As he rode alongside with Sunderland and was employed by CSC........is that enough to diss him by means of the Forum Guilty By Association Rule article 12 ?

Nah. In this case we've invoked the Moray Gub clause, section 3. That's the one where which allowed us to look at Di Luca's performances in the Giro this year and think they were natural.

That clause isnt applied though as in that instance his perfomances in the Giro this year were nothing out of the ordinary as was agreed by others at the time despite what they found in his wee-wee later. Section 3 of the MG clause is only applied if his performances are way out of left field with what he previously achieved.

Don't recall you winning that argument at the time. It was the very transition from good Classics rider to GT contender in earlier Giros that fingered him for me.

Its not a case of wiining or losing its about having a point of view and arguing for it but to reiterate quite a few agreed with me that his perfomances in this years Giro were nothing out of the ordinary.

moray_gub

iainf72 wrote:

I think that clause must be applied as Di Luca was of course linked by association to dubious doctor. That's association, isn't it?

So let me get this right with Di Luca you have moved on from perfomances that in your opinion were out of the ordinary to association now ?

moray_gub

alanmcn1 wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

Moray Gub wrote:

As he rode alongside with Sunderland and was employed by CSC........is that enough to diss him by means of the Forum Guilty By Association Rule article 12 ?

Nah. In this case we've invoked the Moray Gub clause, section 3. That's the one where which allowed us to look at Di Luca's performances in the Giro this year and think they were natural.

:shock: :? 8) :oops: :P :x :twisted: :roll: :arrow: :idea: :?: :!: :roll: :twisted: :evil: :oops: :!: :shock: :? 8)

iainf72

Moray Gub wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

I think that clause must be applied as Di Luca was of course linked by association to dubious doctor. That's association, isn't it?

So let me get this right with Di Luca you have moved on from perfomances that in your opinion were out of the ordinary to association now ?

You mentioned association. I said I was suspicious of his performances based on his association.

moray_gub

iainf72 wrote:

Moray Gub wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

I think that clause must be applied as Di Luca was of course linked by association to dubious doctor. That's association, isn't it?

So let me get this right with Di Luca you have moved on from perfomances that in your opinion were out of the ordinary to association now ?

You mentioned association. I said I was suspicious of his performances based on his association.

No iirc in Di Luca case you were suspicious of his performances and said they were out of the ordinary not becuase of association , wheras in my opinion they were ordinary.

iainf72

Moray Gub wrote:

No iirc in Di Luca case you were suspicious of his performances and said they were out of the ordinary not becuase of association , wheras in my opinion they were ordinary.

I'll try to be clearer in the future.

So do you now think what you accepted as "normal" for DDL were indeed dope fueled?

Woodchip

So has Di Luca joined Sky as well? I thought I'd find a conversation about Ljungqvist in here.

Oh well, off the the Cake Stop for me. I might find some pro tour chat over there.

BdeB

Don't you know the rules of the forum any thread about sky now has to end up talking about doping and how sky are shaming the sport with linking themselves to people whose grannies once met with someone whose neighbour's nephew knew who once doped.

andyp

BdeB wrote:

Don't you know the rules of the forum any thread about sky now has to end up talking about doping and how sky are shaming the sport with linking themselves to people whose grannies once met with someone whose neighbour's nephew knew who once doped.

Sigh. The point remains, Brailsford was very clear in laying out his recruitment policy;

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/20 ... brailsford

I, for one, feel that by hiring certain ex employees of CSC and Team Bruyneel, Mr Brailsford has somewhat contradicted his earlier statements, i.e. there is a lot of evidence in the public domain to suggest that those teams ran doping programs.

He could have signed up sporting directors who don't have associations, i.e. Roger Legeay, who was acting as an advisor for Sky at one point, or Eric Boyer for example.

iainf72

One could argue it goes deeper than that

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luigi_Cecchini

BdeB

It was a bit of a joke so i hope it was taken that way. But my point is that having made such a strong and clear statement maybe DB is being very rigourous in his back ground checks on those he is hiring to back up the statement and ihe s convinced that there is no case to answer for these people and no skeletons in the closet. i agree he was very clear but beyond speculation and speculated links to doping have any of these people been found to have doped or been involved in systamitc doping?

calvjones

BdeB wrote:

It was a bit of a joke so i hope it was taken that way. But my point is that having made such a strong and clear statement maybe DB is being very rigourous in his back ground checks on those he is hiring to back up the statement and ihe s convinced that there is no case to answer for these people and no skeletons in the closet. i agree he was very clear but beyond speculation and speculated links to doping have any of these people been found to have doped or been involved in systamitc doping?

He never said any such thing:

"He has written a recruitment strategy for the team which states that no one with a previous doping violation will be hired"

Sunderland et al have no doping convictions. Hence DB is well within the letter of his law.

Make of that what you will.

andyp

BdeB wrote:

It was a bit of a joke so i hope it was taken that way. But my point is that having made such a strong and clear statement maybe DB is being very rigourous in his back ground checks on those he is hiring to back up the statement and ihe s convinced that there is no case to answer for these people and no skeletons in the closet. i agree he was very clear but beyond speculation and speculated links to doping have any of these people been found to have doped or been involved in systamitc doping?

If he was being rigourous in his back ground checks then surely he'd know that there was a whiff of controversy around a number of his appointments. I don't think you can genuinely enter pro cycling these days without involving someone with links to dopers or doping. Brailsford should have been aware of that and not made empty statements about dope controls, which we all know are far from robust.

I hope that Team Sky are vocal about their anti-doping regime and are open and transparent with journalists and anyone else who's interested on this topic. If they do this they'd retain credibility in my view.

BdeB

AndyP that is exactly my point. As someone who is around cycling i am sure DB is fully aware of the every whiff that isaround but maybe he has information that those whiffs have no substance and so can hire with confidence knowing more than we do. From some of the statements on the forum it seems some people think DB has stumbled into cycling and is completely nieve. He has made bold statements, he has a huge amount to lose if these people have been involved in doping not just for Team Sky but also the rumours it would start about team GB and all he has been involved in. So maybe he is being very careful in who he hires and so by hiring those he has it tells us something about the speculation surrounding these people that there is nothing to the accustaions or the whiffs.

moray_gub

calvjones wrote:

Sunderland et al have no doping convictions. Hence DB is well within the letter of his law.

Make of that what you will.

and the problem with that is ?

moray_gub

iainf72 wrote:

Moray Gub wrote:

No iirc in Di Luca case you were suspicious of his performances and said they were out of the ordinary not becuase of association , wheras in my opinion they were ordinary.

I'll try to be clearer in the future.

So do you now think what you accepted as "normal" for DDL were indeed dope fueled?

Obviously his Giro 2009 tests came back positive so he doped but his perfomances didnt show that at all which was what i said back in may.

moray_gub

andyp wrote:

I, for one, feel that by hiring certain ex employees of CSC and Team Bruyneel, Mr Brailsford has somewhat contradicted his earlier statements, i.e. there is a lot of evidence in the public domain to suggest that those teams ran doping programs.

"Dave Brailsford will not compromise on drugs when hiring riders for Team Sky"

"no doping violations"

I am assuming that there has been doping violations by some of their recent signings and you have evidence of that so come on be specific name names and what exactly they have done with regard to doping violations. If you cant then how can you say with any kind of authority he has contradicted his earlier statements. Just saying that so and so was part of a team isnt enough to mudsling like you do imo.

RichN95.

I can only assume I've been overlooked by Sky because of my associations with the old CSC team (I have two jerseys and a bidon).

Either that or it's the scurrilous rumours of amphetamine use in the early 90s.

Quite Frankly

Moray Gub wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

Moray Gub wrote:

No iirc in Di Luca case you were suspicious of his performances and said they were out of the ordinary not becuase of association , wheras in my opinion they were ordinary.

I'll try to be clearer in the future.

So do you now think what you accepted as "normal" for DDL were indeed dope fueled?

Obviously his Giro 2009 tests came back positive so he doped but his perfomances didnt show that at all which was what i said back in may.

Then you're a mug, Mr Gub.

moray_gub

Quite Frankly wrote:

Moray Gub wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

Moray Gub wrote:

No iirc in Di Luca case you were suspicious of his performances and said they were out of the ordinary not becuase of association , wheras in my opinion they were ordinary.

I'll try to be clearer in the future.

So do you now think what you accepted as "normal" for DDL were indeed dope fueled?

Obviously his Giro 2009 tests came back positive so he doped but his perfomances didnt show that at all which was what i said back in may.

Then you're a mug, Mr Gub.

You didnt watch the 2009 Giro then as he was nothing exceptional if you did then its case of this

Kléber

Forum chatter is one thing but riders, managers and informed types had strong views on Di Luca. ASO had tried to ban him from Le Tour and their other races. There's no similar talk on Sky and its signings, they are looking ok. But not squeaky clean, that's all.

thomasmc

That's real classy Moray, really helps to get your point across! And I was enjoying my breakfast

iainf72

On a seriously note, when are they going to complete their roster? They're pretty short at the moment.