latest wiggins interview.
Comments
-
Interesting that Shane Stokes seems to be sticking his head above the parapet and repeating some of the stuff that people aim at Sky. Maybe he's angling to be Wiggo's Kimmage.
PS, I wonder if anyone has managed to pry Steve Peters off the ceiling yet.0 -
RichN95 wrote:
Yeah, but that was 5 years ago. Things have changed a lot since then - especially the internet and social media - all sorts, not just twitter.
Indeed. But if a real journalist asked the team about, oh, Rogers, or their dodgy doctor, how would they react? I know when the team first started they basically stonewalled you.
I agree anonymous people on the internetz throwing things around isn't helpful at all.Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
Was it Will Fotheringham who tweeted yesterday about the post race press conference, "why do you have red white and blue bands on your jersey?" "Because I love Tommy Voeckler so much"
That was funny, but also indicative of the press pack knowledge. Comedy swearing might be amusing but won't translate well. Fran Millar holding her head in her hands moment?0 -
The Mad Rapper wrote:afx237vi wrote:Interesting that Shane Stokes seems to be sticking his head above the parapet and repeating some of the stuff that people aim at Sky.
Who's he when he's at home?
Irish journo. Runs Velonation -nice fella.Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
The Mad Rapper wrote:afx237vi wrote:Interesting that Shane Stokes seems to be sticking his head above the parapet and repeating some of the stuff that people aim at Sky.
Who's he when he's at home?
Irish journo.
https://twitter.com/SSbike0 -
Thanks guys.0
-
Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0
-
I'm no expert so please put me right if I'm wrong but wouldn't that kind of info be beneficial to your competitors?iainf72 wrote:0 -
RichN95 wrote:iainf72 wrote:LeicesterLad wrote:
On a personal level I can see why it upsets Wiggo, being accused of cheating is never nice, but i don't think the fans are wholly to blame for that.
Back when he was sh*t pack fodder, he indicated he understood why people would think like that.
Yeah, but that was 5 years ago. Things have changed a lot since then - especially the internet and social media - all sorts, not just twitter.
Back in 2007 it was journalists who asked the questions and wrote the stories. They are professionals who try to paint a full picture and have the sense and experience to weigh up the value of various information. They also put their names to their work. The likes of David Walsh put together highly researched, professional work.
Fast forward five years and the accusations are made by faceless, nameless (to maintain the illusion of being connected) bloggers and tweeters. They generally have an agenda and pick and choose their information accordingly. Some of them have built up quite a following so that they see themselves as important or influential and to maintain that they need to keep their followers happy with doping information - from any source necessary - especially those disregarded by proper journalists. The cleaner cycling becomes, the less relevant they become.
So we have we have rumours made up by a Pat McQuaid spoof widely redistributed or that mistake by a German newspaper about Ferrari and Evans (rather than Rogers) still trotted out as fact by many. Any vague link to doping gets blown up and repeated and repeated until it gains traction. Any gap in their understanding of cycling is filled by doping - and the beauty of it is your can't prove a rider is clean, so they can't be shown up.
The sad thing is that they think that they are helping to change cycling, but just like doping doctors, they are perpetuating the idea that only dopers can win. If you put them in a room with Thibault Pinot, they would set about convincing him that he can never win the Tour and he should just try for stages. It's more constructive to see positive signs rather than constructing negative ones.
Yep, gotta agree with that - especially the bold bits. Well said. I think the difference between what LA said and Wiggo is that LA had the cheek to say what he did in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.0 -
frenchfighter wrote:He might ride a bike fast but he is a bit of a prick. Definitely no the type of guy you want as a friend. Crude fella.
Not endearing himself to the French isn't a good idea even though he did so earlier this year.
Really so when Froome went through to win, that wasn't Brad coming in 3rd with his fist clenched in the air in celebration. Or after crossing the line himself, going straight to Froome and giving him a big congratulatory hug.
I think a prick is a rider like Contador who dopes his entire career on various teams, rides with some of the dirtiest DS around and sulks the one moment he is not treated like the little prince he is. A rider who to this day probably took more dope and more refined doping methods than all his predecessors combined.
i see no reason why Wiggins needs to be complimentary or polite to his enemies or those who seems only interested in bringing him or his team down. Whilst he is the best GC road racer on the planet currently and doing it through hard work; I'm happy to hear him take down those 'haterz'0 -
plectrum wrote:
i see no reason why Wiggins needs to be complimentary or polite to his enemies or those who seems only interested in bringing him or his team down. Whilst he is the best GC road racer on the planet currently and doing it through hard work; I'm happy to hear him take down those 'haterz'
If someone had a legitimate question, would you like him to answer it, or just swear with some "work my arse off" nonsense?Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
Slim Boy Fat wrote:
I'm no expert so please put me right if I'm wrong but wouldn't that kind of info be beneficial to your competitors?iainf72 wrote:
If everyone publishes it, the it's equal.
Then again, what kind of advantages would having that info have? I don't need the precise watts per kilo to know Wiggins climbed faster than Canc yesterday, I know that stat is higher for him. I do need to know to see if he's pushing the boundaries of what is humanly possible, or even beyond that.
Having said that, he's published stuff in the past.
You can see with his change from trackie to tour contender that people are raising eyebrows. Even I did. I reckon it's more likely he's not but I'm always a little sceptical.
He should know having watched cycling for years and been in many tours that ANY tour contender gets asked questions and eyebrows are raised. Doing this won't help, and as much as it feels like letting off steam, it usually only winds you up more and causes more hassle and stress in the long run.
The same with that camera man earlier. It'd saved more energy trying to avoid him.
Then again, it's easy to say that from my sofa. But ask Evans about lashing out in front of the cameras or knocking people out of your way after a stage. He's certainly calmed down more than he did before.0 -
iainf72 wrote:plectrum wrote:
i see no reason why Wiggins needs to be complimentary or polite to his enemies or those who seems only interested in bringing him or his team down. Whilst he is the best GC road racer on the planet currently and doing it through hard work; I'm happy to hear him take down those 'haterz'
If someone had a legitimate question, would you like him to answer it, or just swear with some "work my ars* off" nonsense?
Iain,
It wasn't a legitimate question, and I pretty sure you also don't think it is in anyway legitimate. Sky have already answered queries about their performance throughout the season. They are training very hard and are using their riders efficiently and intelligently.
Just look today, EBH pushed until he snapped but just enough so he can recover, this style is being followed by others. On top of this they have a team whose sole objective is GC, unlike Liquigas who have Sagan as no.1 Nibali no.2 or Lotto Bel who have both VdB and Greipel with actually more emphasis on the sprint train. The only other GC based team who are fully behind their leader is BMC and although a good team it isn't as well constructed as Sky especially as Gilbert is not performing well since he left SL (something I find far more interesting and would question).
If perhaps Sky and Wiggins hadn't spoken publicly about their efforts and techniques over and over then perhaps he wouldnt be so snappy, perhaps if they didn't have to present their training techniques to the ASO due to suspicions etc, perhaps if throughout a career that has performed very well in TTs, won Olympic medals and won quite a few tours with all the dope scrutiny and tests then maybe I'd understand those who feel he should just be ultra polite.
But ultimately this is a rider who has never had any inkling of dope, never directly associated with anyone guilty and for the last 5 years+ has riden with the two most anti doping teams in pro cycling.
I think he's done quite enough so for those who continue to question, F'em......
Now personally this is all fine for Wiggo but I think there are still very valid questions for Froome to answer. I'm sure this comes across as illogical but whilst Wiggo has shown a steady improvement and always been a top cyclist, always publicly anti doping, Froome has risen from near nowhere and doesn't particularly take a strong anti-stance. Even with bio-passport suggesting he is consistent, it wouldn't surprise me if Froome at some point failed a test but at present I'm still quite happy to give him benefit of doubt and believe that he has just been working hard and is a late bloomer.0 -
iainf72 wrote:RichN95 wrote:
Yeah, but that was 5 years ago. Things have changed a lot since then - especially the internet and social media - all sorts, not just twitter.
Indeed. But if a real journalist asked the team about, oh, Rogers, or their dodgy doctor, how would they react? I know when the team first started they basically stonewalled you.
I think they were a bit naive when they set out with they're 'everybody must be spotless' stance, rather than Garmin's more practical 'no doping on this team'. They sort of painted themselves into a corner and are maybe quietly trying to tip toe out.
The two people you mention sort of illustrate the problem. With Leinders - De Rooy didn't mention him by name, just 'medical staff' and he said they weren't involved with the actual doping. Yet in recent months Leinders has been elevated to Ferrari/Fuentes like status. Why?
As for Rogers. What do we really know? Ferrari, sure. Freiburg, maybe (didn't two of that team not go). These get mentioned a lot. But no-one ever wonders why he was the only established rider to survive the post Puerto T-Mobile cull. Or mentions that he more recently worked with Sassi - with good results.
Now, both may be dodgy as hell. But both have had their history embellished and exaggerated to fuel the doping narrative. Assumptions are treated as fact, other information ignored. It's all very one sided.Twitter: @RichN950 -
iainf72 wrote:plectrum wrote:
i see no reason why Wiggins needs to be complimentary or polite to his enemies or those who seems only interested in bringing him or his team down. Whilst he is the best GC road racer on the planet currently and doing it through hard work; I'm happy to hear him take down those 'haterz'
If someone had a legitimate question, would you like him to answer it, or just swear with some "work my ars* off" nonsense?
If people consistently and falsely, and very publicly and anonymously, kept accusing you of cheating on your wife/stealing from work/tax evasion etc, I suspect you'd get right royally p!ssed off with it and fancy a bit of a rant when asked.Twitter: @RichN950 -
Rogers is a damn good athlete and top cyclist, perhaps back at T-Mobile when they hoped he'd be a GC contendor doping was advised but now where is job is only to be a super domestique, doping is unnecessary and he can achieve what he needs to through hard graft. Far less pressure and a set high income to do that job.0
-
He's a Tour contender in yellow.
What does he expect? No doping chat from journos? C'mon.
Furthermore, he's come from just surviving races to being a Tour contender in a few years.
He's been watching cycling long enough to know the deal. He needs to chill. He's better with the media and a better rider when he's relaxed - (says the man on his sofa who's just been on holiday [with turbo post-holiday blues if anyone's bothered])0 -
Oh and if Sky are doping then does it mean everyone else isn't? That's just not likely.0
-
plectrum wrote:Oh and if Sky are doping then does it mean everyone else isn't? That's just not likely.
Look, it's cycling.
Big performance = doping chat.
Especially in the Tour.
Everyone in sky knows that. Wiggins too.
Keep not taking drugs and doing well, and keep their heads in front of the cameras. That's all they can be reasonably expected to do.
Flipping out infront of a camera helps no-one - not even Wiggins.0 -
Rick Chasey wrote:I do need to know to see if he's pushing the boundaries of what is humanly possible, or even beyond that.
But that's the problem. What is humanly possible? Can you, a city worker, or I, a civil servant, know? Can those internet posters we know nothing about?
And can an expert who hasn't looked at the actual figures, pass judgement (as happened with Wiggins with his 2009 blood values)
And will people understand that 6.7W/kg for 10 minutes is not the same as 6.7W/kg for 40 minutes, or will the 6.7 be bandied around without context.Twitter: @RichN950 -
Rick Chasey wrote:Look, it's cycling.
Big performance = doping chat.
Especially in the Tour.
Everyone in sky knows that. Wiggins too.
Keep not taking drugs and doing well, and keep their heads in front of the cameras. That's all they can be reasonably expected to do.
Flipping out infront of a camera helps no-one - not even Wiggins.
I understand his frustration though. He's trying to say 'This is a new era', but everyone just wants to talk about the past.0 -
Rick Chasey wrote:plectrum wrote:Oh and if Sky are doping then does it mean everyone else isn't? That's just not likely.
Look, it's cycling.
Big performance = doping chat.
Especially in the Tour.
Everyone in sky knows that. Wiggins too.
Keep not taking drugs and doing well, and keep their heads in front of the cameras. That's all they can be reasonably expected to do.
Flipping out infront of a camera helps no-one - not even Wiggins.
This. What is everyone talking about now? Oh yeah, the doctor on Sky with a shady past and Mick "TT specialist" Roger's glory years.0 -
Rick,
Well don't forget, if you keep winning and know you are clean then really you can do and say whatever the hell you like! You may say the peleton won't like it but if its the truth I think they'll respect that a team and a cyclist is finally winning it clean.
I think the big risk is Froome, he really is a bit too dominant. Wiggo has gone to be as good a climber as Nibalie, Evans, VdB etc or if not then enough to finish within 10-15 seconds (but as yet no sign he is a better climber than any of these). So nothing really surprising, and he's always been one of the best TTers. Froome on the other hand is the best climber in the pack and is rapidly improving his TTing too. Froome looks like he could do some serious damage in the big mountains and that has always been the play ground of the dopers.0 -
It's interesting to see all of the defense of Wiggins, excuses and anger...especially considering how many ripped Americans for doing the same things when it came to Armstrong during his days in yellow.0
-
Rundfahrt wrote:It's interesting to see all of the defense of Wiggins, excuses and anger...especially considering how many ripped Americans for doing the same things when it can't to Armstrong during his days in yellow.
What are you talking about .... Armstrong failed drug tests, rode in the dirtiest years in cycling and didn't keep up with the opposition like Wiggins is doing with Evans but totally blew them apart. Armstrong was an utter cheat who treated everyone with utter disdain, I'd be mightily pissed off if people started to compare me with Armstrong, in that way.0 -
Rundfahrt wrote:It's interesting to see all of the defense of Wiggins, excuses and anger...especially considering how many ripped Americans for doing the same things when it can't to Armstrong during his days in yellow.
THIS is the problem.
What excuses has Wiggins made, and what are they excusing?0 -
Plectrum- Perhaps you missed the part where I said "during his days in yellow." As a matter of fact this reminds me of 1999 when everyone was quick to tout Armstrong and a cleaner peloton.
Turfle- Where did I say anything about Wiggins making excuses? Perhaps you should read my post again.0 -
Rundfahrt wrote:It's interesting to see all of the defense of Wiggins, excuses and anger...especially considering how many ripped Americans for doing the same things when it can't to Armstrong during his days in yellow.
When someone writes a book called BW Confidential or From Wiggins to Cav, then come back to us.
Your argument is like saying someone who thinks Sex in the City 2 is a crap film and another who thinks The Godfather Part 2 is a crap film are the same, because they're both films, eh.Twitter: @RichN950
