Froome on Wiggins and more

above_the_cows

r0bh wrote:

Above The Cows wrote:

Why does this eventuality automatically make Froome a bad guy and mean that he deserves people shouting at him?

That's just really childish. Surely this is all a lot more complicated than good guy Wiggins and bad guy Froome?

Where is everyone getting their information that Froome engineered this, he's manipulated everything?

Because of stuff like this?

"Chris Froome: I sensed mental weakness in Sir Bradley Wiggins": http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/27722064

Love him or hate him Wiggo has kept his head down this year, achieved his targets (Roubaix and California) and not said or done anything controversial in the public eye.

OK so Froome's said some things about Wiggins. Wiggins of course has never said anything about Froome, or played silly b*ggers?

Both Wiggins and Froome can be stupid. Why Wiggins gets a free pass and Froome doesn't I don't know? Why is Froome the automatic bad guy?

Macaloon

"My first love has always been the track and I'm thrilled to be able to spend more time honing the machine as we approach Rio. With Chris' great friend Allan Peiper (or whoever) to steer the road squad..."

bigmat

Froome has been doing a lot of spouting off lately, fanning the flames of the grievances between him and Wiggins. Wiggins has just been focusing on his riding and saying all the right things. Kind of a reverse of last year where Wiggins was talking up his chances of a Giro / Tour double etc. Fact is though, recent history suggests that Froome is now the one causing problems and engineering a situation where Wiggins can't be accommodated in the team - there may be stuff going on behind the scenes but from the public's point of view this is how it seems and it makes a rider who it has always been hard to warm to become positively dislikeable.

Personally, I think Wiggins should be given a free role. He should be told to help out where he can and not attack Froome but otherwise ride his own race. Doesn't necessarily deserve protected rider status, but as a first British tour winner and with the tour starting in Britian he should be there. They made room for Cav in 2012, this could be dealt with in a similar way IMO.

I'm starting to really go off Team Sky - I thought their original purpose was to develop British talent, but they have ended up preventing the first British tour winner from riding the tour for two years now. Swift similarly looks like being sidelined. Failed to pick up the Yates brothers (doh!), kicked out Downing, generally just seem obsessed with winning the tour rather than nurturing and developing the talent under their noses. Disappointing.

Pross

Above The Cows wrote:

Why does this eventuality automatically make Froome a bad guy and mean that he deserves people shouting at him?

That's just really childish. Surely this is all a lot more complicated than good guy Wiggins and bad guy Froome?

Where is everyone getting their information that Froome engineered this, he's manipulated everything?

For me it is the fact that Froome seems to want exactly the same from the riders in 'his' team as he should have been in 'Wiggins' team i.e. they know they are there in a support role and don't question it (or 'mishear' their DS and think they are being told to attack). Froome behaved badly publicly in 2012 (I accept that things had probably been going on that we don't know about but they should have been resolved in private) but seems determined to ensure no-one does the same to him even when it is unlikely to happen.

I can't imagine that the team gets picked without at least listening to what the team leader would like.

I think Wiggins could have done an excellent job in the 2012 Rogers role and can't think that whoever replaces him in the squad will offer more but ultimately I guess if I'm right the only person who loses out is Froome so his call. I think Saxo will have a stronger squad than Sky though.

jimmythecuckoo

I kind of get what posters above are saying re. newbie fans and Team Sky. There is a bigger picture and I can remember Tours without a single British participant.

It didn't ruin my enjoyment of the Tour and I am still here.

This is a sideshow in many ways.

But if I had to pick a side I would pick Bradley. If that makes me a fanboi then so be it. I am still looking forward to the race.

DeVlaeminck

Above The Cows wrote:

Gary Marshall wrote:

I hope for Sky's sake their grand plan is still operational after the cobbles.

At least one GC hope will be in tatters after that stage, and I would have though Wiggins would be a better bet than Froome to get through unscathed even at his new lighter weight.

I can see both sides of the argument but considering sky sent Wiggins to California for the publicity value to 21st C. Fox, I am surprised that they haven't pushed for Wiggins to be in the tour, the non-participation of Wiggins is a big step backwards in what was a steamroller of interest in UK cycling.

But Wiggins is not a serious contender to win the Tour is he? Yes he. An out up a good show in the cobbles? So what, so can lots of other riders.

And if British cycling fans are so immature that the non-inclusion of Wiggins is going to put them off cycling then they really need to put their toys back in the pram and grow up.

There are far less serious options to win the Tour who are leading teams in it. Wiggins has at least won the Tour, do you think he did that by magic, luck or what ? That's irrelevant though, because Wiggins wasn't pressing to lead the Tour he was hoping to ride in support and probably be allowed the freedom to target the TT and maybe go for a stage if the opportunity arose without damaging their GC chances.

I doubt this puts any fans off cycling but it probably puts a few off Sky. It raises questions of the links between Sky and BC when our first (and many would say only) Tour winner never gets to ride another Tour let alone try and win one. Wiggins riding in the Tour would be great for cycling in Britain.

Pross

Macaloon wrote:

'And now, the end is near and so I face my final curtain.....'

foiled

It's confirmed then, Wiggins not riding the ToF this year http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cycling/27729769

Shame really, would have been an interesting contest between the two, can see Wiggins leaving Sky at the end of the year

Macaloon

Pross wrote:

Macaloon wrote:

'And now, the end is near and so I face my final curtain.....'

Chris Vicious.

"I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that"

jimmythecuckoo

+1 to that. I think he is as good as gone.

Maybe he was due to announce his OGRE move during the Tour and Sky felt that would be a distraction.

RichN95.

Macaloon wrote:

"We have been clear right from the start that the Tour team would have a zero tolerance policy when it came to beards. We asked Bradley to sign a piece paper saying he didn't have a beard and he felt he couldn't do that"

"What about Lopez? And Eisel"

"I looked them in the eye and they told me they didn't have a beard. I think we have to be very careful here as to exactly what we classify as a beard..."

RichN95.

Double post

greeny12

DeVlaeminck wrote:

There are far less serious options to win the Tour who are leading teams in it. Wiggins has at least won the Tour, do you think he did that by magic, luck or what ? That's irrelevant though, because Wiggins wasn't pressing to lead the Tour he was hoping to ride in support and probably be allowed the freedom to target the TT and maybe go for a stage if the opportunity arose without damaging their GC chances.

I doubt this puts any fans off cycling but it probably puts a few off Sky. It raises questions of the links between Sky and BC when our first (and many would say only) Tour winner never gets to ride another Tour let alone try and win one. Wiggins riding in the Tour would be great for cycling in Britain.

Well said. I'd love to have written something similar but I can't trust myself not to descend into a rage about the plastic Brit, tax dodging sh1thouse Froome.


Oh bugger I've gone and done it anyway...

DeVlaeminck

It was good Rich but not so good you needed to post it twice

Edit : damn he went and edited it !

Richmond Racer

He went on to say that IF Froome were to get injured in the Dauphine - or basically before the Tour - then that might change things because it might lead to a change in the team construct.

Which is where the 'as things stand' comes in.



RIGHT. So:

1. If anyone henceforth calls me a Sky fan, i will truly lamp them

2. I am investing in my Nibz supporters flag - but also a Bert one, as back-up

3. If anyone sees me on t'telly at some point along the route on either of the first stages, lurking behind a dry stone wall with a trip wire....it never happened

3. Roll on the Commie Games

iainf72

Am I the only one who thinks Wiggins wasn't going to be offered a renewal anyway.

feelgoodlost

BigMat wrote:

Froome has been doing a lot of spouting off lately, fanning the flames of the grievances between him and Wiggins. Wiggins has just been focusing on his riding and saying all the right things. Kind of a reverse of last year where Wiggins was talking up his chances of a Giro / Tour double etc. Fact is though, recent history suggests that Froome is now the one causing problems and engineering a situation where Wiggins can't be accommodated in the team - there may be stuff going on behind the scenes but from the public's point of view this is how it seems and it makes a rider who it has always been hard to warm to become positively dislikeable.

Personally, I think Wiggins should be given a free role. He should be told to help out where he can and not attack Froome but otherwise ride his own race. Doesn't necessarily deserve protected rider status, but as a first British tour winner and with the tour starting in Britian he should be there. They made room for Cav in 2012, this could be dealt with in a similar way IMO.

I'm starting to really go off Team Sky - I thought their original purpose was to develop British talent, but they have ended up preventing the first British tour winner from riding the tour for two years now. Swift similarly looks like being sidelined. Failed to pick up the Yates brothers (doh!), kicked out Downing, generally just seem obsessed with winning the tour rather than nurturing and developing the talent under their noses. Disappointing.

Nail on head.

I'd never really had much of an opinion of Froome (off the bike, anyway) until he started to say things publicy about their fallout. At the end of last year he was talking about how they'd patched everything up and now in interviews he seems to be fanning the flames even more than he previously had. Wiggins has been no angel when it's come to stating his opinion in public but at least once they'd both publicy said it was all water under the bridge, he's kept his head down and got on with racing.

It's just disappointing from a public perspective to not see Wiggins ride the tour.

TheBigBean

Richmond Racer wrote:

He went on to say that IF Froome were to get injured in the Dauphine - or basically before the Tour - then that might change things because it might lead to a change in the team construct.

Which is where the 'as things stand' comes in.



RIGHT. So:

1. If anyone henceforth calls me a Sky fan, i will truly lamp them

2. I am investing in my Nibz supporters flag - but also a Bert one, as back-up

3. If anyone sees me on t'telly at some point along the route on either of the first stages, lurking behind a dry stone wall with a trip wire....it never happened

3. Roll on the Commie Games

Hang on, you prefer Contador to Froome and Eisel is dead to you?

I've never understood the Wiggins love.

TheBigBean

iainf72 wrote:

Am I the only one who thinks Wiggins wasn't going to be offered a renewal anyway.

No, but then I didn't expect Wiggins to be in shape this year.

Richmond Racer

Favourite line so far from Froome: 'it's by no means an attempt to dig up the past'

I dont want to cause a world LOL shortage, so will just do a :?:


FWIW I know at least one sponsor of the team, who has this morning described what's going on as 'toxic'

Turfle

feelgoodlost wrote:

BigMat wrote:

Froome has been doing a lot of spouting off lately, fanning the flames of the grievances between him and Wiggins. Wiggins has just been focusing on his riding and saying all the right things. Kind of a reverse of last year where Wiggins was talking up his chances of a Giro / Tour double etc. Fact is though, recent history suggests that Froome is now the one causing problems and engineering a situation where Wiggins can't be accommodated in the team - there may be stuff going on behind the scenes but from the public's point of view this is how it seems and it makes a rider who it has always been hard to warm to become positively dislikeable.

Personally, I think Wiggins should be given a free role. He should be told to help out where he can and not attack Froome but otherwise ride his own race. Doesn't necessarily deserve protected rider status, but as a first British tour winner and with the tour starting in Britian he should be there. They made room for Cav in 2012, this could be dealt with in a similar way IMO.

I'm starting to really go off Team Sky - I thought their original purpose was to develop British talent, but they have ended up preventing the first British tour winner from riding the tour for two years now. Swift similarly looks like being sidelined. Failed to pick up the Yates brothers (doh!), kicked out Downing, generally just seem obsessed with winning the tour rather than nurturing and developing the talent under their noses. Disappointing.

Nail on head.

I'd never really had much of an opinion of Froome (off the bike, anyway) until he started to say things publicy about their fallout. At the end of last year he was talking about how they'd patched everything up and now in interviews he seems to be fanning the flames even more than he previously had. Wiggins has been no angel when it's come to stating his opinion in public but at least once they'd both publicy said it was all water under the bridge, he's kept his head down and got on with racing.

It's just disappointing from a public perspective to not see Wiggins ride the tour.

Easy for Wiggins to do when his book and side of the story were already published.

I haven't seen this interviews others have of Froome slagging off Brad, or fanning the flames. Outside of questions about team selection he hasn't mentioned him at all as far as I'm aware.

Turfle

Again, who thinks Wiggo would have picked Froome to support him in 2013? Anyone?

vimfuego

Pross wrote:

Above The Cows wrote:

Why does this eventuality automatically make Froome a bad guy and mean that he deserves people shouting at him?

That's just really childish. Surely this is all a lot more complicated than good guy Wiggins and bad guy Froome?

Where is everyone getting their information that Froome engineered this, he's manipulated everything?

For me it is the fact that Froome seems to want exactly the same from the riders in 'his' team as he should have been in 'Wiggins' team i.e. they know they are there in a support role and don't question it (or 'mishear' their DS and think they are being told to attack). Froome behaved badly publicly in 2012 (I accept that things had probably been going on that we don't know about but they should have been resolved in private) but seems determined to ensure no-one does the same to him even when it is unlikely to happen.

I can't imagine that the team gets picked without at least listening to what the team leader would like.

I think Wiggins could have done an excellent job in the 2012 Rogers role and can't think that whoever replaces him in the squad will offer more but ultimately I guess if I'm right the only person who loses out is Froome so his call. I think Saxo will have a stronger squad than Sky though.

Couldn't agree more. Froome does seem to be focused on selling books at the moment..... I can see why you would want a clear GC team leader and that it could be unsettling with two competing leaders or in this case two non-aligned personalities, but I think Froome/Sky are effectively cutting off their own nose to spite their face here - if Wiggins' role is in support of Froome why on earth would you leave someone of his quality and in his form (cobbles included) behind? madness. So, unfortunately Froome comes out of this looking a) hypocritical and b) possibly worried/scared of Wiggins in terms of the threat. The Tour (especially starting in the UK) will be a worse place without Wiggins this year. Hopefully all goes well for Froome & Sky, but personally I reckon Porte will have no kind of form and they'll be kicking themselves if this is all true and they don't have a quality plan B.

Richmond Racer

TheBigBean wrote:

Richmond Racer wrote:

He went on to say that IF Froome were to get injured in the Dauphine - or basically before the Tour - then that might change things because it might lead to a change in the team construct.

Which is where the 'as things stand' comes in.



RIGHT. So:

1. If anyone henceforth calls me a Sky fan, i will truly lamp them

2. I am investing in my Nibz supporters flag - but also a Bert one, as back-up

3. If anyone sees me on t'telly at some point along the route on either of the first stages, lurking behind a dry stone wall with a trip wire....it never happened

3. Roll on the Commie Games

Hang on, you prefer Contador to Froome and Eisel is dead to you?

I've never understood the Wiggins love.

Bean, I cannot stand Froome. I've considered him a snake under a veneer of humility, for 2 years now. He and his gf were named Macbeth and Lady Macbeth as far back as Jul 2012.

I'd rather Nibz than Bert. But I'd rather a doper (ex-doper?) than a snake.

And Froome kept Eisel out of the Tour team last year (allegedly)

The Wiggins love is a strange thing. He's contrary and so am I. The more people hate on him, the more strongly I defend him. Has always been this way. His frailties make him human. Even when he's being a tool.

FJS

In terms of this forum as a reasonably mature place to discuss pro cycling, it looks like the timeframe between a depressing winter and hysterical summer has been particularly short, hasn't it?

gattocattivo

BigMat wrote:

Froome has been doing a lot of spouting off lately, fanning the flames of the grievances between him and Wiggins. Wiggins has just been focusing on his riding and saying all the right things. Kind of a reverse of last year where Wiggins was talking up his chances of a Giro / Tour double etc. Fact is though, recent history suggests that Froome is now the one causing problems and engineering a situation where Wiggins can't be accommodated in the team - there may be stuff going on behind the scenes but from the public's point of view this is how it seems and it makes a rider who it has always been hard to warm to become positively dislikeable.

Personally, I think Wiggins should be given a free role. He should be told to help out where he can and not attack Froome but otherwise ride his own race. Doesn't necessarily deserve protected rider status, but as a first British tour winner and with the tour starting in Britian he should be there. They made room for Cav in 2012, this could be dealt with in a similar way IMO.

I'm starting to really go off Team Sky - I thought their original purpose was to develop British talent, but they have ended up preventing the first British tour winner from riding the tour for two years now. Swift similarly looks like being sidelined. Failed to pick up the Yates brothers (doh!), kicked out Downing, generally just seem obsessed with winning the tour rather than nurturing and developing the talent under their noses. Disappointing.

^ Exactly

Macaloon

Richmond Racer wrote:

FWIW I know at least one sponsor of the team, who has this morning described what's going on as 'toxic'

A case study in how not to approach an entirely predictable, completely unforseen, management engineered, no-win scenario.

Art Vandelay

Brilliant:

via @peterindevon

greeny12

Richmond Racer wrote:

Bean, I cannot stand Froome. I've considered him a snake under a veneer of humility, for 2 years now. He and his gf were named Macbeth and Lady Macbeth as far back as Jul 2012.

I'd rather Nibz than Bert. But I'd rather a doper (ex-doper?) than a snake.

And Froome kept Eisel out of the Tour team last year (allegedly)

The Wiggins love is a strange thing. He's contrary and so am I. The more people hate on him, the more strongly I defend him. Has always been this way. His frailties make him human. Even when he's being a tool.

+1

Especially the last paragraph.

DeVlaeminck

Turfle wrote:

Again, who thinks Wiggo would have picked Froome to support him in 2013? Anyone?

Wiggins came out after the 2012 win and pretty much said it was Froome's turn next year - does anyone think Froome would have done the same in that situation ? If Wiggins had been a bit more canny and self interested he could probably have made sure he stayed as Tour leader for 2013 and 2014 too. To that extent he's been the author of his own downfall.