Wiggo broken hearted???

type:epyt

My take on things is that it all started during discussions about tactics for the Vuelta 2011.

Wiggins had come of the back of injury and racing at the sharp end earlier in the season and Froome was relatively fresh (kind of like the Chris Horner situation when he won the Vuelta).

Wiggins was likely told to stick to Froome's wheel 'where possible' and Froome told to 'stay' with Wiggins. For a proven winner like Wiggins this doesn't show the faith he felt he had earned/needed and a lot of faith in a then untried Froome.

It seems obvious that Sky/BC wanted Wiggins to be the first to win a GC for them (both in terms of salary paid and the subsequent recognition it would garner as a multi gold medal Olympian). In the end that goal cost them the win and that failure left a mark on Wiggins that has never gone. Sure he won the 2012 TdF but he won as a figurehead for the team rather than dominant leader (while on the road, same as the Vuelta, Froome looked like the real deal).

Wiggins at this year's TdF is a tricky one as although some say he deserves his moment on home soil he already had that at the 2012 Olympics (and 2013 ToB) but hasn't done anything since which indicates he could (or would) do himself or the team justice. His inclusion brings all the initial hoopla but unless he surprises everyone it's all just negative press from there on in. 2009 should have taught Wiggins more than just he could compete in a GT with the right focus, he also got a front row seat to the fall of a champion.

iainf72

Pross wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

jimmythecuckoo wrote:

Froome didn't play the game (IMO) and now Wiggins and he wouldn't touch each other with a barge pole.

From the post above I would want to see a flatter Tour in 2014 with the two of them squaring up on rival teams.

Bumwash. They didn't get on before Froome did anything to upset Wiggins.

Surely Froome shouldn't have been at the 2012 Tour then?

Well, Sky signed a contract which stated they would support his TdF GC ambitions, so....

Also, the team clearly knew Wiggins needed Froome to win

Macaloon

type:epyt wrote:

It seems obvious that Sky/BC wanted Wiggins to be the first to win a GC for them (both in terms of salary paid and the subsequent recognition it would garner as a multi gold medal Olympian). In the end that goal cost them the win and that failure left a mark on Wiggins that has never gone. Sure he won the 2012 TdF but he won as a figurehead for the team rather than dominant leader (while on the road, same as the Vuelta, Froome looked like the real deal).

That's a great point. It's one thing to feel a little inferior. It's quite another for that to be showcased (in your mind at least) in front of a global audience. I think this is the same debilitating condition afflicting English footballers. When your contract is based on more on your showbiz ratings than skills, it must be torture being on the field.

greeny12

Macaloon wrote:

type:epyt wrote:

It seems obvious that Sky/BC wanted Wiggins to be the first to win a GC for them (both in terms of salary paid and the subsequent recognition it would garner as a multi gold medal Olympian). In the end that goal cost them the win and that failure left a mark on Wiggins that has never gone. Sure he won the 2012 TdF but he won as a figurehead for the team rather than dominant leader (while on the road, same as the Vuelta, Froome looked like the real deal).

That's a great point. It's one thing to feel a little inferior. It's quite another for that to be showcased (in your mind at least) in front of a global audience. I think this is the same debilitating condition afflicting English footballers. When your contract is based on more on your showbiz ratings than skills, it must be torture being on the field.

Oh, come on. We know wtih whom you stand re: Wiggins and Froome but please don't start comparing Wiggins to England footballers!

In the interests of space I won't list Wiggins' palmares here but you know where to find it...

Macaloon

greeny12 wrote:

Macaloon wrote:

That's a great point. It's one thing to feel a little inferior. It's quite another for that to be showcased (in your mind at least) in front of a global audience. I think this is the same debilitating condition afflicting English footballers. When your contract is based on more on your showbiz ratings than skills, it must be torture being on the field.

Oh, come on. We know wtih whom you stand re: Wiggins and Froome but please don't start comparing Wiggins to England footballers!

In the interests of space I won't list Wiggins' palmares here but you know where to find it...

I highlighted the narrow comparison I was making. Of course Wiggins is a world class cyclist. Which makes his results since 2012 all the more difficult to explain. In my opinion, performance anxiety is one plausible contributory factor.

Happier?

Daz555

Macaloon wrote:

That's a great point. It's one thing to feel a little inferior. It's quite another for that to be showcased (in your mind at least) in front of a global audience. I think this is the same debilitating condition afflicting English footballers. When your contract is based on more on your showbiz ratings than skills, it must be torture being on the field.

Not sure we can compare 4 time Olympic Champion, 6 time World Champion and Tour de France winner with any England setup over the last 40 years.

Macaloon

Daz555 wrote:

Macaloon wrote:

That's a great point. It's one thing to feel a little inferior. It's quite another for that to be showcased (in your mind at least) in front of a global audience. I think this is the same debilitating condition afflicting English footballers. When your contract is based on more on your showbiz ratings than skills, it must be torture being on the field.

Not sure we can compare 4 time Olympic Champion, 6 time World Champion and Tour de France winner with any England setup over the last 40 years.

Granted, as above. So what's he doing touring TV studios for Simon Fuller?

adr82

Macaloon wrote:

Daz555 wrote:

Macaloon wrote:

That's a great point. It's one thing to feel a little inferior. It's quite another for that to be showcased (in your mind at least) in front of a global audience. I think this is the same debilitating condition afflicting English footballers. When your contract is based on more on your showbiz ratings than skills, it must be torture being on the field.

Not sure we can compare 4 time Olympic Champion, 6 time World Champion and Tour de France winner with any England setup over the last 40 years.

Granted, as above. So what's he doing touring TV studios for Simon Fuller?

Being an arse as far as I can tell. Any sympathy I had for him is long gone.

jimmythecuckoo

Bumwash indeed !!!

It is only my opinion of course, but there I felt all the soft attacking and arm waving for Wiggins on the climbs was Froome's attempt to show he was the main man, despite team orders, and was calculated and conscious.

If he had played the team-mate without the histrionics, he might have had a different outcome in terms of support from Wiggins (regardless of whether they fell out at the Vuelta in2011).

iainf72

jimmythecuckoo wrote:

Bumwash indeed !!!

It is only my opinion of course, but there I felt all the soft attacking and arm waving for Wiggins on the climbs was Froome's attempt to show he was the main man, despite team orders, and was calculated and conscious.

If he had played the team-mate without the histrionics, he might have had a different outcome in terms of support from Wiggins (regardless of whether they fell out at the Vuelta in2011).

If you'd signed a contract that said the team would support your GC ambitions, wouldn't you feel slightly aggrieved when it was all in for someone else?

At the end of the day, Froome could've dropped him multiple times. He never did really. So at the end of the day, he did was the team wanted. If he was Hinault or Contador he wouldn't have.

type:epyt

jimmythecuckoo wrote:

Bumwash indeed !!!

It is only my opinion of course, but there I felt all the soft attacking and arm waving for Wiggins on the climbs was Froome's attempt to show he was the main man, despite team orders, and was calculated and conscious.

If he had played the team-mate without the histrionics, he might have had a different outcome in terms of support from Wiggins (regardless of whether they fell out at the Vuelta in2011).

The difference as I see it is that Wiggins needed Froome to assist him, whereas on the evidence available so far Wiggins was just a hinderance to Froome. Froome won when Wiggins wasn't there to cost him both time and team.

r0bh

iainf72 wrote:

If you'd signed a contract that said the team would support your GC ambitions, wouldn't you feel slightly aggrieved when it was all in for someone else?

What firm evidence do you have that his contract actually said this? And they did support Froome's GC ambitions - at the 2012 Vuelta.

jimmythecuckoo

WIthout seeing Froome's actual contract I might remain open minded on that.

Sir Dave would have been bonkers to allow a contract written for a grand tour team leader based on Froome's performance up to that point.

Wasn't there rumour that he would leave in 2011 at Sky's behest and then they back tracked during that Vuelta?

iainf72

r0bh wrote:

What firm evidence do you have that his contract actually said this? And they did support Froome's GC ambitions - at the 2012 Vuelta.

I did add an If in there. That's basically what the Froome book says - It was watered down from what he originally wanted (outright leader), and Saxo offered a deal where he'd lead in Giro / Vuelta which he rejected

The wording in the book is "support me in my ambitions at the Tour de FRance"

jimmythecuckoo

I am still deliberating over the Froome book... Should I ?

r0bh

iainf72 wrote:

r0bh wrote:

What firm evidence do you have that his contract actually said this? And they did support Froome's GC ambitions - at the 2012 Vuelta.

I did add an If in there. That's basically what the Froome book says - It was watered down from what he originally wanted (outright leader), and Saxo offered a deal where he'd lead in Giro / Vuelta which he rejected

The wording in the book is "support me in my ambitions at the Tour de FRance"

If that is the actual wording then it is so vague as to be basically worthless; if he signed that contract thinking it would give him GC leadership at the 2012 Tour then he is incredibly naive. Every man and his dog knew it was going to be all in for Wiggins at the 2012 Tour, especially once the TT heavy parcours was announced.

type:epyt

jimmythecuckoo wrote:

WIthout seeing Froome's actual contract I might remain open minded on that.

Sir Dave would have been bonkers to allow a contract written for a grand tour team leader based on Froome's performance up to that point.

Wasn't there rumour that he would leave in 2011 at Sky's behest and then they back tracked during that Vuelta?

Froome's ride in the Vuelta resulted in the contract mentioned above.

Remember, at that point Wiggins only had a distant 4th (+6 mins at a race ran at LA pace) and 23rd (nearly 40 mins down) at the TdF along with his 3rd place at the Vuelta to barter against Froome's 2nd place (+13 secs) which was achieved hanging about considerably on his team leader.

After that Vuelta the numbers pointed to Froome being the man most likely so Sky did what they had to do, not only to keep a potential winner, but to prevent Froome becoming a major competitor who looked to already have put the 'indian sign' on Wiggins.

iainf72

jimmythecuckoo wrote:

I am still deliberating over the Froome book... Should I ?

It's very interesting I think. It won't change anyones mind but his backstory is fascinating

iainf72

r0bh wrote:

If that is the actual wording then it is so vague as to be basically worthless; if he signed that contract thinking it would give him GC leadership at the 2012 Tour then he is incredibly naive. Every man and his dog knew it was going to be all in for Wiggins at the 2012 Tour, especially once the TT heavy parcours was announced.

His original clause was much more blunt. But Brailsford said they needed 2 options, hence the change. What bothered him was when they got to the Tour it wasn't Brad is plan A and Chris is B, it was Brad only.

adr82

iainf72 wrote:

r0bh wrote:

If that is the actual wording then it is so vague as to be basically worthless; if he signed that contract thinking it would give him GC leadership at the 2012 Tour then he is incredibly naive. Every man and his dog knew it was going to be all in for Wiggins at the 2012 Tour, especially once the TT heavy parcours was announced.

His original clause was much more blunt. But Brailsford said they needed 2 options, hence the change. What bothered him was when they got to the Tour it wasn't Brad is plan A and Chris is B, it was Brad only.

Yeah, he said that was made clear almost from the start when he punctured on one of the early stages and had to wait around for a wheel, losing over a minute in the process IIRC, while almost everything & everyone else remained focused on Wiggins.

r0bh

iainf72 wrote:

r0bh wrote:

If that is the actual wording then it is so vague as to be basically worthless; if he signed that contract thinking it would give him GC leadership at the 2012 Tour then he is incredibly naive. Every man and his dog knew it was going to be all in for Wiggins at the 2012 Tour, especially once the TT heavy parcours was announced.

His original clause was much more blunt. But Brailsford said they needed 2 options, hence the change. What bothered him was when they got to the Tour it wasn't Brad is plan A and Chris is B, it was Brad only.

But you only need a plan B if plan A isn't working.

Pross

iainf72 wrote:

r0bh wrote:

If that is the actual wording then it is so vague as to be basically worthless; if he signed that contract thinking it would give him GC leadership at the 2012 Tour then he is incredibly naive. Every man and his dog knew it was going to be all in for Wiggins at the 2012 Tour, especially once the TT heavy parcours was announced.

His original clause was much more blunt. But Brailsford said they needed 2 options, hence the change. What bothered him was when they got to the Tour it wasn't Brad is plan A and Chris is B, it was Brad only.

Froome wasn't going to be an option from the time he fell off in the first week and he never really went all out in support of Wiggins in the way that Porte and Rogers did (and as Porte did for Froome last year). They never needed to look at a Plan B as the only threat to Wiggins came from Froome and he was too far distant after the crash and first TT. Would any team support their second rider attacking their first rider in a bid to win? Had anything happened to Wiggins then I'm sure Froome would have received all the support. In the event Sky took first and second which is a pretty good result.

I can understand Froome being upset if he was expecting GC support but surely in that case Sky should have sent one to go for the Giro and one for the Tour? It looks like the whole thing has been badly managed since the end of 2011 to be honest.

Edit - time loss was due to mechanical wasn't it? He did crash but at the end of a stage so no time lost.

type:epyt

r0bh wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

r0bh wrote:

If that is the actual wording then it is so vague as to be basically worthless; if he signed that contract thinking it would give him GC leadership at the 2012 Tour then he is incredibly naive. Every man and his dog knew it was going to be all in for Wiggins at the 2012 Tour, especially once the TT heavy parcours was announced.

His original clause was much more blunt. But Brailsford said they needed 2 options, hence the change. What bothered him was when they got to the Tour it wasn't Brad is plan A and Chris is B, it was Brad only.

But you only need a plan B if plan A isn't working.

Was Froome not left high and dry after a problem on an early stage which cost him a chunk of time? Hardly good tactics if indeed he was the alternate plan.

edit: see above-ish

RichN95.

jimmythecuckoo wrote:

I am still deliberating over the Froome book... Should I ?

It's actually pretty entertaining. Most sporting autobiogs aren't because careers tend to be formulaic and well documented, but Froome's certainly isn't. The weakest parts of the book are from the 2011 Vuelta onwards because it's all been played out in front of our eyes and written about many times over.

If your name is Julius Mwangi, though, you might want to steer clear.

iainf72

Pross wrote:

I can understand Froome being upset if he was expecting GC support but surely in that case Sky should have sent one to go for the Giro and one for the Tour? It looks like the whole thing has been badly managed since the end of 2011 to be honest.

The point was he specified the TDf. Saxo offered the Giro, Astana as TdF leader. But he wanted to stay at Sky as long as he could go for Tour

I don't blame Sky - They said the right things to get the signature. The man they wanted to win won in 2012 but now they're happy enough to support Froome

iainf72

RichN95 wrote:

jimmythecuckoo wrote:

I am still deliberating over the Froome book... Should I ?

It's actually pretty entertaining. Most sporting autobiogs aren't because careers tend to be formulaic and well documented, but Froome's certainly isn't. The weakest parts of the book are from the 2011 Vuelta onwards because it's all been played out in front of our eyes and written about many times over.

If your name is Julius Mwangi, though, you might want to steer clear.

The guy is an absolute clown.

I also think people who are under the impression that CF had a privileged upbringing should read it. It's also quite amusing how CF makes EBH look like a scholar of cycling history

Pross

iainf72 wrote:

Pross wrote:

I can understand Froome being upset if he was expecting GC support but surely in that case Sky should have sent one to go for the Giro and one for the Tour? It looks like the whole thing has been badly managed since the end of 2011 to be honest.

The point was he specified the TDf. Saxo offered the Giro, Astana as TdF leader. But he wanted to stay at Sky as long as he could go for Tour

I don't blame Sky - They said the right things to get the signature. The man they wanted to win won in 2012 but now they're happy enough to support Froome

None of that is really Wiggins fault though is it? As someone said above, everyone knew Wiggins would lead the team and if Froome genuinely believed he would be anything other than a back up in case of a 2011 repeat then he really is naive. The course was almost purpose built for Wiggins. Considering he got the leadership last year and won I'm not sure why the whole thing is still rumbling on and why Wiggins couldn't be part of the team this year. It's only since he announced he wouldn't be riding that his head has fallen off and he's started behaving like a spoiled brat again, a month ago he looked like he could do a good support job whilst being highly unlikely to threaten Froome's chances.

I'm amazed that two adults can behave so unprofessionally and in such a childish manner!

iainf72

I reckon where Wiggins went wrong in 2012 is he didn't show he was the alpha male. Communicating through management, threatening to go home just makes him look weak.

r0bh

iainf72 wrote:

I reckon where Wiggins went wrong in 2012 is he didn't show he was the alpha male. Communicating through management, threatening to go home just makes him look weak.

But he isn't an alpha male, and I don't think he has ever claimed to be. And please don't bring this back around to him being "weak". A weak person would not have the palmares he does.

adr82

Pross wrote:

None of that is really Wiggins fault though is it? As someone said above, everyone knew Wiggins would lead the team and if Froome genuinely believed he would be anything other than a back up in case of a 2011 repeat then he really is naive. The course was almost purpose built for Wiggins. Considering he got the leadership last year and won I'm not sure why the whole thing is still rumbling on and why Wiggins couldn't be part of the team this year. It's only since he announced he wouldn't be riding that his head has fallen off and he's started behaving like a spoiled brat again, a month ago he looked like he could do a good support job whilst being highly unlikely to threaten Froome's chances.

I think his "head fell off" during the 2012 Tour, if not before. There was bad feeling between him and Froome during and after that event, then there was the whole Giro+Tour will he/won't he fiasco last year as well. Wiggins has basically been letting his mouth do the talking instead of his legs, and only has himself to blame for the situation he's in now IMO.