yet another DB thread...

ddraver

Anyone seen this in the Guardian - http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2013/ma ... ck-cocaine - would appear to have started an entirely different doping debate in the comments...makes a change I suppose.

Oh and btw did anyone see Walsh's latest missive from the Sky Camp in the ST? I thought that was in last weekend's. Does anyone have a highly illegal and immoral link to a version for free?

LeicesterLad

He truly is a master of PR. :roll:

The actual analogy is a load of sterotype tripe.

Find it odd Brailsford is now trying to explain how drugs were in Armstrongs day like an expert yet when the whole USADA/Armstrong/Last Decade thing broke he claimed to be shocked. And knew nothing about Geert obviously.

PS. I'm not trolling, I just think this is a woeful PR move for Dave, again.

danlikesbikes

LeicesterLad wrote:

The actual analogy is a load of sterotype tripe.

I don't know I can see it as a "logical" step for a rider first trying EPO then moving onto growth hormones, blood transfusions. Well sort of in a way I guess, if your wanting to cheat & your try the first option and see benefits and don't get caught then reach a plateau & as you have already cheated move it on a bit.

Of course I don't know how true it is though as have never taken any illegal drugs myself let alone anything for performance so don't really have a frame of reference.

Macaloon

LeicesterLad wrote:

He truly is a master of PR. :roll:

The actual analogy is a load of sterotype tripe.

Find it odd Brailsford is now trying to explain how drugs were in Armstrongs day like an expert yet when the whole USADA/Armstrong/Last Decade thing broke he claimed to be shocked. And knew nothing about Geert obviously.

PS. I'm not trolling, I just think this is a woeful PR move for Dave, again.

But it's not really about PR for you is it? I doubt you're nitpicking a guy's Q&A with a general business audience - not a press conference with sports journos - conducted by an advertising exec, because you were hoping he'd bring his PR A-game.

Seems to me that "PR" is the latest codeword for UK Postal/Anti-sport/SRM-robots/phone-hacking/doping scumbags. Or do you really care about the PR smarts of all pro teams?

knedlicky

LeicesterLad wrote:

I just think this is a woeful PR move for Dave

I agree. Brailsford has no idea of real life when he says:

(a) drug users progress from a first joint to crack cocaine,
(b) Everton manager David Moyes does an unbelievably good job,
(c) driving a car is something most people can manage casually while multitasking with radios, smartphones.

All nonsense.

Re (c): http://road.cc/content/news/53806-smart ... nabis-says

Just because he’s now a ‘Sir’, because he wielded a strong whip over his team and helped them become successful, doesn’t mean he has any more brains about other matters or more street sense than anyone else.

afx237vi

To be fair he was pretty funny when he did that song on Comic Relief last week.

DeadCalm

I'm a little bit drunk at the moment so my irony detection abilities are perhaps a little bit under par. But is this thread for real? There is clearly zero context to any of the quotes. It's shabby tabloid journalism of the lowest order and symptomatic of the sad state of British journalism. The fact that it comes from a supposed 'broadsheet' makes me want to cry.

ddraver

I confess I was more interested in the Walsh piece. Plus I thought it was mildly amusing that for once the uproar had an entirely different argument. Sad to say it was almost a bit refreshing...

LeicesterLad

Macaloon wrote:

LeicesterLad wrote:

He truly is a master of PR. :roll:

The actual analogy is a load of sterotype tripe.

Find it odd Brailsford is now trying to explain how drugs were in Armstrongs day like an expert yet when the whole USADA/Armstrong/Last Decade thing broke he claimed to be shocked. And knew nothing about Geert obviously.

PS. I'm not trolling, I just think this is a woeful PR move for Dave, again.

But it's not really about PR for you is it? I doubt you're nitpicking a guy's Q&A with a general business audience - not a press conference with sports journos - conducted by an advertising exec, because you were hoping he'd bring his PR A-game.

Seems to me that "PR" is the latest codeword for UK Postal/Anti-sport/SRM-robots/phone-hacking/doping scumbags. Or do you really care about the PR smarts of all pro teams?

You think I'm twaliban? You are mistaken.

I 100% DO NOT THINK SKY DOPE. Have made this clear many times. But then I spose anybody who dares question anything done or said by Sky is now automatically labelled as 'one of them'.

Read my blog - have had plenty of good things to say about British cycling, Brailsford and Wiggins - i've also questioned them on occasion, it's a rounded view.

PR F*ckups are becoming the Sky norm - thats the only reason i've said what I have said.

No_Ta_Doctor

DB comes over as wonderfully naive in the Guardian piece. Like an aging academic trying to explain a theory to some teenagers by use of pop culture references that are a decade out of date. I really do think he's probably so focused on his project that he barely knows the rest of the world even exists. Ferguson never having any conflict in ManU?

ddraver

I get the impression it was a spur of the moment answer to somebody which was overheard by a journo...

"Brailsford, in conversation with WPP chief executive Sir Martin Sorrell at the Advertising Week Europe conference in London" is not exactly a WADA conference is it. Think he's been stitched up a bit!

Yet another exceptional bit of journalism! That's the Independent, the Guardian AND the Telegraph I ve seen do something similar just this weekend, and they wonder why so few people support them over the Leveson debacle?

smithy21

DeadCalm wrote:

I'm a little bit drunk at the moment so my irony detection abilities are perhaps a little bit under par. But is this thread for real? There is clearly zero context to any of the quotes. It's shabby tabloid journalism of the lowest order and symptomatic of the sad state of British journalism. The fact that it comes from a supposed 'broadsheet' makes me want to cry.

+1

Nothing to see here. Move along.

bockers

The article is pretty tame and no howlers from what I can see, just quite a boring peice. I would rather DB speak and make a few PR mistakes than the vanilla rubish you get from most PR trained "personalities".

Kimi Raikonen for example shines out as a truculent old sod in F1, but I love hime for being like that and showing us a glimpse of personality, simularly I like Wiggo for much the same reason.

above_the_cows

DeadCalm wrote:

I'm a little bit drunk at the moment so my irony detection abilities are perhaps a little bit under par. But is this thread for real? There is clearly zero context to any of the quotes. It's shabby tabloid journalism of the lowest order and symptomatic of the sad state of British journalism. The fact that it comes from a supposed 'broadsheet' makes me want to cry.

This.

ddraver wrote:

I confess I was more interested in the Walsh piece. Plus I thought it was mildly amusing that for once the uproar had an entirely different argument. Sad to say it was almost a bit refreshing...

And also this. The comments below the article make you stop and think about how you live in almost an entirely different reality to some people.

I fear the Guardian took the comments out of context, took the most 'controversial' one about drug use, foregrounded it, wacked the piece on the front page and just counted the number of hits the page got as a result and thought job done, that will please the money men in the advertising department.

Macaloon

LeicesterLad wrote:

Macaloon wrote:

LeicesterLad wrote:

He truly is a master of PR. :roll:

The actual analogy is a load of sterotype tripe.

Find it odd Brailsford is now trying to explain how drugs were in Armstrongs day like an expert yet when the whole USADA/Armstrong/Last Decade thing broke he claimed to be shocked. And knew nothing about Geert obviously.

PS. I'm not trolling, I just think this is a woeful PR move for Dave, again.

But it's not really about PR for you is it? I doubt you're nitpicking a guy's Q&A with a general business audience - not a press conference with sports journos - conducted by an advertising exec, because you were hoping he'd bring his PR A-game.

Seems to me that "PR" is the latest codeword for UK Postal/Anti-sport/SRM-robots/phone-hacking/doping scumbags. Or do you really care about the PR smarts of all pro teams?

You think I'm twaliban? You are mistaken.

I 100% DO NOT THINK SKY DOPE. Have made this clear many times. But then I spose anybody who dares question anything done or said by Sky is now automatically labelled as 'one of them'.

Read my blog - have had plenty of good things to say about British cycling, Brailsford and Wiggins - i've also questioned them on occasion, it's a rounded view.

PR F*ckups are becoming the Sky norm - thats the only reason i've said what I have said.

Fair enough. But you seemed to couple dismay at DB's Daily Mail views on recreationals with some fairly scandalous behaviour. That's the only reason I responded as I did.

The "I'm just asking the questions" line, while slipping in some toxic associations, is also tediously familiar. But since you're not trolling...

ianwilliams

I think he was just saying that the addiction to cheating to win was what had spiralled out of control, much like drug use can. Its easy enough to start blurring the boundaries a little, then keep doing it only to find you're in very deep indeed.

I think that's a pretty plausible point, albeit articulated badly and potentially confusing giving the nature of the analogy and its subject (recreational drugs and PEDs).