Sky and David Walsh

micron

Yes the UKPS coinage was an interesting one - not mine, by the way - but I put my hands up to using it, and to being very clear as to why I was using it. There was a general sense on twitter that day of 'feck, not again' - Not because of doping, simply that sinking feeling that we were in for a US Postal type race of team domination and mountain processions. When I used that hashtag that was the spirit I used it in - as you know I'm that very worst of things, a cycling 'romantic' - who was hoping that Prudhomme's 'Tour of Innovations' would produce some exciting racing. My heart sank that day. But to say that my personal use of that hashtag meant anymore than a short hand way of referring to tactics is way off beam. I believe even Wiggins himself freely admits Sky have borrowed from USPS - as many here have pointed out, they won 7 tours, why wouldn't they? Love it or loathe it, it works.

Macaloon

Richmond Racer wrote:

To No tA Doc's post above, I'd also cite the coining of Sky as UKPOSTAL - during the Dauphine, I believe?

Wish you hadn't reminded me. That episode of odious witch-huntery always brings out my inner Bardem:

Richmond Racer

micron wrote:

RR the point I was trying to make was the very obverse: Walsh's great strength is that he has the ability to change his mind based on the evidence he accumulates - so woe betide Sky if they do anything to wee-wee him off I freely admit to being disappointed with his first article - no drugs in swimming Tim Kerrison? - but Walsh plays a long game. I'm really interested to see what he concludes - whichever way it falls out, some will inevitably be disappointed - lets hope its me rather than you


So you'll actually be disappointed if he concludes with a clean bill of health for Sky?

That says everything.

micron

RR a question: if you're all about transparency, why do you protect your tweets?

Macaloon

micron wrote:

Yes the UKPS coinage was an interesting one - not mine, by the way - but I put my hands up to using it, and to being very clear as to why I was using it. There was a general sense on twitter that day of 'feck, not again' - Not because of doping, simply that sinking feeling that we were in for a US Postal type race of team domination and mountain processions. When I used that hashtag that was the spirit I used it in - as you know I'm that very worst of things, a cycling 'romantic' - who was hoping that Prudhomme's 'Tour of Innovations' would produce some exciting racing. My heart sank that day. But to say that my personal use of that hashtag meant anymore than a short hand way of referring to tactics is way off beam. I believe even Wiggins himself freely admits Sky have borrowed from USPS - as many here have pointed out, they won 7 tours, why wouldn't they? Love it or loathe it, it works.

That's ridiculous. You were in the 1% using a hashtag to discuss tactics that the 99% were using to smear a team for doping? It will be many moons before I start taking statements like this at face value.

No_Ta_Doctor

micron wrote:

Yes the UKPS coinage was an interesting one - not mine, by the way - but I put my hands up to using it, and to being very clear as to why I was using it. There was a general sense on twitter that day of 'feck, not again' - Not because of doping, simply that sinking feeling that we were in for a US Postal type race of team domination and mountain processions. When I used that hashtag that was the spirit I used it in - as you know I'm that very worst of things, a cycling 'romantic' - who was hoping that Prudhomme's 'Tour of Innovations' would produce some exciting racing. My heart sank that day. But to say that my personal use of that hashtag meant anymore than a short hand way of referring to tactics is way off beam. I believe even Wiggins himself freely admits Sky have borrowed from USPS - as many here have pointed out, they won 7 tours, why wouldn't they? Love it or loathe it, it works.

Humpy Dumpty wrote:

When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.

Alice wrote:

The question is,whether you can make words mean so many different things.

Richmond Racer

As for my tweets, I dont chuck rumour and innuendo around the place hiding behind a pseudonym, which I was only made to change because of pressure from attending that CCN meeting.

Nor, for the record, do I go on about transparency.

stagehopper

The first thing I thought of when I saw Sky last year at the Dauphiné wasn't "ahhhhh it's the return of USPostal" but "it's Liquigas again" as the loveable team in lime green had used those tactics repeatedly in recent seasons. CSC another team that springs to memory as sweeping along the valley floors with a seven man train into the final Alp of the day.

For such a mountain-light Tour, Sky weren't that successful at using the tactic and often seemed a little short of numbers compared to their notorious American predecessors.

slim_boy_fat

micron wrote:

RR the point I was trying to make was the very obverse: Walsh's great strength is that he has the ability to change his mind based on the evidence he accumulates - so woe betide Sky if they do anything to wee-wee him off I freely admit to being disappointed with his first article - no drugs in swimming Tim Kerrison? - but Walsh plays a long game. I'm really interested to see what he concludes - whichever way it falls out, some will inevitably be disappointed - lets hope its me rather than you

Considering the history of cycling, why would anybody be disappointed to learn that Sky could have the year they had last year and do it clean? Surely that is what we all want, no?

micron

Mac, I'd dig out my tweets from that time but that would smack of self justification. The great irony is that you accuse me of having made up my mind immutably about sky when clearly you have made your mind up about the meaning of anything I try and contribute to the 'debate'. Shame really. Stops being debate when responses are based on personal judgements and not the 'evidence'.

RR don't know if you noticed but I didn't change my ID until some time after CCN - I felt remaining pseudonymous ran counter to transparency. My decision alone. Fuller asked me to remain pseudonymous - but he was trying to make a point that was never adequately transmitted - as with so much from CCN. Fact is, ive always been more than honest and open about who I am and what I do - as demonstrated by the comment you linked to. Sorry you didn't get the little joke about sky - I've been told my humour is on the dry side.

Now, it's a miserable Sunday & my kid has finished his lunch and wants me to make goblins. When it's dry he likes to ride a bike - where he ever to want to get into the sport, I'd hate to think he would ever have to make 'the choice'. That's what motivates me. Am I a bitter old cynic? Guilty as charged. But the silly thing about all this squabbling is that we all want the same thing - a demonstrably clean sport. You think sky are doing this - I hope they are. I'll continue to talk to people and make up my own mind.

Now to get back to being 'just' a mother - best job in the world

Macaloon

stagehopper wrote:

The first thing I thought of when I saw Sky last year at the Dauphiné wasn't "ahhhhh it's the return of USPostal" but "it's Liquigas again" as the loveable team in lime green had used those tactics repeatedly in recent seasons.

Notably in the 2012 Giro. Of course the difference was that they didn't win so clearly could not have been anything like USPS.

iainf72

micron wrote:

RR don't know if you noticed but I didn't change my ID until some time after CCN - I felt remaining pseudonymous ran counter to transparency. My decision alone. Fuller asked me to remain pseudonymous - but he was trying to make a point that was never adequately transmitted - as with so much from CCN.

Suze - not sure if you're still in touch with Jaimie, but does he realise what a blinking disaster CCN turned out to be? I'm quite curious about where his head is at around it.

Macaloon

micron wrote:

Mac, I'd dig out my tweets from that time but that would smack of self justification. The great irony is that you accuse me of having made up my mind immutably about sky when clearly you have made your mind up about the meaning of anything I try and contribute to the 'debate'. Shame really. Stops being debate when responses are based on personal judgements and not the 'evidence'.

Sign me up for Micron's Twitter Academy because I totally thought #UKPS and fatuous Armstrong/Wiggins couplings are used to *nudge-nudge* that Sky/Wiggins are doping. On this narrow point I'm accusing you of ludicrous revisionism with the aggravating factor of insulting my intelligence.

Nowhere have I made the accusation that your mind is immutably made up. (How on earth could it be given the range of different voices you listen to.) This is a classic move in the Jellyfish Tango canon.

ocdupalais

micron wrote:

Stops being debate when responses are based on personal judgements and not the 'evidence'.

Heh heh...Damn right.

micron wrote:

But the silly thing about all this squabbling is that we all want the same thing - a demonstrably clean sport. You think sky are doing this - I hope they are. I'll continue to talk to people and make up my own mind.

I'll tell you what, I'll agree to say "we need to be watchful about Sky" if you'll say "the massive lack of solid and accessible evidence suggests that Sky are possibly/probably clean". That's fair, isn't it?
That way we can all concentrate on more viable targets (while keeping an eye on Sky, obviously) - and your sprog can grow up passionate about a sport that's not riddled with the putrid stench of cynicism that's been allowed to fester in the absence of clear thinking, fresh ideas and bright leadership.

Lawyer's Edit (thanks EKIMIKE*)



*May have to go back to my clumsy original if I can't afford the re-wording fee - what's that, 45 seconds rounded-up to 6 hours?

EKIMIKE

OCDuPalais wrote:

I'll tell you what, I'll agree to say "we need to be watchful about Sky" if you'll say "the massive lack of solid and accessible evidence suggests that Sky are possibly/probably clean". That's fair, isn't it?

FTFY

micron

Iainf I get the group emails, don't participate except over the ashenden debacle. I think fuller was motivated by the desire to do right but his personality blinded him to how CCN would be perceived. It was really frustrating that the frank and open discussions of the first day were hijacked by the ridiculous stunt of lemond for UCI president (which I strongly opposed). I think the peoplecwhovattended had good motives but that ultimately it looks like a rich man's vanity project. As I said elsewhere, a group of us fans - headed up by Scott - were trying to set something up at the same time - we got superseded. I wouldn't go now - not because of silly tosh about revolutionary councils - but because it was too rushed, I'll conceived. It didn't have agency. Would what we were trying to achieve have had more traction with fans - I like to think so. But would probably have been shot down for not being truly representative etc. Around the same time quite a few new accounts sprang up from groups of fans wanting to be heard - if they expressed support for CCN they were shot down in flames. So it's not quite true it didn't have agency but fan initiatives were never allowed to gain traction. Sometimes think we're all happier to sit around & moan rather than do something constructive - however wrongheaded that may turn out to be.

As for knowing where fuller's head is? Your guess is as good as mine.

Mac: unless you were following my entire timeline that day, you'd have no idea what I tweeted. I could dig out my tweets but frankly can't be arsed. The reason UKPostal gained traction and not Liquisky? Perhaps because the former is a little punchier? The FG twitter academy is always open, rates very reasonable, jellyfish tango a speciality

OCD you make a very fair point - and, as ive realised, point scoring and back slapping is all in this August temple to debate I'm happy to agree to disagree. And enjoyed your 'lawyer edit'.

frenchfighter

micron wrote:

Now to get back to being 'just' a mother - best job in the world

feltkuota

Micron

I can't help but feel that whatever message you are trying to get across would come out a lot better if each and every post didn't' sound like sanctimonious clap.

As a side note saying"back to being just a mother " etc whilst true in itself does kind of preach to those others out there who are mothers or fathers that somehow you are more special.

Anyway must go as I have something wonderful to be getting on with

micron

I can't help thinking there's no point posting on a forum where all comments are prejudged. If you go looking for sanctimonious clap then you'll pretty certainly find it.

As for the 'just a mother' comment - a dig at rich who said without doping I was 'just a mother' - I call that sexist claptrap and an insult to all parents, you may disagree. Question of tone? I'm still struggling with that one.

RichN95.

micron wrote:

As for the 'just a mother' comment - a dig at rich who said without doping I was 'just a mother' - I call that sexist claptrap and an insult to all parents, you may disagree. Question of tone? I'm still struggling with that one.

No, the point was that it just makes you no different to a couple of billion other people. It's important to your kids, but not something that anyone else is going to pay the slightest bit of attention to. No-one's going to follow you on twitter to hear about the school run or invite you to meet Greg LeMond to chat about school uniforms.

micron

Do you have kids, rich? I'm guessing not. And of course you'd already played the 'just there to make the coffee' card. So, let me get this straight, what it boils down to is that you should have met Greg lemond instead because you're cycling knowledge is far superior to mine? I don't doubt it. I also thought you made some excellent points in your post about the 'need' in some quarters to perpetuate the doping culture - quite true, for example look at Aussie rules, just signed their biggest ever tv contract despite a season riddled with scandal. You're right, that shit sells. You're on the money. But you make the point better without the personal stuff. I get that you're angry, but you imbue me with a level of influence far beyond what is either feasible or realistic. As you said yourself, I was a total irrelevance at CCN.

frenchfighter

micron wrote:

a dig at rich who said without doping I was 'just a mother'

Yeah that was totally uncalled for and I was going to call him out on it.

Rich lost his cool on this thread a few times. Doesn't often happen.

Macaloon

FF. Your meta-commentary by avator enhances my experience of this forum no end. Chapeaux

No_Ta_Doctor

micron wrote:

I can't help thinking there's no point posting on a forum where all comments are prejudged.

Perhaps if you stopped insulting our intelligence we'd collectively be less judgemental.

Macaloon nailed it there.

In the summer of 2012 USPOSTAL meant one thing and one thing only. The UKPOSTAL hashtag was disgraceful. To claim it meant anything other when using it is just dishonest.

Which doesn't stand you in good stead when you say this:

micron wrote:

You're right - there is nothing as concrete around Sky, just some whispers from the odd ex-pro, an as yet unresolved UKAD investigation into Linda McCartney and rumours of CERA & carbon monoxide poisoning used as a PED.

You'll understand if I don't take your word for all of it.

Sources, please. Who is the ex pro, and what is he whispering?
Linda McCartney team: an unresolved investigation into a team Wiggins was signed with for for less than two months - is this likely to be damaging to his credibility? Unless it's Sean Yates' credibility that's damaged, but I hardly think the McCartney team would be the biggest suspicion on his career.
Rumours of CERA and CO poisoning - sources again please, otherwise they're just rumours.

Contrast that to this:

micron wrote:

look at the vaughters/andreu SMS conversation now enshrined in the USADA reasoned decision as evidence - when that first emerged it was immediately explained away by the fanboys as innuendo, speculation, at best a joke at worst lies

Now that's a good solid piece of evidence. It needed to questioned (what was it's providence? was it genuine?) but there you have two riders informally discussing doping in the peloton and naming names. If you have anything like that on Sky then please provide it.

You're right, some tried to explain it away, they're largely the same people that tried to explain the entire USADA reasoned decision away.

I object, though, to the inference that anyone that tries to "explain away" the Sky innuendo is somehow a blinkered "fanboy" unable to deal with rational argument. There really is very, very, little to explain away at all. Certainly not anything remotely as damning as the vaughters/andreu IM.

We've never asked for a smoking gun, they're very rarely found. We just wanted something, anything, that wasn't pure conjecture or a Chinese whisper we didn't know the source of.

frenchfighter

Macaloon wrote:

FF. Your meta-commentary by avator enhances my experience of this forum no end. Chapeaux

I have so much difficulty choosing. I wish I could have it set to random and link it to my avatar folder.

AntiTroll

Macaloon wrote:

micron wrote:

Yes the UKPS coinage was an interesting one - not mine, by the way - but I put my hands up to using it, and to being very clear as to why I was using it. There was a general sense on twitter that day of 'feck, not again' - Not because of doping, simply that sinking feeling that we were in for a US Postal type race of team domination and mountain processions. When I used that hashtag that was the spirit I used it in - as you know I'm that very worst of things, a cycling 'romantic' - who was hoping that Prudhomme's 'Tour of Innovations' would produce some exciting racing. My heart sank that day. But to say that my personal use of that hashtag meant anymore than a short hand way of referring to tactics is way off beam. I believe even Wiggins himself freely admits Sky have borrowed from USPS - as many here have pointed out, they won 7 tours, why wouldn't they? Love it or loathe it, it works.

That's ridiculous. You were in the 1% using a hashtag to discuss tactics that the 99% were using to smear a team for doping? It will be many moons before I start taking statements like this at face value.

I have to agree with Mac here. I remember during the tour reading the exchanges between FG and cronies regarding 'UKPS', although perhaps not explicit, anyone with a hint of cycling knowledge couldn't help but infer the nudge-nudge wink-wink tone to those tweets...It really does feel like FG is trying to worm her way out of this one.

I see Rich's point, agree however that the personal comments were perhaps unwise in retrospect.

In terms of the 'twaliban' (I feel a bit uneasy about the name), I want to know why their ire is almost entirely focused on Bradley Wiggins. As JV quite nicely pointed out on twitter last week, given his background (IP) and consequent weight loss it makes perfect physiological sense that he's at the pinnacle of the sport. I'd have thought the rapid improvements of the likes of Chris Froome over the last couple of years would warrant more skepticism than Bradley.

FG - it genuinely does distress me that you will be disappointed if you find out in the long run that sky were clean. I'd have hoped you'd be more embarrassed for the slander/libel but pleased that the sport had moved forwards.

Similarly if sky do turn out to be clean will the 'twaliban' be publicly apologising for the smear campaign against sky. At the present I prefer to hope for the best but prepare for the worst. I genuinely hope sky are clean. If evidence does emerge that sky are doping I know I'll happily hold my hands and say 'FG/Cyclismas', you were right.

PS. Sent from phone so ignore typos

frenchfighter

Your 2nd post has reminded me that I wanted to say that your first post was a very good. You keep that up and post more often.

Not sure about the username though - may want to start a new account with a more stylish name

Macaloon

frenchfighter wrote:

Macaloon wrote:

FF. Your meta-commentary by avator enhances my experience of this forum no end. Chapeaux

I have so much difficulty choosing. I wish I could have it set to random and link it to my avatar folder.

I'd happily borrow an excess avi: like a public palm-reading. Can't be bothered doing the 80 pix thing.

frenchfighter

Which rider do you want one of? I'll sort you out with one later if I can get my photo site to work after a stupid upgrade.

Macaloon

frenchfighter wrote:

Which rider do you want one of? I'll sort you out with one later if I can get my photo site to work after a stupid upgrade.

Pierre Rolland's rictus pain face. Ta