Paul Kimmage.....
Comments
-
disgruntledgoat wrote:Pardon me, I meant pre-Hinault
Anquetil, Merckx, Coppi, Bartoli, Moser, Saronni, Jan Janssen and so on and so forth.
Got it. The legend remains intact!Contador is the Greatest0 -
Lottery money does not support the team. Stop making things up.0
-
powerbookboy wrote:ddraver wrote:What changes is that when you ask those questions and get genuine plausable answers then you stop asking questions until something new turns up. What you re doing (and what Kimmage does) is just throwing wild accusations around. There is a big difference between skepticism and muck slinging...
I'm hoping we're starting from the same page and I've not missed some outrageous slander than Kimmage has made? This seems to be the article that re-awoke this thread. http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/kimmage ... nd-wiggins
I can't see anything particularly controversial in that article. Seems quite a logical, reasoned stance he's taking. I'd call his view sceptical. I can't see anything in there that isn't either factually accurate, or reasonable speculation. I very much doubt a lawyer could look t it and start drawing up papers.
Doesn't mean to say he's right. But it's perfectly measured, logical analysis.
Either way, I'll withdraw before I ruffle any more feathers. Races starting in the Southern hemisphere soon!
TBH he's said things that are a lot more accusatory than the German-media interview cited in the CN piece. Started with a piece in the Daily Fail just after the end of the Tour last year, and other stronger articles in CN, Velonation, Guardian online around 3 weeks ago, and a pretty strong article/interview published on the Bicycling website around a month ago. The German interview is tame by comparison.
But yeah, bring on the racing!0 -
Sorry, I mean you don't keep repeating the same questions...I wrote that badly (i.e. wrong!)
Anyway, just ordered the Cycling Anthology (and 3 issues of Privateer) so I ll read the articles in there, see if they throw up anything...
Edit - man there have been 8 posts since I typed this..We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
- @ddraver0 -
Richmond Racer wrote:powerbookboy wrote:ddraver wrote:What changes is that when you ask those questions and get genuine plausable answers then you stop asking questions until something new turns up. What you re doing (and what Kimmage does) is just throwing wild accusations around. There is a big difference between skepticism and muck slinging...
I'm hoping we're starting from the same page and I've not missed some outrageous slander than Kimmage has made? This seems to be the article that re-awoke this thread. http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/kimmage ... nd-wiggins
I can't see anything particularly controversial in that article. Seems quite a logical, reasoned stance he's taking. I'd call his view sceptical. I can't see anything in there that isn't either factually accurate, or reasonable speculation. I very much doubt a lawyer could look t it and start drawing up papers.
Doesn't mean to say he's right. But it's perfectly measured, logical analysis.
Either way, I'll withdraw before I ruffle any more feathers. Races starting in the Southern hemisphere soon!
TBH he's said things that are a lot more accusatory than the German-media interview cited in the CN piece. Started with a piece in the Daily Fail just after the end of the Tour last year, and other stronger articles in CN, Velonation, Guardian online around 3 weeks ago, and a pretty strong article/interview published on the Bicycling website around a month ago. The German interview is tame by comparison.
If you have the urls, could you post? I remember reading the Daily Mail article - seemed pretty reasoned to me if memory serves?0 -
go googling...put the 'power' in powerbookboy
0 -
The problem with that article (http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/kimmage ... nd-wiggins) is that it employs that classic easy but effective journalistic ploy of reporting the edited contentious and insinuatory highlights (or in this case, lowlights) of another article made elsewhere. In that case, Cyclingnews are even less obliged to include any balanced statements Kimmage may have originally made (I didn't read it - were there any?).
With Walsh and Kimmage being the 2 leading English speaking names in journalism dealing with doping in cycling, the latter needs to watch out that the chip on his shoulder isn't starting to dig into his spinal column because it'll end up in his newspaper column...
... ahem, I'll get my coat0 -
OCDuPalais wrote:The problem with that article (http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/kimmage ... nd-wiggins) is that it employs that classic easy but effective journalistic ploy of reporting the edited contentious and insinuatory highlights (or in this case, lowlights) of another article made elsewhere. In that case, Cyclingnews are even less obliged to include any balanced statements Kimmage may have originally made (I didn't read it - were there any?).
With Walsh and Kimmage being the 2 leading English speaking names in journalism dealing with doping in cycling, the latter needs to watch out that the chip on his shoulder isn't starting to dig into his spinal column because it'll end up in his newspaper column...
... ahem, I'll get my coat
Yes, 'tis true. This lifting selected soundbites from other media sources and just publishing has become more and more prevalent. Add to that the fact that the likes of Velonation and CN just run non-English language 3rd party stuff (which equates to the vast majority of their published material) through an internet translator and clearly do little to proof the results before publishing on their sites, and you have a news content providers equivalent of Chinese whispers masquerading as journalism.0 -
OCDuPalais wrote:The problem with that article (http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/kimmage ... nd-wiggins) is that it employs that classic easy but effective journalistic ploy of reporting the edited contentious and insinuatory highlights (or in this case, lowlights) of another article made elsewhere. In that case, Cyclingnews are even less obliged to include any balanced statements Kimmage may have originally made (I didn't read it - were there any?).
With Walsh and Kimmage being the 2 leading English speaking names in journalism dealing with doping in cycling, the latter needs to watch out that the chip on his shoulder isn't starting to dig into his spinal column because it'll end up in his newspaper column...
... ahem, I'll get my coat
Reminds me of a great Iain Banks line about someone sweet-talking Lachlan Murdoch in an attempt to get a column in The Son....a rare 100% loyal Pro Race poster. A poster boy for the community.0 -
Richmond Racer wrote:Lottery money does not support the team. Stop making things up.
I didn't say that.
Lottery money pays people who do work for the team. That's a different thing. Being paid by BC for working at team Sky happens.0 -
Have you thought about buying a scratch card and demanding answers to your questions as someone like, dunno, Shane Sutton whose salary is paid by BC, works with Wiggins?0
-
It's interesting there is a different morality between BC and Sky.Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0
-
If you mean Sir Shane is now beyond the pale for Sky, surely that's more about corporate sponsor pressure than morality?...a rare 100% loyal Pro Race poster. A poster boy for the community.0
-
Richmond Racer wrote:go googling...put the 'power' in powerbookboy
I have weak Google-fu skills apparantly. I can't find anything on CN, Velonews or the Guardian apart from a load of stuff about the UCI lawsuit stuff.0 -
disgruntledgoat wrote:Rodrego Hernandez wrote:If they've got nothing to hide they will be open and honest with Kimmage and any other journalist that asks awkward questions.
They might have a whole heap of tame / bought and paid for journalists and fans (D Millar for one) but to be seen as clean and to be clean are 2 different things.
Considering lottery funding supports the team as well as private money they should be an open book to any awkward questions and should have the answers!
Ah, the old "nothing to hide, nothing to fear" eh?
Kimmage hasn't asked them any questions that I'm aware of, he's just pointed out inconsistencies in their approach and made insinuations. Walsh asked Brailsford about Lienders and published his answer, stating himself satsisfied with it. What questions, specifically, have Sky not answered that you would like to see them face?
Recruiting 'dirty' riders. Recruiting dirty doctors. Promising to be transparent.
It's only a matter of time before someone follows the money.0 -
Rodrego Hernandez wrote:disgruntledgoat wrote:Rodrego Hernandez wrote:If they've got nothing to hide they will be open and honest with Kimmage and any other journalist that asks awkward questions.
They might have a whole heap of tame / bought and paid for journalists and fans (D Millar for one) but to be seen as clean and to be clean are 2 different things.
Considering lottery funding supports the team as well as private money they should be an open book to any awkward questions and should have the answers!
Ah, the old "nothing to hide, nothing to fear" eh?
Kimmage hasn't asked them any questions that I'm aware of, he's just pointed out inconsistencies in their approach and made insinuations. Walsh asked Brailsford about Lienders and published his answer, stating himself satsisfied with it. What questions, specifically, have Sky not answered that you would like to see them face?
Recruiting 'dirty' riders. Recruiting dirty doctors. Promising to be transparent.
It's only a matter of time before someone follows the money.
Would Kimmage et al not be better investing their time doing that, gathering their evidence, sources etc?"In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"
@gietvangent0 -
He probably is.
You know for sure that the journalists sucking heavily on the Sky teat aren't doing any digging.
They were tricked by Armstrong, they need to make sure that they don't let themselves get fooled again.
But then again, the lure of free bikes, exclusive chats with riders, nice hotels etc. might be too much to resist.0 -
Rodrego Hernandez wrote:He probably is.
You know for sure that the journalists sucking heavily on the Sky teat aren't doing any digging.
They were tricked by Armstrong, they need to make sure that they don't let themselves get fooled again.
But then again, the lure of free bikes, exclusive chats with riders, nice hotels etc. might be too much to resist.
Any evidence to back up your assertion that Sky are bribing journos with bikes and fancy hotels?
Did Brailsford bribe Walsh for his appraisal of their credentials?"In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"
@gietvangent0 -
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0
-
Kimmage is right to be suspicious. Until there is an amnesty and then lifetime bans for all riders on first offence, and the UCI cleaned out, there is going to be doping. I don't think I'm alone in wondering why British cyclists are worldbeaters at the moment on the road and on the track, it's not Kingsmill and Highland Spring in my opinion. I hope I'm wrong, but there are still dopers a out any my opinion is that in order to beat a talented rider who dopes, you have no option to be a talented rider who dopes. The culture of the sport has been to turn a blind eye for decades, and when faced with the choice of being competitive or being an also-ran its not difficult to see why it's done. That's why total amnesty, clean slate, no more chances. Kimmage deserves to be part of that as does Bassons. You can't blame anyone currently for doping or omertà, it's part of the history of the sport.
Great thread btw.0 -
Total amnesty is a Total Red Herring - it will never happen
If you have this opinion, I just don't know why you watch the sport. Seriously! Switch off. If enough people who believe the sport is as rotten to the core as you do switch off then sponsers will go, races and teams will fail and the sport can begin again from scratch. It won't happen any other way
(oh and join twitter and follow Kimmage, you ll realise why so many of us can't take him seriously anymore)We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
- @ddraver0 -
It's because they have the most money and the best coaches. Same as every other team sport. In fact they are just about the only teams that actually employ coaches. Sky have the second or third highest budget and four or five dedicated coaches - which is probably more than the other 17 WT teams put together.Joelsim wrote:I don't think I'm alone in wondering why British cyclists are worldbeaters at the moment on the road and on the track, it's not Kingsmill and Highland Spring in my opinion.Twitter: @RichN950 -
ddraver wrote:Total amnesty is a Total Red Herring - it will never happen
If you have this opinion, I just don't know why you watch the sport. Seriously! Switch off. If enough people who believe the sport is as rotten to the core as you do switch off then sponsers will go, races and teams will fail and the sport can begin again from scratch. It won't happen any other way
(oh and join twitter and follow Kimmage, you ll realise why so many of us can't take him seriously anymore)
I believe competitive cribbage may offer an alternative pastime for our friend to follow - what say you, chap?0 -
I watch it because I enjoy it, simple. The only reasons I care about doping is to allow those few riders who don't want to dope to be competitive. To be honest, if everyone is doing it then its a fair fight. Do I think it's endemic and rife? Yes. Do I think they are cheating? No. To my mind the definition of cheating is to gain an unfair advantage, which I don't think is the case if everyone's doing it. I do, however, find the continued reluctance to do everything possible about it bemusing. I think cycling could gain so much by opening up, admitting the problems and doing everything to try to rid itself. I think there would be a huge amount of respect that would result. Do you honestly think the sponsors think it's clean?0
-
Not big on crib either, scrabble perhaps as long as there are no word generators being used!!0
-
Joelsim wrote:Kimmage is right to be suspicious. Until there is an amnesty and then lifetime bans for all riders on first offence, and the UCI cleaned out, there is going to be doping. I don't think I'm alone in wondering why British cyclists are worldbeaters at the moment on the road and on the track, it's not Kingsmill and Highland Spring in my opinion. I hope I'm wrong, but there are still dopers a out any my opinion is that in order to beat a talented rider who dopes, you have no option to be a talented rider who dopes. The culture of the sport has been to turn a blind eye for decades, and when faced with the choice of being competitive or being an also-ran its not difficult to see why it's done. That's why total amnesty, clean slate, no more chances. Kimmage deserves to be part of that as does Bassons. You can't blame anyone currently for doping or omertà, it's part of the history of the sport.
Great thread btw.
If you check your records British cyclists are and were only really peaking for the Olympics & have a history (as does the British Rowing teams) of not being as good in the year before or after typically not winning as many world championship events. Now you could see that as good sporting manners and letter the 'others' win once in while, or to cover up any potential drug taking by letting others win sometimes, or you could believe that its part of their 4 year training cycle.
I do agree that whilst some people tend to think that Kimmage is a broken record and not good for our sport I do think that a lot of what he says does make sense & personally I do agree that stronger sentences are called for & that the UCI whether corrupt or not has managed to get itself tainted with its run-ins with WADA etc.
I do like the idea of total amnesty, however do not think it will happen as there is no incentive. If your going to let people who doped in the past tell all with no repercussions then fine, but others who made good money may fear a civil case being brought against them. Plus there are none riders but support staff, doctors etc who may still be working in cycling and therefore would have no incentive to 'fess up' as it might effect their current or future positions & might be scared of being named by others for the same reasons.Pain hurts much less if its topped off with beating your mates to top of a climb.0 -
Back to this Kimmage movie...its going to be all about Kimmage as Hero and The Only Speaker of the Truth, isnt it...
*yawns and wanders off again*0 -
Richmond Racer wrote:Back to this Kimmage movie...its going to be all about Kimmage as Hero and The Only Speaker of the Truth, isnt it...
*yawns and wanders off again*
Hold on I know I'm late to the party & have not gone through this whole tread but they are making a film of him?Pain hurts much less if its topped off with beating your mates to top of a climb.0 -
I'm not suggesting for one moment that anyone fesses up. Just draw a line under it, no one banned from Puerto, meat, saddle sores or whatever that has happened in the past. Then set some very stringent rules and penalties for the future. Where is the disincentive to dope if you just get a slap on the wrist?
Btw, for the couple of posters above, I'm not a troll and doping makes no difference to my interest in the sport. In fact the science of it and sheer scale of it fascinates me. Coupled with the strategy, teamwork, tactics and the wonderful opportunities for all styles of rider to have their day, the diversity and the spectacle of the events... TDF is absolutely one of my favourite sporting events and I'm already excited by it and can't wait for it to start, likewise the giro and even Turkey that I've just been watching.0 -
Joelsim wrote:I'm not suggesting for one moment that anyone fesses up. Just draw a line under it, no one banned from Puerto, meat, saddle sores or whatever that has happened in the past. Then set some very stringent rules and penalties for the future. Where is the disincentive to dope if you just get a slap on the wrist?
Btw, for the couple of posters above, I'm not a troll and doping makes no difference to my interest in the sport. In fact the science of it and sheer scale of it fascinates me. Coupled with the strategy, teamwork, tactics and the wonderful opportunities for all styles of rider to have their day, the diversity and the spectacle of the events... TDF is absolutely one of my favourite sporting events and I'm already excited by it and can't wait for it to start, likewise the giro and even Turkey that I've just been watching.
Fair point about the slap on the wrist & stronger penalties, but others may disagree. I can see the incentive in not banning people from the upcoming trials, however do disagree it as personally I think that it sends out the wrong image to the none cycling world but thats perhaps for another thread.
Not sure that anyone thinks your trolling, do they? If so I don't think what you have said is bad enough to suggest it.Pain hurts much less if its topped off with beating your mates to top of a climb.0
