Ljungqvist joins Sky as sports director.

2

Comments

  • andyp
    andyp Posts: 10,481
    Moray Gub wrote:
    "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.

    How many big name riders have been done for doping in recent years due to police investigations rather than being caught by the tests? You know the answer as well as I do.

    Brailsford has been very clear when speaking in public that he wants a team that is clean and credible. I'd argue that any credibility they have could be undermined by hiring ex-CSC and Team Bruyneel staff, both of which have strong and persistent links to doping scandals. I've expressed that opinion on here as I think it's disappointing that they couldn't recruit support staff from teams. That's it. No mudslinging, just an observation.

    I hope that next season Team Sky are a strong voice for racing clean and all staff are open and transparent about this.
  • alanmcn1
    alanmcn1 Posts: 531
    Moray Gub wrote:
    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

    headup.jpg

    Reasoned debate triumphs once again in bikeradar
    Robert Millar for knighthood
  • moray_gub
    moray_gub Posts: 3,328
    alanmcn1 wrote:
    Moray Gub wrote:
    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.



    Reasoned debate triumphs once again in bikeradar

    Bit selective there are you not you should have said that to the post above mine as well if thats how you feel.
    Gasping - but somehow still alive !
  • moray_gub
    moray_gub Posts: 3,328
    thomasmc wrote:
    That's real classy Moray, really helps to get your point across! And I was enjoying my breakfast


    Why should i try and get my point across to someone who sole resposne to my post was ...........you are a mug ?
    Gasping - but somehow still alive !
  • moray_gub
    moray_gub Posts: 3,328
    andyp wrote:
    Moray Gub wrote:
    "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.

    How many big name riders have been done for doping in recent years due to police investigations rather than being caught by the tests? You know the answer as well as I do.

    Brailsford has been very clear when speaking in public that he wants a team that is clean and credible. I'd argue that any credibility they have could be undermined by hiring ex-CSC and Team Bruyneel staff, both of which have strong and persistent links to doping scandals. I've expressed that opinion on here as I think it's disappointing that they couldn't recruit support staff from teams. That's it. No mudslinging, just an observation.

    I hope that next season Team Sky are a strong voice for racing clean and all staff are open and transparent about this.

    All good and well and very forward thinking but it still doesnt answer my point how many of this team have doping violations in their past ? and if the answer is none then he has not contradicted his earlier statement .........which is what you are claiming is it not ?
    Gasping - but somehow still alive !
  • afx237vi
    afx237vi Posts: 12,630
    MG is still the only person on the planet who thinks DDL's performance in the Giro was perfectly normal.
  • andyp
    andyp Posts: 10,481
    Moray Gub wrote:
    All good and well and very forward thinking but it still doesnt answer my point how many of this team have doping violations in their past ? and if the answer is none then he has not contradicted his earlier statement .........which is what you are claiming is it not ?

    I haven't seen the appointment of Yates confirmed yet, but he definitely failed a drugs test in his career, in 1989 if memory serves.
  • calvjones
    calvjones Posts: 3,850
    Moray Gub wrote:
    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 ?

    That by sticking to the letter of what he said but not the spirit he risks the impression that he's a sneaky, mealy mouthed tosspot*? That he pisses off a fair minority of potential Sky fans, as can be shown by this thread (and yes, I do think we're a fairly representative bunch).

    *Not that I'd deduce such a thing, never having met the guy.
    ___________________

    Strava is not Zen.
  • dave_1
    dave_1 Posts: 9,512
    andyp wrote:
    Moray Gub wrote:
    All good and well and very forward thinking but it still doesnt answer my point how many of this team have doping violations in their past ? and if the answer is none then he has not contradicted his earlier statement .........which is what you are claiming is it not ?

    I haven't seen the appointment of Yates confirmed yet, but he definitely failed a drugs test in his career, in 1989 if memory serves.

    wrong, cleared by B sample at Tour of Belgium 1989. Suggest you retract that

    records show he won that event as well, but my memory of it is clear enough of it regardless, cleared
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKBacb2V ... ata_player
  • andyp
    andyp Posts: 10,481
    Dave_1 wrote:
    wrong, cleared by B sample at Tour of Belgium 1989. Suggest you retract that

    records show he won that event as well, but my memory of it is clear enough of it regardless, cleared
    I suggest you read this;

    http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/default.a ... ry&id=4503
  • dave_1
    dave_1 Posts: 9,512
    andyp wrote:
    Dave_1 wrote:
    wrong, cleared by B sample at Tour of Belgium 1989. Suggest you retract that

    records show he won that event as well, but my memory of it is clear enough of it regardless, cleared
    I suggest you read this;

    http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/default.a ... ry&id=4503

    the above linke says that in the 1980s, late 80s, the B sample could vanish if you paid. Is that what you are saying ?
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKBacb2V ... ata_player
  • moray_gub
    moray_gub Posts: 3,328
    afx237vi wrote:
    MG is still the only person on the planet who thinks DDL's performance in the Giro was perfectly normal.

    this obviously seems to upset you some what so tell me what did he do that was so abnormal then ?........at least this time you should be able to say a few things without getting yer erse skelped :wink:
    Gasping - but somehow still alive !
  • moray_gub
    moray_gub Posts: 3,328
    calvjones wrote:
    Moray Gub wrote:
    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 ?

    That by sticking to the letter of what he said but not the spirit he risks the impression that he's a sneaky, mealy mouthed tosspot*? That he pisses off a fair minority of potential Sky fans, as can be shown by this thread (and yes, I do think we're a fairly representative bunch).

    *Not that I'd deduce such a thing, never having met the guy.

    He says no doping violations and thats what he has got end of ,(subject to the Yates positive test issue)he is never gonna please a bunch of forum crazies though is he.
    Gasping - but somehow still alive !
  • moray_gub
    moray_gub Posts: 3,328
    andyp wrote:
    Moray Gub wrote:
    All good and well and very forward thinking but it still doesnt answer my point how many of this team have doping violations in their past ? and if the answer is none then he has not contradicted his earlier statement .........which is what you are claiming is it not ?

    I haven't seen the appointment of Yates confirmed yet, but he definitely failed a drugs test in his career, in 1989 if memory serves.

    So are you stating for sure that he tested positive for a PED and he was sanctioned for it ? If so can i have the details please ?
    Gasping - but somehow still alive !
  • SpaceJunk
    SpaceJunk Posts: 1,157
    andyp wrote:
    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.

    Well point Andy.
  • andyp
    andyp Posts: 10,481
    Dave_1 wrote:

    the above linke says that in the 1980s, late 80s, the B sample could vanish if you paid. Is that what you are saying ?

    Exactly.

    I've no idea if this was the case with Yates, as unsurprisingly there isn't any coverage of this online, but Theakston indicates it was possible.

    Anyway, I don't care if Yates was busted back then or not. The issue I have is with his recent employment as a directeur sportif with Bruyneel. In my opinion a team that is striving to be clean and to be vocal about it, which Dave Brailsford has said will be the case, should not be recruiting anyone who has worked with Bruyneel. People can trot out the 'he's never had anyone test positive' line but there is a lot of evidence out there which strongly indicates that Bruyneel's team management has run a team wide doping program. Brailsford should not be recruiting anyone with that kind of background if he wants Team Sky to be credible as a clean team. One only needs to look at the issues High Road have had in that respect to understand why.
  • moray_gub
    moray_gub Posts: 3,328
    andyp wrote:
    Dave_1 wrote:

    the above linke says that in the 1980s, late 80s, the B sample could vanish if you paid. Is that what you are saying ?

    Exactly.

    I've no idea if this was the case with Yates, as unsurprisingly there isn't any coverage of this online, but Theakston indicates it was possible.

    Anyway, I don't care if Yates was busted back then or not. The issue I have is with his recent employment as a directeur sportif with Bruyneel. In my opinion a team that is striving to be clean and to be vocal about it, which Dave Brailsford has said will be the case, should not be recruiting anyone who has worked with Bruyneel. .

    Ahhh i get it now you cant get Yates by alleging he tested positive so now you take the guily by association line........Now i dont know if Yates tested positive for PED or not and i know you dont care if Yates was positive or not but i would imagine Yates himself wouldnt be too impressed about your allegations though.
    Gasping - but somehow still alive !
  • afx237vi
    afx237vi Posts: 12,630
    Moray Gub wrote:
    afx237vi wrote:
    MG is still the only person on the planet who thinks DDL's performance in the Giro was perfectly normal.

    this obviously seems to upset you some what so tell me what did he do that was so abnormal then ?........at least this time you should be able to say a few things without getting yer erse skelped :wink:

    Di Luca's entire career was abnormal. The Giro was just a continuation of that.
  • andyp
    andyp Posts: 10,481
    Moray Gub wrote:
    Ahhh i get it now you cant get Yates by alleging he tested positive so now you take the guily by association line........Now i dont know if Yates tested positive for PED or not and i know you dont care if Yates was positive or not but i would imagine Yates himself wouldnt be too impressed about your allegations though.
    He tested positive though. You seemed to have missed that part. That he wasn't sanctioned for it is also true, but unfortunately I don't have access to the UCI doping records for the last 20 years so I can't find out why.

    If Sean Yates wants to sue me for libel, he should PM me for my name and address. I don't see I've libelled him though, given that I've only mentioned things that are already in the public domain, so he might not want to waste his money.
  • moray_gub
    moray_gub Posts: 3,328
    afx237vi wrote:
    Moray Gub wrote:
    afx237vi wrote:
    MG is still the only person on the planet who thinks DDL's performance in the Giro was perfectly normal.

    this obviously seems to upset you some what so tell me what did he do that was so abnormal then ?........at least this time you should be able to say a few things without getting yer erse skelped :wink:

    Di Luca's entire career was abnormal. The Giro was just a continuation of that.

    So it was normal then ?
    Gasping - but somehow still alive !
  • redddraggon
    redddraggon Posts: 10,862
    Moray Gub wrote:
    afx237vi wrote:
    Moray Gub wrote:
    afx237vi wrote:
    MG is still the only person on the planet who thinks DDL's performance in the Giro was perfectly normal.

    this obviously seems to upset you some what so tell me what did he do that was so abnormal then ?........at least this time you should be able to say a few things without getting yer erse skelped :wink:

    Di Luca's entire career was abnormal. The Giro was just a continuation of that.

    So it was normal then ?

    You've got him there gub :wink:
    I like bikes...

    Twitter
    Flickr
  • moray_gub
    moray_gub Posts: 3,328
    andyp wrote:
    Moray Gub wrote:
    Ahhh i get it now you cant get Yates by alleging he tested positive so now you take the guily by association line........Now i dont know if Yates tested positive for PED or not and i know you dont care if Yates was positive or not but i would imagine Yates himself wouldnt be too impressed about your allegations though.
    He tested positive though. You seemed to have missed that part. That he wasn't sanctioned for it is also true, but unfortunately I don't have access to the UCI doping records for the last 20 years so I can't find out why.

    If Sean Yates wants to sue me for libel, he should PM me for my name and address. I don't see I've libelled him though, given that I've only mentioned things that are already in the public domain, so he might not want to waste his money.

    You have already more or less alluded to why by posting a link to say B samples were made to dissapear by pay offs now I didnt say you had libelled him and dont you need both an A and B to to test positive ?
    Gasping - but somehow still alive !
  • afx237vi
    afx237vi Posts: 12,630
    Moray Gub wrote:
    afx237vi wrote:
    Moray Gub wrote:
    afx237vi wrote:
    MG is still the only person on the planet who thinks DDL's performance in the Giro was perfectly normal.

    this obviously seems to upset you some what so tell me what did he do that was so abnormal then ?........at least this time you should be able to say a few things without getting yer erse skelped :wink:

    Di Luca's entire career was abnormal. The Giro was just a continuation of that.

    So it was normal then ?

    *golf applause*

    Well played, sir.

    Abnormally normal.
  • moray_gub
    moray_gub Posts: 3,328
    afx237vi wrote:
    Moray Gub wrote:
    afx237vi wrote:
    Moray Gub wrote:
    afx237vi wrote:
    MG is still the only person on the planet who thinks DDL's performance in the Giro was perfectly normal.

    this obviously seems to upset you some what so tell me what did he do that was so abnormal then ?........at least this time you should be able to say a few things without getting yer erse skelped :wink:

    Di Luca's entire career was abnormal. The Giro was just a continuation of that.

    So it was normal then ?

    *golf applause*

    Well played, sir.



    Abnormally normal.

    My work here is done :lol:
    Gasping - but somehow still alive !
  • andyp
    andyp Posts: 10,481
    Moray Gub wrote:
    You have already more or less alluded to why by posting a link to say B samples were made to dissapear by pay offs now I didnt say you had libelled him and dont you need both an A and B to to test positive ?
    Alluding to something is one thing when it comes to libel, saying it is another. As you seem to want me to do all the work here why don't you go and do the libel research?

    As I've already said, I don't know the circumstances of Yates' test in 1989. All I know is that he failed a test but escaped sanction. If Brailsford does employ him I hope we find out more, preferably from Yates himself.
  • dave_1
    dave_1 Posts: 9,512
    andyp wrote:
    Moray Gub wrote:
    Ahhh i get it now you cant get Yates by alleging he tested positive so now you take the guily by association line........Now i dont know if Yates tested positive for PED or not and i know you dont care if Yates was positive or not but i would imagine Yates himself wouldnt be too impressed about your allegations though.
    He tested positive though. You seemed to have missed that part. That he wasn't sanctioned for it is also true, but unfortunately I don't have access to the UCI doping records for the last 20 years so I can't find out why.

    If Sean Yates wants to sue me for libel, he should PM me for my name and address. I don't see I've libelled him though, given that I've only mentioned things that are already in the public domain, so he might not want to waste his money.

    Not true. His A sample was + so they tested a b sample and it was negative. He's negative and these were and are the rules. It is misleading to say he was + when he was obviously not
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKBacb2V ... ata_player
  • andyp
    andyp Posts: 10,481
    Can you show me the evidence as I can't find it. Thanks.
  • dave_1
    dave_1 Posts: 9,512
    andyp wrote:
    Can you show me the evidence as I can't find it. Thanks.

    it's listed below as "non sanction", cause B cancels A result. You have a point re DB and Sky...but on this thread, you're posting misleading information

    http://www.cyclisme-dopage.com/chiffres/tdf1989.htm#7 ELEVEN-AMERICAN AIRLINES
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKBacb2V ... ata_player
  • andyp
    andyp Posts: 10,481
    I'd argue I wasn't. I merely pointing out that Yates failed a test but wasn't sanctioned, the reason for which I don't know. You say the B sample didn't come back positive but I haven't seen this, not arguing it isn't true here btw, and it does appear to go against received knowledge on drug tests, i.e. 99% of the time the B sample confirms the positive test from the A sample.
  • stagehopper
    stagehopper Posts: 1,593
    That same received knowledge also suggests that in some quantitative drug tests false positives can and have occurred. Which is why there's a mandated necessity for a B sample under WADA, governoing body and national regulations across all sport.

    If both samples turn up positive you're sanctioned as the likelihood of two false positives is extremely remote.

    So actually this doesn't go against received knowledge and fully falls within accepted practical and theoretical doping science.
    @stagehopper

Categories