Leinders Banned

Rodrego Hernandez

RichN95 wrote:

Rodrego Hernandez wrote:

I do know of other stuff but even when it is written down in print, the true blind fan boys won't believe it and the talk of level playing fields will come out again.

Go on then. Try us with this 'other stuff' that you know.

There's cortisone usage amongst staff to lose weight - this is pretty well known. One DS who signed the never used anything actually did use stuff. Over time it will all come out, these things always do. Look at USPS, that didn't take very long. Sky are following a very similar pattern.

I'm not trying to convince you otherwise, you are entitled to your own opinion but surely even the most dedicated fan must be thinking that it is strange that the clean team employed someone like Leinders.

Anyone who has been around pro cycling for a while knows the score. It'll take more than a smartly worded press release to make me think anything apart from the obvious in this case.

RichN95.

The_Boy wrote:

ddraver wrote:

Sky have been going for 5 years - have you SERIOUSLY not come up with any better arguments yet?

Tbf, if they'd done their background checks properly they would have saved us all a lot of trouble. I don't think they should be forgiven for that...

It was a monumental error. No-one is saying otherwise. But how long do you keep going on about it? The main reason people go on about it all the time is because they haven't found a bigger stick to beat Sky with.

RichN95.

Rodrego Hernandez wrote:

There's cortisone usage amongst staff to lose weight - this is pretty well known. One DS who signed the never used anything actually did use stuff. Over time it will all come out, these things always do. Look at USPS, that didn't take very long. Sky are following a very similar pattern.

Is that it? Does cortisone even aid weight loss? And it's not even banned out of competition. (Probably should be and they shouldn't be using it).
And DS took stuff. So what. That a daft Sky internal rule. Every team has a DS that took something. I don't think someone taking something in 1998 (and maybe other years) has much bearing on today. I don't think that the idea that someone who rode for TVM in the Festina Tour may have taken something is too much for a 'fanboy' to understand.

Rodrego Hernandez wrote:

I'm not trying to convince you otherwise, you are entitled to your own opinion but surely even the most dedicated fan must be thinking that it is strange that the clean team employed someone like Leinders.

But why him? The case against him paints a picture of someone with no special knowledge. The man some credited for Rasmussen in 2007 turns out not to have been involved in that. He's a minion, not a mastermind. And if Sky knew he was a doping doc surely they knew he would soon be exposed in one of the Rabobank investigations. And then they put him on the pay roll, in team kit and took him to races. That makes no sense to me.

Rodrego Hernandez

I'll leave you to wait until more comes out and you can revise your opinion if you wish.

In the mean time it might be worth casting your mind back to the USPS era and see the excuses given then for their performances, the cover up for a cortisone positive and the number of positive tests they had. Remember, Armstrong never tested positive in all those years and the infrastructure that allowed him to do that is still in place.

Remember the explanations for him beating all of his doped up rivals. Swap Cancer with Bilharzia and see just how depressingly familiar it all looks.

The_Boy

ddraver wrote:

You ll need to explain it a bit better then. If you could bear in mind what Rich said at the top of the page we might save some time too...

The 'trouble' I was referring to is the sort of stuff that goes on in threads like this. It was a lighthearted comment about the obsession the clinic mob have with Leinders.

ocdupalais

That Mark Cavendish was a rider at Sky when Leinders was there - and is now in Argentina finishing MTF's in same group as well known climbers such as Carlos Betancur - tells me all I need to know...
The whole thing stinks.
And until someone mentions Leinders being employed by Sky being a mistake a few more times, I don't think we'll ever get to the bottom of this...

The_Boy

OCDuPalais wrote:

That Mark Cavendish was a rider at Sky when Leinders was there - and is now in Argentina finishing MTF's in same group as well known climbers such as Carlos Betancur - tells me all I need to know...
The whole thing stinks.
And until someone mentions Leinders being employed by Sky being a mistake a few more times, I don't think we'll ever get to the bottom of this...

no, no, no you're thinking too hard. Cavendish wins a lot, ergo he dopes.

though he has been a lot "cleaner" since he left sky. you might be onto something. good work.

Macaloon

Rodrego Hernandez wrote:

I'm not trying to convince you otherwise, you are entitled to your own opinion but surely even the most dedicated fan must be thinking that it is strange that the clean team employed someone like Leinders.

I'm not Brailsford's biggest fan, but I do admire his consistency. He's done absolutely nothing since the hiring of Leinders to crack the 'clueless' narrative.

Separately, it's perfectly possible to discount everything Brailsford says as being crafted by the brand, and at the same time seriously doubt he's leading a massive scam. Of course, given they've put the frighteners on Leinders to keep him on-side, they're capable of anything.

argyllflyer

Even a stopped clock tells the right time twice a day, and with that in mind, our feisty skybot basher has a point saying that the two former Rabo riders on Sky during Leinders' time must have known something. Both have in diffferent ways denied links to anything dodgy at the team already (with Hayman telling Walsh in his book that he suspected but had proof of nothing and then Flecha getting a retraction from Rasmussen for saying everyone on the team doped) but is it credible they knew nothing of Leinders' existence or expertise? That they also had a former Rabo rider DSing is also stretching it but in the case of all three, admitting knowledge of these dark arts might have led to difficult questions.

RichN95.

argyllflyer wrote:

Even a stopped clock tells the right time twice a day, and with that in mind, our feisty skybot basher has a point saying that the two former Rabo riders on Sky during Leinders' time must have known something. Both have in diffferent ways denied links to anything dodgy at the team already (with Hayman telling Walsh in his book that he suspected but had proof of nothing and then Flecha getting a retraction from Rasmussen for saying everyone on the team doped) but is it credible they knew nothing of Leinders' existence or expertise? That they also had a former Rabo rider DSing is also stretching it but in the case of all three, admitting knowledge of these dark arts might have led to difficult questions.

Never underestimate a man's ability to keep what he knows to himself in exchange for an easy time.

blazing_saddles

Rodrego Hernandez wrote:

Salsiccia1 wrote:

Rodrego Hernandez wrote:

You are entitled to believe what you choose but don't be surprised when more of the same starts to come out.

And you'll be hanging out the bunting and celebrating the night away, I'm sure.

Why do so many people seem to revel in this shit?

I'm not really bothered to be honest. The sooner the sport cleans up, the better. Why would you automatically assume that because I have pointed out that Sky are less than 100% clean that I would revel in their downfall?

They had the opportunity to be a clean team and to nurture British talent but they have failed on that. This is the most disappointing thing.

I do know of other stuff but even when it is written down in print, the true blind fan boys won't believe it and the talk of level playing fields will come out again.

At the end of the day, there is only one thing that a doctor like Leinders would be employed to do and it wasn't weighing riders or checking saddle sores, the thing otherwise is just being naive.

If all the forum folks claiming to "know stuff" and/or have insider knowledge or contacts at Sky, BC etc are to be believed, it is amazing that Sky are still afloat. So may personnel with loose lips, willing to talk.
I'm amazed that nobody seems to have thought to point Paul Kimmage in their direction.

As for riders talking: Here's one:

Sven Nys:

"In my 10 years at Rabobank he was always fair and honest and never recommended doping"

http://www.nieuwsblad.be/sportwereld/cn ... 3_01491227

Looks as if "knowing stuff" isn't that easy for riders, either.

The_Boy

RichN95 wrote:

argyllflyer wrote:

Even a stopped clock tells the right time twice a day, and with that in mind, our feisty skybot basher has a point saying that the two former Rabo riders on Sky during Leinders' time must have known something. Both have in diffferent ways denied links to anything dodgy at the team already (with Hayman telling Walsh in his book that he suspected but had proof of nothing and then Flecha getting a retraction from Rasmussen for saying everyone on the team doped) but is it credible they knew nothing of Leinders' existence or expertise? That they also had a former Rabo rider DSing is also stretching it but in the case of all three, admitting knowledge of these dark arts might have led to difficult questions.

Never underestimate a man's ability to keep what he knows to himself in exchange for an easy time.

Or their ability to look the other way and simply not see what might be thought of as patently obvious to outsiders. Also in the name of self-preservation.

above_the_cows

I'm confused. How could Sky have known about Leinders when they hired him from the Rabobank investigation? They hired him in what 2011 and Rabobank didn't hit the skids and the investigation into it didn't start until 2012.



*In the spirit of full disclosure I am taking cortisone, injections too to boot, I'm not a procyclist with a bio passport though so like Sky staff members it doesn't matter.

ddraver

The_Boy wrote:

ddraver wrote:

You ll need to explain it a bit better then. If you could bear in mind what Rich said at the top of the page we might save some time too...

The 'trouble' I was referring to is the sort of stuff that goes on in threads like this. It was a lighthearted comment about the obsession the clinic mob have with Leinders.

Then I withdraw

argyllflyer

Above The Cows wrote:

I'm confused. How could Sky have known about Leinders when they hired him from the Rabobank investigation? They hired him in what 2011 and Rabobank didn't hit the skids and the investigation into it didn't start until 2012.

He wasn't publicised as a doping doctor by that point but I think the general consensus is that: as he actually was and therefore people in cycling would have known, especially former riders, why did they not find out? The former Rabo staff, as has been suggested aleady, all had good reason to stay quiet if they knew anything, but if they did, surely an off record wee 'don't go there' would have sufficed. But it seems Sky had brought on board the three wise monkeys and their reputation has been tarred ever since.

iainf72

argyllflyer wrote:

He wasn't publicised as a doping doctor by that point but I think the general consensus is that: as he actually was and therefore people in cycling would have known, especially former riders, why did they not find out? The former Rabo staff, as has been suggested aleady, all had good reason to stay quiet if they knew anything, but if they did, surely an off record wee 'don't go there' would have sufficed. But it seems Sky had brought on board the three wise monkeys and their reputation has been tarred ever since.

Not sure - The way Sky are setup means that honesty wouldn't pay.

I'm just not convinced it was widely known in the peloton. I've not really heard many people saying "oh yeah, him"

argyllflyer

iainf72 wrote:

argyllflyer wrote:

He wasn't publicised as a doping doctor by that point but I think the general consensus is that: as he actually was and therefore people in cycling would have known, especially former riders, why did they not find out? The former Rabo staff, as has been suggested aleady, all had good reason to stay quiet if they knew anything, but if they did, surely an off record wee 'don't go there' would have sufficed. But it seems Sky had brought on board the three wise monkeys and their reputation has been tarred ever since.

Not sure - The way Sky are setup means that honesty wouldn't pay.

I'm just not convinced it was widely known in the peloton. I've not really heard many people saying "oh yeah, him"

But it would have been known among the Rabobank riders and they were elsewhere in some cases by 2010. And I completely agree that anyone speaking up might have found themselves in bother at Sky but they had plenty of riders and staff with skeletons in their bidons that they effectively turned a blind eye to (ahem he who 'only drove the car' at Discovery for example) until they could no longer.

Race Radio has done a fair enough job on tying some of the loose ends together...

http://theraceradio.com/leinders/

iainf72

argyllflyer wrote:

Race Radio has done a fair enough job on tying some of the loose ends together...

http://theraceradio.com/leinders/

This

Despite a lot of publicly available evidence of Lienders active participation in Rabobank’s doping program he was hired by Team Sky in late 2010.

That's horse poop. The first anyone seemed to know about it was in 2012. I don't remember anyone moaning about it at all until then.

No_Ta_Doctor

iainf72 wrote:

argyllflyer wrote:

Race Radio has done a fair enough job on tying some of the loose ends together...

http://theraceradio.com/leinders/

This

Despite a lot of publicly available evidence of Lienders active participation in Rabobank’s doping program he was hired by Team Sky in late 2010.

That's horse poop. The first anyone seemed to know about it was in 2012. I don't remember anyone moaning about it at all until then.

Yep. It's massively revisionist history.

iainf72

No tA Doctor wrote:

Yep. It's massively revisionist history.

This kind of says it all

http://www.google.co.uk/trends/explore# ... 20leinders

dish_dash

iainf72 wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

Yep. It's massively revisionist history.

This kind of says it all

http://www.google.co.uk/trends/explore# ... 20leinders

That's how you do it! I was playing around with google earlier in the week to try to prove that same point. Could find nothing referring to him pre-2012.

blazing_saddles

iainf72 wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

Yep. It's massively revisionist history.

This kind of says it all

http://www.google.co.uk/trends/explore# ... 20leinders

When those lovely folks over in that place where Race Radio frequents got all feisty, last year, demanding that Sky should have found out all this stuff before contracting Deerty Geerty, the question was asked: how? given that nobody there had known owt and they, unlike Sky, had nowt better to do than talking doping all day, every day.
Did anybody have a link?
Not a single link to anything in English could be found.

One obscure piece in Dutch did eventually get put forward by a local.
That would constitute lots of evidence there, when used in conjunction with Sky.

tailwindhome

iainf72 wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

Yep. It's massively revisionist history.

This kind of says it all

http://www.google.co.uk/trends/explore# ... 20leinders

Does that not just reflect public interest in a search term?

rick_chasey

I'm still slightly surprised anyone gives a sh!t.

iainf72

TailWindHome wrote:

Does that not just reflect public interest in a search term?

It does. But it shows it was on nobodies radar.

You can also do a search and limit it to a period of time. Guess what happens then? Yep, that one Telegraaf article which says he was leaving the team as he didn't like the direction it was taking.

argyllflyer

iainf72 wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

Does that not just reflect public interest in a search term?

It does. But it shows it was on nobodies radar.

You can also do a search and limit it to a period of time. Guess what happens then? Yep, that one Telegraaf article which says he was leaving the team as he didn't like the direction it was taking.

I'm just a fan but looking at it from the outside, cycling seems a small world with a limited pool of people working in it. It seems pretty clear a lot of teams were dirty in the early / mid 2000s and the people involved in the sport then would have had a fair idea what various teams were up to even if the pathetic omerta stopped any public comment. Whether or not media outlets were printing at that time that Rabobank were more like a bloodbank would seem to me to be immaterial. Sky, by taking a doctor from a top European team a few years after Puerto, were also taking a massive gamble regarding his ethics.

ddraver

blazing_saddles

argyllflyer wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

Does that not just reflect public interest in a search term?

It does. But it shows it was on nobodies radar.

You can also do a search and limit it to a period of time. Guess what happens then? Yep, that one Telegraaf article which says he was leaving the team as he didn't like the direction it was taking.

I'm just a fan but looking at it from the outside, cycling seems a small world with a limited pool of people working in it. It seems pretty clear a lot of teams were dirty in the early / mid 2000s and the people involved in the sport then would have had a fair idea what various teams were up to even if the pathetic omerta stopped any public comment. Whether or not media outlets were printing at that time that Rabobank were more like a bloodbank would seem to me to be immaterial. Sky, by taking a doctor from a top European team a few years after Puerto, were also taking a massive gamble regarding his ethics.

If you discount the media, immaterial or not and realise that those riders prepared to talk are giving solid references, how should Sky have gone about screening Leinders?
Sure there was prior Rabo speculation with the likes of Menchov etc, but If you are suggesting that rumours within a team should suffice to disqualify the entire staff, then I would suggest Team Sky would have probably failed to get off the ground.

Looking to sign experienced personnel at that time from the field of professional cycling, while attempting to operate a strict ZTP may well make Sky naive, but not, as some would have, complicit.

We can all agree with the benefit of hindsight that signing Leinders was foolish.

TheBigBean

iainf72 wrote:

argyllflyer wrote:

Race Radio has done a fair enough job on tying some of the loose ends together...

http://theraceradio.com/leinders/

This

Despite a lot of publicly available evidence of Lienders active participation in Rabobank’s doping program he was hired by Team Sky in late 2010.

That's horse poop. The first anyone seemed to know about it was in 2012. I don't remember anyone moaning about it at all until then.

In the interests of presenting both sides, this is Race Radio's response

Yeah, “Public” may be too a broad term. I recall Leinders name being linked to the Human Plasma mess in 2009/10 when multiple Rabobank riders were linked to the lab. This resulted in an internal audit of the team and Leinders exit. There had also been a decade of reports of doping on Rabobank. It is surprising that Hayman or Flecha we not asked about it.

Add to this, I have heard that at least 2 people at Sky warned Brailsford about Leinders prior to him being hired but he ignored them.

It seems there was either incompetence or willful ignorance in his hiring.

ddraver

RaceRadio wrote:

It seems there was either incompetence or willful ignorance in his hiring.

How many times do Sky have to say that it was stupid (i.e. incompetent)

Poor attempt at manufacturing an argument