Yates to confess??

Coach H

Should he?

In light of Barry's confession and Leinders [cough] departure [cough] should Yates confess in order to get all the skeletons out of the closet and really "move forward".

It would only do good wouldn't it? I mean does anybody think that he wasn't doping? Would it actually make a difference now for it to be confirmed? Wouldn't it remove a potential PR risk at a time when it would largely pass under the radar following the Blair Model of spin concerning ambarassing revalations?

I think there are more positives than negatives for sky and Yates in a confession at this time

gattocattivo

In theory, yes, but in reality there's a certain amount of inflexibility in the stated Team Sky approach (cf. Dave Millar)

Coach H

gattocattivo wrote:

In theory, yes, but in reality there's a certain amount of inflexibility in the stated Team Sky approach (cf. Dave Millar)

Riders; yes (Barry's retirement)
Staff; no

Eddie72

I'd really like to see it but I'm not holding my breath. What with Barry and the dodgy doctor I think Sky need to come up with a clear and transparent response to prevent this looking like the old days of don't ask don't tell

Coach H

Exactly Eddie, for transparency.
Lets face it, it would not be a revalation to the informed and would be lost in the furore sourounding Armstrong.

sherer

isn't the sea change in cycling we need with people like Yates, Kelly and others being able to admit what went on in the past and then move forwards.

Le Commentateur

Perhaps someone would like to ask him face to face at the hill climb on Sunday.

mfin

itisaboutthebike

Hey Yatesey - did yer dope ?

There ..............asked him.........

bigmat

Problem for Yates is his doping involvement was probably more at a management level than a riding level. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and hope he left all that behind with Bruyneel & Co, but its still too close for comfort and I don't think he could confess to that and carry on working with Sky. Should he? Yes. Will he? NO.

This is all just speculation of course, Yates has always struck me as a decent guy and I fully apologise if there are no skeletons in his closet, I'm not sitting in judgment here in any event.

rebs

Thing is with this that didnt show in the past as much... Good guys doped also.

josame

He just told 5Live ... I know nothing.. I see nothing

que?

ContrelaMontre

Yates should be sacked by Sky. He was on the management of a team with a proven institutionalised doping programme. If he'd come clean I'd be happy with a bit of truth and reconciliation, but as he won't admit the truth...

rdt

josame wrote:

He just told 5Live ... I know nothing.. I see nothing

que?

It's one thing to say "I didn't do nuffink", but would require a leap into incredulity for me to accept that someone in and around the peloton in that era never heard nor saw anything.

So it's not a credible stance IMO, and therefore indicates how far the sport still has to travel, unfortunately, before people feel able to talk freely and openly.

Monty Dog

As Tyler's book testifies, discussions about doping was one of the main topics of conversation in the peloton - for anyone acting as a DS at that time to deny seeing / hearing anything is taking us for a bunch of fools. I think Sky should encourage team members to reveal-all - it'll get lost in the stink of the Armstrong case, they can then draw a line under it and move on. Alternatively, if they stay quiet and subsequently more information comes out that they were actively involved, sack-em for gross-misconduct?

I also believe that figureheads like Merckx, Kelly and Roche (in particular) need to speak-up otherwise they continue to reinforce the Omerta. Their denials look more ridiculous by the day.

Coach H

Monty Dog wrote:

As Tyler's book testifies, discussions about doping was one of the main topics of conversation in the peloton - for anyone acting as a DS at that time to deny seeing / hearing anything is taking us for a bunch of fools. I think Sky should encourage team members to reveal-all - it'll get lost in the stink of the Armstrong case, they can then draw a line under it and move on. Alternatively, if they stay quiet and subsequently more information comes out that they were actively involved, sack-em for gross-misconduct?

I also believe that figureheads like Merckx, Kelly and Roche (in particular) need to speak-up otherwise they continue to reinforce the Omerta. Their denials look more ridiculous by the day.

Thanks Monty, this says everything I was trying to say in a more concise and succinct way.

Mccaria

In some respects this is the outcome of the Sky zero tolerance approach. As I understand it, if Yates confesses (assuming he has something to confess of course !) then he is pretty much immediately out of a job. Therefore there is little upside for him in confessing and significant downside. In this instance the Garmin approach espoused by Vaughters is more pragmatic, by providing a team environment where riders and other staff members can be honest about their past involvement with drugs, as long as they commit to riding or supporting clean riding going forward.

There are benefits and drawbacks in both teams approaches, but for this particular question the zero tolerance approach of Sky has the affect of discouraging a member of staff from being candid about his past (assuming he has anything to be candid about !)

Pross

Le Commentateur wrote:

Perhaps someone would like to ask him face to face at the hill climb on Sunday.

Not much point, you'd never understand the answer. I reckon he doped and still is with some very strong skunk!

rebs

The Sky approach is possibily afew years too early for the sport to cater too. But someone has to draw the line somewhere. Garmin possibly have the best approach but the manage went into this with first hand experience with doping. Sky have always acted very nieve with this. Unless they are hiding something which by all accounts is very unlikely.... Certainly cannot rule it out totally.

Yates isn't doing himself any favours acting so bone idle.

Richmond Racer

Pross wrote:

Le Commentateur wrote:

Perhaps someone would like to ask him face to face at the hill climb on Sunday.

Not much point, you'd never understand the answer. I reckon he doped and still is with some very strong skunk!

Everyone knows he doped - its public record - he was popped in 89

Eddie72

I was disappointed with Yates on 5Live this morning, although I'm perhaps not surprised. His answers were along the lines of "all I did was drive the car and sometimes tell people what to do on the road". I think he's only getting away with it because the general media don't know enough to ask the probing questions. Like a lot of people I admired Yates as a rider and I think he still carries a lot of respect in the cycling community, a confession from him would mean a lot.

itisaboutthebike

Everyone knows he doped - its public record - he was popped in 89

So why is he working at Sky ?

Richmond Racer

itisaboutthebike wrote:

Everyone knows he doped - its public record - he was popped in 89

So why is he working at Sky ?

That's a question for DB and Sky...

RichN95.

It seems to me that some people are very disappointed not to see Yates's name anywhere in the evidence. All those sharpened axes and nowhere to use them. All this evidence with plenty of teams looking directly involved in doping, but you need to hark back to a little pill popping back in the 80s.

Sky's only real crime was to naively set their standards too high at the start and not being omniscient when recruiting. I'm sure they'd do it like Garmin if they could start again. But they can't so some will criticise from their high horse even if they think they're clean. You're making them same mistake they made and being stupidly idealistic.

Either you think they are doping or not. If you think they are then bash away, but if you don't then stop using the 'transparency' excuse to undermine their efforts. If some of their staff did things 10 or 20 years ago, it's mostly irrelevant, what they do now is important.

LeicesterLad

RichN95 wrote:

It seems to me that some people are very disappointed not to see Yates's name anywhere in the evidence. All those sharpened axes and nowhere to use them. All this evidence with plenty of teams looking directly involved in doping, but you need to hark back to a little pill popping back in the 80s.

Sky's only real crime was to naively set their standards too high at the start and not being omniscient when recruiting. I'm sure they'd do it like Garmin if they could start again. But they can't so some will criticise from their high horse even if they think they're clean. You're making them same mistake they made and being stupidly idealistic.

Either you think they are doping or not. If you think they are then bash away, but if you don't then stop using the 'transparency' excuse to undermine their efforts. If some of their staff did things 10 or 20 years ago, it's mostly irrelevant, what they do now is important.

Which includes their reaction to the situation, which has been poor.

RichN95.

LeicesterLad wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

It seems to me that some people are very disappointed not to see Yates's name anywhere in the evidence. All those sharpened axes and nowhere to use them. All this evidence with plenty of teams looking directly involved in doping, but you need to hark back to a little pill popping back in the 80s.

Sky's only real crime was to naively set their standards too high at the start and not being omniscient when recruiting. I'm sure they'd do it like Garmin if they could start again. But they can't so some will criticise from their high horse even if they think they're clean. You're making them same mistake they made and being stupidly idealistic.

Either you think they are doping or not. If you think they are then bash away, but if you don't then stop using the 'transparency' excuse to undermine their efforts. If some of their staff did things 10 or 20 years ago, it's mostly irrelevant, what they do now is important.

Which includes their reaction to the situation, which has been poor.

Perhaps Brailsford should have said absolutely nothing like every other team boss.

Dowsett is a confused kid who was probably exposed to a fair bit of propaganda at LB.

Richmond Racer

RichN95 wrote:

It seems to me that some people are very disappointed not to see Yates's name anywhere in the evidence. All those sharpened axes and nowhere to use them. All this evidence with plenty of teams looking directly involved in doping, but you need to hark back to a little pill popping back in the 80s.

Sky's only real crime was to naively set their standards too high at the start and not being omniscient when recruiting. I'm sure they'd do it like Garmin if they could start again. But they can't so some will criticise from their high horse even if they think they're clean. You're making them same mistake they made and being stupidly idealistic.

Either you think they are doping or not. If you think they are then bash away, but if you don't then stop using the 'transparency' excuse to undermine their efforts. If some of their staff did things 10 or 20 years ago, it's mostly irrelevant, what they do now is important.

I do agree. I think there is a lot of attacking Sky from a moral ground that if it was any higher, would induce vertigo. But I do think that Brailsford needs to change the way in which he's addressing things, sharpish, or lose a lot of credibility - which is turn will start to reflect on his riders. For instance Sean Yates should not have been allowed to do that radio interview this am - if only cos he's hard to understand at the best of times

Thats more where I'm coming from.

LeicesterLad

RichN95 wrote:

LeicesterLad wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

It seems to me that some people are very disappointed not to see Yates's name anywhere in the evidence. All those sharpened axes and nowhere to use them. All this evidence with plenty of teams looking directly involved in doping, but you need to hark back to a little pill popping back in the 80s.

Sky's only real crime was to naively set their standards too high at the start and not being omniscient when recruiting. I'm sure they'd do it like Garmin if they could start again. But they can't so some will criticise from their high horse even if they think they're clean. You're making them same mistake they made and being stupidly idealistic.

Either you think they are doping or not. If you think they are then bash away, but if you don't then stop using the 'transparency' excuse to undermine their efforts. If some of their staff did things 10 or 20 years ago, it's mostly irrelevant, what they do now is important.

Which includes their reaction to the situation, which has been poor.

Perhaps Brailsford should have said absolutely nothing like every other team boss.

Dowsett is a confused kid who was probably exposed to a fair bit of propaganda at LB.

Brailsford probably should have kept his gob shut until he thought of something constructive to say. Dowsett I agree.

As for Yates's notion of 'saw nothing, heard nothing' that just shows what a slithering sh*t he is. He really expects anybody to believe that sh*t? He was at US Postal and Astana, he was in 'the' era. The blokes a liar and Sky should offload him asap.

jibberjim

Richmond Racer wrote:

I do agree. I think there is a lot of attacking Sky from a moral ground that if it was any higher, would induce vertigo. But I do think that Brailsford needs to change the way in which he's addressing things, sharpish, or lose a lot of credibility - which is turn will start to reflect on his riders.

Surely Sky's problem is one of gross incompetence - atrocious media training of riders, atrocious management of stories, poor choices of staff etc. So how does such an incompetent organisation get so much success?

dave_1

I thought Yates was a totally selfless pro who worked for others his whole career. I don't have the contempt for him many appear to have. It's a shame he won't confess though..but go easy on him. He had a great career that he gained little from for his efforts and ended up a landscape gardener to turn a buck. He also has a heart complaint which is probably down to what he did to his body. That was the era he raced in

ContrelaMontre

Doping would be one way to overcome ineptitude...