Team Sky- position on doping
Comments
-
It's a brave piece of satire, highlighting an important issue, not a cowardly way to accuse someone while claiming not to be accusing them.
Lots of people add a lot of important points to the debate, UCI_overlord isn't one of them.0 -
ddraver wrote:I failed to resist...
Sorry Rich
The problem is they want a reaction as this then becomes part of the 'story'. You can already see him claming to have been 'intimidated' due to Fran Millar pointing out he was wrong (just like Armstrong intimidated people, I suppose). And then you and others will be portrayed as 'fanboys' just like Armstrong had.
Even the Asylum has paid little attention to it.
Social media has created an army of anonymous David Walsh wannabes, but they're all too lazy to do any actual work for it so they just trot out whatever theory they crosses their mind.Twitter: @RichN950 -
Well, anyone doubting why DB has stated this requirement for staff / riders to sign a declaration take at look at Rabo. Maybe he knows that Sky are prepared to take a similar stance. I suspect we will be seeing all the people with question marks gone before next season.0
-
Pross wrote:Well, anyone doubting why DB has stated this requirement for staff / riders to sign a declaration take at look at Rabo. Maybe he knows that Sky are prepared to take a similar stance. I suspect we will be seeing all the people with question marks gone before next season.
Have to say that's what occurred to me when the news first came through re Rabobank. Still doesnt mean that I think the 'fess up now and lose your job' isnt storing up possible future problems....but I've been pretty certain that DB is working to whatever it takes to keep Sky on board - and if thems the conditions...
In corporate boll$%ks speak its a process with an audit trail0 -
DB is getting a lot of flak here, but he doesn't strike me as a stupid or naive individual.
This hasn't been done as a knee-jerk-no-thought reaction.
I'm sure he's aware of the admit-it-now-get-sacked-immediately, deny-it-now-get-sacked-if-it-comes-out logic everyone is pointing out
But after the Lancey-boy publicity pro-cycling has had in the last 10 days and the impact this must have had on the Great British Public - who let's face it don't know much about elite cycling unless it's Chris Hoy or Vicky P getting a Gold - this contract is perhaps just the thing to be read by Daily Mail readers or get its 20secs on BBC News240 -
RichN95 wrote:
It's not his policy though (he's quite happy to pick Millar for GB), it comes from BSkyB.andy_wrx wrote:DB is getting a lot of flak here, but he doesn't strike me as a stupid or naive individual.
I'm not so sure about that. I know the initial one was, but this round, not so sure.
If it is them, why is he or someone else not explaining the pointlessness of it.Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
I think it is a great idea. Yates, Julich and 2 others, Rogers is one..they will be cornered by this. Rogers won't sign, nor will Julich0
-
Why not? If they sign they keep their jobs until they get some sort of official sanction from the UCI/WADA which could be years away or might never happen.Dave_1 wrote:I think it is a great idea. Yates, Julich and 2 others, Rogers is one..they will be cornered by this. Rogers won't sign, nor will Julich
They've already doped/been involved in doping and been dishonest about it, why stop now if they're just going to get sacked for it?0 -
iainf72 wrote:RichN95 wrote:
It's not his policy though (he's quite happy to pick Millar for GB), it comes from BSkyB.andy_wrx wrote:DB is getting a lot of flak here, but he doesn't strike me as a stupid or naive individual.
I'm not so sure about that. I know the initial one was, but this round, not so sure.
If it is them, why is he or someone else not explaining the pointlessness of it.
We have no insight into what he - or someone else - may have tried to explain - and DB's not about to share that with the media. He's front of house, and he's the one having to take one for the team on behalf of the sponsor - such as Jeremy Whittle's hatchet job in the Times today0 -
It's like visa/customs forms where you are asked to declare if you're a terrorist, whether you packed your bag yourself etc. So if you are a terrorist they can go "we're charging you with an act of terrorism, and lying to a customs officer when you were asked about it!". It gives the impression of doing something without actually doing anything.0
-
Richmond Racer wrote:Pross wrote:Well, anyone doubting why DB has stated this requirement for staff / riders to sign a declaration take at look at Rabo. Maybe he knows that Sky are prepared to take a similar stance. I suspect we will be seeing all the people with question marks gone before next season.
Have to say that's what occurred to me when the news first came through re Rabobank. Still doesnt mean that I think the 'fess up now and lose your job' isnt storing up possible future problems....but I've been pretty certain that DB is working to whatever it takes to keep Sky on board - and if thems the conditions...
After the Murdoch storm at Sky, they'll be doing their utmost to avoid the merest whiff of scandal for the next few years as they seek to consolidate their image. DB ain't no mug. Despite his "shocked, so shocked" stance, he'll have known the level of organised doping in the peleton (if not the details). Like others have mentioned, I suspect he's taken the view that in order to appease the nervous accountants and senior management amongst the growing number of avid cycling fans on the board at Sky ("so Dave, is it true that even Mark or Bradley wouldn't stop for a wee during a Tour stage? Gosh. And is it true what I read somewhere about their bike frames costing over 3 hundred and fifty pounds EACH?"), he needs to be seen to go the extra mile...Richmond Racer wrote:In corporate boll$%ks speak its a process with an audit trail
...heh - like that.
I'm not sure one way or another at the moment how I feel about Sky's stance on this. But one thing it could be seen to do is shift the onus from the "Organisation" (the team) to the individuals employed...0 -
To be honest not convinced how good Yates is in his job at sky,in the documentary it does not strike me that many of the riders had much respect for him,not to mention the fact he always sounded drunk
Given how close he was to Lance surely he was aware what was going on and kept quiet. Currently I have been mostly riding a Specialized Roubaix Comp0 -
fudbeer wrote:To be honest not convinced how good Yates is in his job at sky,in the documentary it does not strike me that many of the riders had much respect for him,not to mention the fact he always sounded drunk Given how close he was to Lance surely he was aware what was going on and kept quiet.
Personally I think Yates has been spot on this year. He's been lead DS at every major stage race they've won - Algarve, P-N, Romandie, Dauphine and of course the Tour.
His speech has always been like that - take a look at a clip on youtube of him watching and commenting on a play-back of the Tour stage in 94 when he took the maillot jaune.
Do any of us believe that Yatesy didnt know what was going on with Lancey-boy and kept schtum? Course not.0 -
It's all media fluff.
Remember that only last week one of the Sky riders was spouting to the media about how Lance was a 'legend'
There was of course a very obvious PR backpeddle a few hours later, explaining thoroughly unconvincingly what he really meant, but by then it was too late, it was in big headlines on the BBC news website frontpage0 -
Brailsford will already know who is in or out with this new stipulation; he'll also have viable replacements lined up...
Brian Smith for a senior DS role? He's already essentially signed the declaration in public...0 -
andy_wrx wrote:It's all media fluff.
Remember that only last week one of the Sky riders was spouting to the media about how Lance was a 'legend'
There was of course a very obvious PR backpeddle a few hours later, explaining thoroughly unconvincingly what he really meant, but by then it was too late, it was in big headlines on the BBC news website frontpage
I don't understand what Dowsett's comment is supposed to show. The real truth about Sky?0 -
Graeme_S wrote:
Why not? If they sign they keep their jobs until they get some sort of official sanction from the UCI/WADA which could be years away or might never happen.Dave_1 wrote:I think it is a great idea. Yates, Julich and 2 others, Rogers is one..they will be cornered by this. Rogers won't sign, nor will Julich
They've already doped/been involved in doping and been dishonest about it, why stop now if they're just going to get sacked for it?
If Sky are asking for a signed statement now it implies they didn't bother to get one when they employed these people. If that's the case where do they stand legally if they want to get rid of say Julich and/or Yates for either not signing or admitting some former involvement - after all for Sky to say they assumed they were innocent is about as plausible as Yates saying he didn't see or hear of any doping at Disco/USP or whatever teams he worked on with Lance.
it's a hard life if you don't weaken.0 -
Where would Sky stand on people who have previously served a short term suspended doping ban for a product no longer on the banned list I wonder? (Just hypothetical!)0
-
I have a certain amount of sympathy for the young riders who were all drawn into this doping when they started, I don't agree with doping but I understand the pressure they felt.
In my opinion if a rider has come clean about his past and served any ban - then they need to draw a line under it and maybe make them do some form of anti doping community work. Millar has made no secret of his drups past now and makes it clear almost every time he is interviewed - by wiunning a stage at the TDF - he also showed there is a future without drugs - maybe people like him are doing more than anyone to bring cycling back from the brink?
As for team managers, coaches etc. who let doping happen on their watch - if it can be proven, then I say they should never be allowed near a bike again - they are the ones who had the power to stop it - not the young riders.
Just my 2 cents.0 -
Turfle wrote:andy_wrx wrote:It's all media fluff.
Remember that only last week one of the Sky riders was spouting to the media about how Lance was a 'legend'
There was of course a very obvious PR backpeddle a few hours later, explaining thoroughly unconvincingly what he really meant, but by then it was too late, it was in big headlines on the BBC news website frontpage
I don't understand what Dowsett's comment is supposed to show. The real truth about Sky?
Nooo.
What I mean is, what must it have looked like to the Sky board to have one of their riders spouting this and it being broadcast widely ?
Sure, Dowsett is still only a kid, but this was a PR disaster - he was hardly 'on message'
This contract thing is intended for consumption by the Great British Public who will have gathered the impression from this Armstrong saga that pro cycling is full of drugs
Now whether it is or not, whether it always was, whether other sports are, is a different matter...0 -
andy_wrx wrote:Turfle wrote:andy_wrx wrote:It's all media fluff.
Remember that only last week one of the Sky riders was spouting to the media about how Lance was a 'legend'
There was of course a very obvious PR backpeddle a few hours later, explaining thoroughly unconvincingly what he really meant, but by then it was too late, it was in big headlines on the BBC news website frontpage
I don't understand what Dowsett's comment is supposed to show. The real truth about Sky?
Nooo.
What I mean is, what must it have looked like to the Sky board to have one of their riders spouting this and it being broadcast widely ?
Sure, Dowsett is still only a kid, but this was a PR disaster - he was hardly 'on message'
Oh, now I see. And agree!0 -
I guess it depends on their contracts - doubtless they are 'contractors' rather than 'staff' and so UK employment rights won't apply.Tom Butcher wrote:If Sky are asking for a signed statement now it implies they didn't bother to get one when they employed these people. If that's the case where do they stand legally if they want to get rid of say Julich and/or Yates for either not signing or admitting some former involvement - after all for Sky to say they assumed they were innocent is about as plausible as Yates saying he didn't see or hear of any doping at Disco/USP or whatever teams he worked on with Lance.0 -
Tom Butcher wrote:Graeme_S wrote:
Why not? If they sign they keep their jobs until they get some sort of official sanction from the UCI/WADA which could be years away or might never happen.Dave_1 wrote:I think it is a great idea. Yates, Julich and 2 others, Rogers is one..they will be cornered by this. Rogers won't sign, nor will Julich
They've already doped/been involved in doping and been dishonest about it, why stop now if they're just going to get sacked for it?
If Sky are asking for a signed statement now it implies they didn't bother to get one when they employed these people. If that's the case where do they stand legally if they want to get rid of say Julich and/or Yates for either not signing or admitting some former involvement - after all for Sky to say they assumed they were innocent is about as plausible as Yates saying he didn't see or hear of any doping at Disco/USP or whatever teams he worked on with Lance.
Only 3 people are full employees - everyone else is contracted - FAR less liability on the employer. There are also bound to be clauses re 'bringing name and reputation of the employer into disrepute' etc. Also a decent pay-off together with a non-disclosure agreement usually works.0 -
Do we know what Smithy is doing next year, as Endura has 'merged' (been absorbed by ?) NetApp ?OCDuPalais wrote:Brailsford will already know who is in or out with this new stipulation; he'll also have viable replacements lined up...
Brian Smith for a senior DS role? He's already essentially signed the declaration in public...0 -
So is all this Team Sky doping thing a bit like Only Fools & Horses, where Rodney can't go abroad because he smoked a spliff when he was 13?
0 -
I never inhaled0
-
Just read a few comments from Sky's press conference the other night at some covent garden hotel - NOT seen one question asked by these so-called journalists about Yates,Julich,Leinders,De Jongh. What happened did Brailsford hand pick all his fav's and tell them not to ask any dodgy questions. WHY is Mick Rodgers still in the team ????. Dont suppose that crossed anybody's mind the other night :roll: .0
-
Gazzetta67 wrote:Just read a few comments from Sky's press conference the other night at some covent garden hotel - NOT seen one question asked by these so-called journalists about Yates,Julich,Leinders,De Jongh. What happened did Brailsford hand pick all his fav's and tell them not to ask any dodgy questions. WHY is Mick Rodgers still in the team ????. Dont suppose that crossed anybody's mind the other night :roll: .
Get hold of a copy of today's Times and see what Jeremy Whittle has written0
