Jonathan Vaughters value for money

danlikesbikes

Now before we start an all out war & this descends into a doping/anti doping, Sky/anti sky thread please note I am only posting this as I find him quite good for his attitude & his comment's.

Attached is the news report I am referring too - http://velonews.competitor.com/2013/03/ ... #f1e6881dc which it seems started as an interview with Tom Danielson upon his return to cycling.

What caught my eye are the comments by JV at the bottom and his responses to posters on that forum which I thought were refreshing. For those of you that can't be bothered to click the link or don't want to I like the one below. Say what you like & I know he is a bad man for doping and having riders that doped & I don't like that but for once its nice to see someone saying they were wrong & sticking your head in the sand is not the way forward.

"maybe this is easier... copy paste: Eric, you make the assumption that I would prefer sponsorship dollars over doing the right thing. In the end, the widespread nature of what went on is still not known or understood by most. These three are shouldering your hatred, while many, like Peter (in the comments section) above, cheer on those who simply didn't get caught, but did the same thing, and continue to lie. To me, it is irrelevant if one was caught, admitted, or didn't get caught, but did the same thing. It's the act, not the unveiling, that is wrong. We chose to dope. It was not forced or imposed. That was wrong. We also chose to come forward. That choice was not imposed nor forced, and the record of those who did the investigating shows that true.
The easier choice and the one that would not be subject to such criticism would have been to do what cycling teams have chosen to do for generations: Keep your mouth shut and your head down, because everyone is in the same boat. We felt it was time for a change. Maybe it works or maybe not. But from what I read here, people (you?) prefer a pretty lie over the ugly truth. That's a choice too. And one that makes it impossible for the younger generation to move forward from the 100 year history of doping in top level cycling. I think we figured it was worth a shot. Maybe we were wrong."

takethehighroad

He's just tweeted this

danlikesbikes

TakeTheHighRoad wrote:

He's just tweeted this

F'ing genius IMHO

Richmond Racer

Has he actually read all of the comments?

RichN95.

I like Vaughters's but his weakness is his belief or desire that repentant dopers should be viewed as morally equal to those who never doped in the first place.

danlikesbikes

Richmond Racer wrote:

Has he actually read all of the comments?

Looks like it & the responses do sound like his normal quirky/funny style. Am quite impressed at what he says, but then I always was before he admitted to doping himself & even more so since in his attitude and openness.

TheBigBean

I think riders fall into the following categories in order of respect:

1. Those that didn't dope
2. Those that voluntarily admitted doping shortly afterwards with a lot to lose
3. Those that voluntarily admitted doping a long time afterwards with nothing to lose.
4. The rest.

There are probably a few sub categories based on how much they helped anti-doping afterwards.

Vaughters might be a 3, but he is probably a 4. A 4+ at a push.

It is worth noting that categories 1-3 are pretty thinly populated, so he is mostly right. They are all equal, they are all 4s

Richmond Racer

Danlikesbikes wrote:

Richmond Racer wrote:

Has he actually read all of the comments?

Looks like it & the responses do sound like his normal quirky/funny style. Am quite impressed at what he says, but then I always was before he admitted to doping himself & even more so since in his attitude and openness.

No, I realise that he's read the comments. I was questioning him puffing off, given that there's a fair old mix of anti/negative comments, as well as supportive ones.

Vaughters is a strange beast.

Could have done without him pushing Roger Hammond and Dan Lloyd out of the door, and bringing in Dekker - cant say that endeared him to me much. Why save 2 clean riders when there's an ex-doper to be given a second chance, eh?

Jez mon

I think to be fair with the Dekker situation, he does have a team to run, and he does want some level of success. I'm not suggesting he should go out and try and get Valverde on his team, but if he sees a young cyclist, who he feels would fit on his team, then at the end of the day, it's his team. The tragedy (OK probably too strong a word) for Roger Hammond is that Team Sky came along a bit too late, his palmeres are reasonably impressive, and I don't get the feeling he got that much support (it was before my time!!!)

Personally, I find him an interesting character and really, I think what he's done with Team Garmin is probably far more important than him telling the truth immediately and in full, about his own doping experiences.

danlikesbikes

Richmond Racer wrote:

Danlikesbikes wrote:

Richmond Racer wrote:

Has he actually read all of the comments?

Looks like it & the responses do sound like his normal quirky/funny style. Am quite impressed at what he says, but then I always was before he admitted to doping himself & even more so since in his attitude and openness.

No, I realise that he's read the comments. I was questioning him puffing off, given that there's a fair old mix of anti/negative comments, as well as supportive ones.

Vaughters is a strange beast.

Could have done without him pushing Roger Hammond and Dan Lloyd out of the door, and bringing in Dekker - cant say that endeared him to me much. Why save 2 clean riders when there's an ex-doper to be given a second chance, eh?

Is a fair point about his team choice, but thats team politics I guess & both riders are now onto better things I like to think. Rogers seems happy at Maddison & Dan in his new TV/Internet role

Guess you could describe him as being strange & you wouldn't be that far off. I guess why I find myself warming to Vaughters & this is not excusing his prior drugs use, but his current attitude that more can & should be done on the drugs front and he seems to be trying to make a proactive approach. I guess I see so many other people in cycling making comments like "its not such a problem now", "that was in the past" etc and it just smacks to me of putting ones head in the sand and ignoring the problem.

r0bh

Richmond Racer wrote:

No, I realise that he's read the comments. I was questioning him puffing off, given that there's a fair old mix of anti/negative comments, as well as supportive ones.

Vaughters is a strange beast.

Could have done without him pushing Roger Hammond and Dan Lloyd out of the door, and bringing in Dekker - cant say that endeared him to me much. Why save 2 clean riders when there's an ex-doper to be given a second chance, eh?

I still find the Dekker signing inexplicable. Sure I read somewhere that Vaughters doesn't even like him as a person, and (correct me if I'm wrong) he's done nothing post-suspension. Even accepting that Hammond and Lloyd were towards the end of their careers surely that place would have been better going to a US neo-pro?

prawny

r0bh wrote:

I still find the Dekker signing inexplicable. Sure I read somewhere that Vaughters doesn't even like him as a person, and (correct me if I'm wrong) he's done nothing post-suspension. Even accepting that Hammond and Lloyd were towards the end of their careers surely that place would have been better going to a US neo-pro?

I think the best way to think of Garmin is like a rehab centre for ex dopers, JV set the team up as a haven for people who don't want to dope any more and I get the feeling that he'd rather hire a former doper and keep them clean than let them back into the peloton with a different team where they might slip into bad habits.

It does suck a bit that there are riders without contracts who've never doped, but at the end of the day like any business you'd hire someone you were familiar with over someone you know nothing about. I wouldn't be surprised if pro cycling were as cliquey as any other industry.

danlikesbikes

prawny wrote:

I think the best way to think of Garmin is like a rehab centre for ex dopers, JV set the team up as a haven for people who don't want to dope any more and I get the feeling that he'd rather hire a former doper and keep them clean than let them back into the peloton with a different team where they might slip into bad habits.

I think that is a good way to look at & perhaps it is a compromise but if he really does stop them from doing it again I think I can live with that. Perhaps thats why I like JV for his way of trying to clear up this mess.