Froome on Wiggins and more

rick_chasey

TMR wrote:

Cal_Stewart wrote:

Just to move this on

Does anyone think that there are 8 better sky riders than Wiggo to go to the tour on performance as shown this season?

Of course not. Porte is a ******* joke. I don't even know why he's in the Team other than to give Chris a reach around.

Ah chill. Chap was almost on the podium last year.

Wiggins presence, like it or not, doesn't help Froome.

Snot that difficult to either understand or even see yourself.

Wiggins won't be able to win the Tour regardless of whether he's in the team or not.


Okay so he's won the popularity contest and it's clear people are irate and blaming Froome for denying them a Wiggins in the tour but tough sh!t. We were denied a proper contest between the two fastest riders in 2012 which was in Wiggins favour. It happens.

Re Porte - think people can only start saying anything about him after next weekend.

TMR

Mark_P wrote:

I'm not sure someone who won a Paris-Nice can really be described as a joke. He'd do well on the GC if he was able to ride for himself and had full team support.

I meant in the context of his performance this year.

TMR

Rick Chasey wrote:

Ah chill. Chap was almost on the podium last year.

And Farrar won a stage of the TdF once. I'm not happy about it Rick - just venting my frustration. I just think the situation is complete bollocks.

Wiggins presence, like it or not, doesn't help Froome.

If they were both gotten a grip of then I can't see how it's possible to argue that Wiggins couldn't help. Yes, he can't ride for himself, but he'd still be one of the strongest riders on the Team.

Snot that difficult to either understand or even see yourself.

I disagree. The only thing that's not difficult to see is that the forum is split in their view.

Wiggins won't be able to win the Tour regardless of whether he's in the team or not.

If Froome falls off an Alp then it's not impossible.

Mark_P

I meant in the context of his performance this year.

Ah, soz. In that case I'd have to agree. Wiggins would be a better teammate.

rick_chasey

Really? You'd have to throw a few good riders after Froome off the Alp too before Wiggins could win it.

tailwindhome

As @Dimspace points out it's normal for a leader to surround himself with " the riders he trusts, with the riders that suit him, and he has faith in <snip> Contador has his loyal guys who move with him from team to team. Guys he can rely on. Same for most of the leading GT contenders."

joelsim

iainf72 wrote:

Joelsim wrote:

No, he deserves to be in the team and I'm sure the sponsors will be less than impressed.

Froome isn't doing himself any favours with anyone.

How do you know the primary sponsor is not involved and approves of the decision?

Froome seems to be not doing himself any favours by - erm, not really doing anything that we're aware of.

Why on earth would any sponsor be happy that the biggest star in the team isn't riding? Froome may now be better but he is a rider without a home, with no passionate following.

DB himself wouldn't be drawn last week, but he did state that the team leader would have a say. There is no form nor injury reason to leave Wiggo out. Make of that what you will.

iainf72

Maybe the sponsor values the win more and trusts the people they employ to make the correct decisions to achieve that aim? Perhaps the sponsor knows the biggest star is off at the end of the season and isn't too bothered.

I agree, there is no form based reason to leave Wiggins out. So there is something else - Which everyone is assuming is Froome. So why are all the other team mates not trying to talk him round? Why aren't management doing it? Or is everyone on the team basically happy with how it's panning out?

tailwindhome

Joelsim wrote:

Why on earth would any sponsor be happy that the biggest star in the team isn't riding? .

It worked out so well for Brazil in 1998

gattocattivo

iainf72 wrote:

So why are all the other team mates not trying to talk him round?

Because some probably don't care one way or the other and those that do care don't want to get labelled as a Wiggins man and cast out of the team

iainf72 wrote:

Why aren't management doing it?

Because they see Froome as the guy who's going to win them more races in the long term and they want to keep him happy, rather than risk him going off to another team.

iainf72

gattocattivo wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

So why are all the other team mates not trying to talk him round?

Because some probably don't care one way or the other and those that do care don't want to get labelled as a Wiggins man and cast out of the team

iainf72 wrote:

Why aren't management doing it?

Because they see Froome as the guy who's going to win them more races in the long term and they want to keep him happy, rather than risk him going off to another team.

That it in one. I'd add in 'some of them feel the same way as Froome does"

joelsim

TailWindHome wrote:

Joelsim wrote:

Why on earth would any sponsor be happy that the biggest star in the team isn't riding? .

It worked out so well for Brazil in 1998

Yes I forgot that Wiggo has just had a fit.

joelsim

Why does any sponsor sponsor a team to the tune of millions?

Where is Sky's biggest market?

Who is the rider that people know? Especially the non-cycling public.

It's not rocket science.

iainf72

So you're saying that having Wiggins in the squad should be more important than winning the Tour?

tuneskyline

I think the hatred for Froome is unjustified. Froome dragged Wiggins around for 2 GT''s knowing he was the better rider. I don't know the state of their relationship it may or may not be as bad as we think but their must be an issue with Wiggins if he's not riding. I would like to know what exactly Froome has said to justify people on this site saying they hate him. I don't like his riding style, he's a bit elbows out but I don't hate him. I wonder if this is more about supporting the true brit Wiggins :roll: Nothing stopping Wiggins turning up and riding with the fans a before the tour starts if he does not have a ride. That would be a nice touch.

adr82

Joelsim wrote:

Why does any sponsor sponsor a team to the tune of millions?

Where is Sky's biggest market?

Who is the rider that people know? Especially the non-cycling public.

It's not rocket science.

You really think the "non-cycling public" are going to give much of a sh*t about this? That the popularity of cycling in the UK and support for Sky is going to take a nosedive because Wiggins isn't going to the Tour? Give me a break. When the World Cup starts this will all be relegated to the status of "other news" because the "non-cycling public" don't care that much.

iainf72 wrote:

So you're saying that having Wiggins in the squad should be more important than winning the Tour?

I think that's exactly what a lot of people here are arguing and I don't understand it. Any negative publicity over this is going to be wiped out if they manage to win the Tour again, and they obviously feel they've got a better chance of doing that without building a team containing Froome and Wiggins.

TMR

iainf72 wrote:

So you're saying that having Wiggins in the squad should be more important than winning the Tour?

Why does it have to be an either or choice? They aren't mutually exclusive. You're talking about Wiggins as though he's crap and that's just wrong.

TMR

tuneskyline wrote:

I think the hatred for Froome is unjustified. Froome dragged Wiggins around for 2 GT''s knowing he was the better rider.

That's debatable.

joelsim

I don't believe that having Wiggins in the team will cause Froome to lose.

The column inches and TV value will be far higher for Sky if Wiggo is in the team, and plenty of non-avid fans will have an interest/awareness because it is The Tour De France. The value of the coverage I would imagine would be a few million pounds' worth with him in.

iainf72

TMR wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

So you're saying that having Wiggins in the squad should be more important than winning the Tour?

Why does it have to be an either or choice? They aren't mutually exclusive. You're talking about Wiggins as though he's crap and that's just wrong.

I'm not saying Wiggins is crap. I've stated it's got nothing to do with form quite a few times.

Could Wiggins play a role and be useful? Absolutely.

Do you *need* him to win? No.

Would he cause disharmony and upset on the team? Yes.

Therefore, not there.

So I ask my question again, if the presence of Wiggins on the team cost them a win, would it be worth it?

TMR - You're a big Cavendish fan. What's your take on the notes he passed Froome in 2012?

TMR

adr82 wrote:

I think that's exactly what a lot of people here are arguing and I don't understand it. Any negative publicity over this is going to be wiped out if they manage to win the Tour again, and they obviously feel they've got a better chance of doing that without building a team containing Froome and Wiggins.

I don't think that's true. I have no idea whether I would be considered representative of 'a lot of people here', but I have zero emotional investment in a SKY side without Wiggins.

TMR

iainf72 wrote:

TMR - You're a big Cavendish fan. What's your take on the notes he passed Froome in 2012?

I thought that was really interesting. In truth, I am not sure what to make of it. I know the relationship between BW and MC has been fraught in the past, but I had thought, while they were riding the 2012 TdF at least, that they were on good terms. When I read that, my initial reaction was one of surprise - I interpreted what MC did as stabbing BW in the back; inciting CF to ride for himself.

Just my view of course...

adr82

TMR wrote:

adr82 wrote:

I think that's exactly what a lot of people here are arguing and I don't understand it. Any negative publicity over this is going to be wiped out if they manage to win the Tour again, and they obviously feel they've got a better chance of doing that without building a team containing Froome and Wiggins.

I don't think that's true. I have no idea whether I would be considered representative of 'a lot of people here', but I have zero emotional investment in a SKY side without Wiggins.

Yeah but Sky don't care about your emotional investment! They care about winning the Tour again, and if they think the chances of doing that are increased by leaving Wiggins out, that's what they will do.

r0bh

iainf72 wrote:

TMR wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

So you're saying that having Wiggins in the squad should be more important than winning the Tour?

Why does it have to be an either or choice? They aren't mutually exclusive. You're talking about Wiggins as though he's crap and that's just wrong.

Would he cause disharmony and upset on the team? Yes.

And you know that how? When has Wiggins actually caused any trouble in the team post 2012?

Oman 2013 by all accounts he did a solid domestique job.

Talk of going for 2013 Tour was just that, talk.

Worlds 2013 sure he went missing but so did most of the rest of the team. And Froome had no form anyway.

Yes Wiggins might get the hump but he might also do a solid team role. You don't know, I don't know.

TMR

adr82 wrote:

Yeah but Sky don't care about your emotional investment! They care about winning the Tour again, and if they think the chances of doing that are increased by leaving Wiggins out, that's what they will do.

I agree, but this is a cycling forum and emotion is a huge part of what the sport means to us as fans, ne c'est pas?

iainf72

TMR wrote:

When I read that, my initial reaction was one of surprise - I interpreted what MC did as stabbing BW in the back; inciting CF to ride for himself.

Just my view of course...

Did it make you wonder if the view inside the peloton is maybe somewhat different from what you think?

TMR

iainf72 wrote:

Did it make you wonder if the view inside the peloton is maybe somewhat different from what you think?

No mate. I think the realistic answer to that is that the peloton is no different from any other collection of individuals in any other setting in life; you'll always get on with some people better than others. That's just human nature.

iainf72

r0bh wrote:

And you know that how? When has Wiggins actually caused any trouble in the team post 2012?

Oman 2013 by all accounts he did a solid domestique job.

From the Velorooms review of The Climb at Oman 2013 (which I've not read yet)

The atmosphere was very tense and the DS Nico Portal appeared as if he walking on eggshells. Froome said to Kennaugh “Does this feel different to oyu?”. Kennaugh “I thought it was just me. I’m glad you said something. I’m afraid to open my mouth”. It felt very unhealthy with everybody on edge; like a week working at a job poisoned by office politics.”

adr82

TMR wrote:

adr82 wrote:

Yeah but Sky don't care about your emotional investment! They care about winning the Tour again, and if they think the chances of doing that are increased by leaving Wiggins out, that's what they will do.

I agree, but this is a cycling forum and emotion is a huge part of what the sport means to us as fans, ne c'est pas?

Of course it is, all I'm saying is that Sky aren't making decisions based on emotion.

TMR wrote:

No mate. I think the realistic answer to that is that the peloton is no different from any other collection of individuals in any other setting in life; you'll always get on with some people better than others. That's just human nature.

I think his point was for you to ask yourself if you could accept that people who are closer to the situation than you might have good reason to see things differently. If you'd been a fly on the wall during all the Wiggins/Froome interactions over the last few years you might have a very different opinion right now (not saying I know anything more one way or the other either).

UncleMonty

Joelsim wrote:

The column inches and TV value will be far higher for Sky if Wiggo is in the team, and plenty of non-avid fans will have an interest/awareness because it is The Tour De France. The value of the coverage I would imagine would be a few million pounds' worth with him in.

But this whole debacle is generating even more publicity, Sky just can't loose, more column inches, more stories & images on all the sports channels & new bulletins.

As a few people have already pointed out winning is everything, Sky as a sponsor only care about one thing, as long as this happens they're happy. Wiggo would have always been the foot note to the main story, Froome wins mountain top finish and extends lead, Wiggings comes in 8 min down, Cavendish will have his chance tomorrow, blah, blah, blah.

For the record I would like to see him race, he's not though and him not racing isn't going to change anything, not the result, not the viewing figures, attendance figures, nothing.