Digger

ddraver

good lord :roll:

spaceman147

TakeTheHighRoad wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

Joelsim wrote:

Lol. He said some pretty libellous shizz the other night when I had a 5 hour discussion with him and The Clear.

If it turns out you were the catalyst for this I will personally install a hidden motor in the bike of your choice and I'll even hide the batteries too.

Post of the year so far

Brilliant

disgruntledgoat

Shadowrider wrote:

It's now been made an issue of freedom of speech by his crew. They really are stupid.

There is no infringement on his freedom of speech. He could have left the offending tweet to stand and taken the consequences.

Some twitter enabled soul should use the platform to call him a child abuser and disclose his home address then see how far his commitment to completely unfettered freedom of speech extends.

mr_poll

It would also appear that this thread and the forum as a whole has received the ire of Digger's Twitter fan base (well three muppets). Apparently this used to be a decent forum until Sky came around and we all became fan's.

Bloody Sky - turning up messing with cycling with all this marginal gains stuff, pretending to be whiter than white and now messing up good cycling forums - where will their corrupt influence go to next?

ddraver

Where? (google searches for Digger just show up stuff about..well...diggers)

Edit found it - that woman is hilarious....
https://twitter.com/vamosalberto/status ... 7490499584

bobmcstuff

I've noticed this forum has a rep for being Sky fanboi, wool-over-the-eyes, "doping isn't happening" on the Asylum and so on. Seems unreasonable to me.

ddraver

Bob the whole world outside the clinic is Sky Fanboi, woll over eyes etc

joelsim

Anyone who doesn't think that Sky has systematic doping, started by Leinders just before Froome's miraculous transformation and supported by Brailsfraud having a coffee with Millar in 2004, and that Crookson isn't protecting Sky is a Sky fanboi and an idiot.

So I've ascertained.

Maybe throw in the fact that JTL had been on a training camp with Sky before he joined too.

There you are. Guilty m'lord.

thchris1958

TailWindHome wrote:

https://twitter.com/Digger_libel[/quot




but an old account: 05:11 - 2 févr. 2015 I did not notice " 2015" the first time that I read.

johnboy183

Can someone please give a brief history of Digger and his views? Seen the name crop up from time to time on here but not really aware of what he's been saying over the years. Thanks

No_Ta_Doctor

Well the True Believers on the clinic honestly believe that doping is obvious and well beyond doubt, to the point that anyone questioning whether a rider is doping (or a Sky rider at any rate) is clearly a moron. It's obvious and apparent to anyone with half a brain because... well.. Leinders.

So if that's their starting point, quite obviously they're going to feel pretty hard done by when a libel suit lands on one of them.

As for the guessing game as to who might have dropped the hammer ad put Digger in the pain cave...

Sky's PR is unlikely to be that bad, even if Mrs. Fenton gets carried away. And they've had ample opportunity to get heavy over the last few years.

Cookson similarly isn't much of a candidate for sending the lawyers round, he knows that would be a PR disaster.

Not seen what he's written about Radcliffe or other track and field athletes. They might get shirty as they don't know the first step to admitting guilt, a la Lance, is to sue everybody. I think all cyclists probably know better.

Katusha though, might be something there. Russian strong-man, living in a country where the point of power is to use it, and let everybody know. Yeah, I could see that.

No_Ta_Doctor

johnboy183 wrote:

Can someone please give a brief history of Digger and his views? Seen the name crop up from time to time on here but not really aware of what he's been saying over the years. Thanks

Basically, in Digger's world, everyone dopes, especially Sky, but all those English bastards are too English to believe it, unlike us nice Irish people. Everyone that that works for any cycling organisation, from the UCI to national associations, to drug testing, is corrupt as hell, but especially those English bastards, who have the cheek to go round pretending to be clean.

I think that's about the long and short of it. Paranoid delusion mixed with some good old fashioned anti-English shoulder chip.

johnboy183

Sounds like I've missed out on some fun then! Anyone be recommended who I can follow for similar entertainment?

dabber

I was thinking the same... who is Digger.

So now, if I understand correctly.... he's just somebody that posts his opinions on the interweb based on nothing in particular, with no exclusive knowledge, with no specialist knowledge etc... and gets a lot of attention from others for what reason, who knows? He gets his own thread here because somebody is suing him.

Is that about right? Funny old world.

topper_harley

I'm sure he was having digs at the Rugby, with the six nations starting he might have imploded

Rodrego Hernandez

Armstrong used to like suing people so maybe it's him?

Sky won't sue him. Fran Millar won't sue him.

It'll be some gobby yank who won't see it through.

You'd be surprised at how much truth Digger came out with so if it does get to court it'll be very entertaining for some and very embarrassing for others.

iainf72

Rodrego Hernandez wrote:

You'd be surprised at how much truth Digger came out with so if it does get to court it'll be very entertaining for some and very embarrassing for others.

It's not going to be about if he was "right" one time in twenty.

It'll be about his libellous statement whatever that was.

I thought of him (and others) when listening to this Freakonomics

http://freakonomics.com/podcast/how-to- ... o-podcast/

It's easy to say stuff when there is no cost to being wrong. But now he'd in a position where being wrong has a cost. Interesting times

Rodrego Hernandez

iainf72 wrote:

Rodrego Hernandez wrote:

You'd be surprised at how much truth Digger came out with so if it does get to court it'll be very entertaining for some and very embarrassing for others.

It's not going to be about if he was "right" one time in twenty.

It'll be about his libellous statement whatever that was.

I thought of him (and others) when listening to this Freakonomics

http://freakonomics.com/podcast/how-to- ... o-podcast/

It's easy to say stuff when there is no cost to being wrong. But now he'd in a position where being wrong has a cost. Interesting times

Unless anyone knows what the comment was we're just guessing. He has called out Radcliffe and she's pretty quick to send the lawyers in so possibly something to do with the IAAF and those particular cheats.

orraloon

Dabber wrote:

I was thinking the same... who is Digger.

...

Funny old world.

Remember the good old days, whenever they were, when in the corner of the local pub you would have a Reg or a Cyril spouting all sorts of boxxox to anyone who would listen. You would raise an eyebrow and ignore as he was a fxxxwit.

In these 'enlightened' days of the interweb, Reg can reach Cyril and Jeremy and... Fxxxwits can reach other fxxxwits, winding each other up, getting louder and louder and more and more convinced they are right simply due to mutual acclamation.

Soshul meejah is dead brilliant innit.

joelsim

Rodrego Hernandez wrote:

Armstrong used to like suing people so maybe it's him?

Sky won't sue him. Fran Millar won't sue him.

It'll be some gobby yank who won't see it through.

You'd be surprised at how much truth Digger came out with so if it does get to court it'll be very entertaining for some and very embarrassing for others.

You'd also be surprised by the amount of unfounded rubbish he came out with.

The Clear next, he is just as bad.

iainf72

Rodrego Hernandez wrote:

Unless anyone knows what the comment was we're just guessing. He has called out Radcliffe and she's pretty quick to send the lawyers in so possibly something to do with the IAAF and those particular cheats.

Exactly. But there seems to be a strange belief that people sue for libel when they're trying to hide something. Sure, that can and does happen, but maybe they're just sick of being libelled?

I still can't believe Digger is a teacher. If my kids were taught by someone that unhinged I'd be fairly displeased.

RichN95.

My guess is he won't learn. He'll come back, just avoiding libelling the same person and he will be proclaimed a prophet by his cult-like acolytes.

joelsim

RichN95 wrote:

My guess is he won't learn. He'll come back, just avoiding libelling the same person and he will be proclaimed a prophet by his cult-like acolytes.

I guess it all depends on how much it costs him. Most of the evidence he holds dear isn't evidence.

ddraver

Dabber wrote:

Funny old world.

It is, but cycling is a small world and Pro Cycling even smaller so the nutters are more noticeable and therefore part of the fabric of the conversation

To give him some context, he was a general conspiracy theorist as well, 9/11 Truther, JFK and probably flat earth and chemtrails too...

Macaloon

Brailsford does come in for more than his fair share of unjustified stick on this forum, so it's only natural that the fanboys and girls rush to his defence. Imagine expecting to be taken seriously as a regular Asylum poster... TheHog - hahahaha

e: Digger's a pathetic penniless fantasist. If he's being sued it's for spite, not damages. He's finally pissed-off the wrong person.

iainf72

Macaloon wrote:

e: Digger's a pathetic penniless fantasist. If he's being sued it's for spite, not damages. He's finally pissed-off the wrong person.

Quite. And that's one of those important life lessons he's obviously not learnt yet.

Spite never sleeps.

joelsim

TheHog. Snort.

Telling porkies.

tailwindhome

Dabber wrote:

I was thinking the same... who is Digger.

So now, if I understand correctly.... he's just somebody that posts his opinions on the interweb based on nothing in particular, with no exclusive knowledge, with no specialist knowledge etc... and gets a lot of attention from others for what reason, who knows? He gets his own thread here because somebody is suing him.

Is that about right? Funny old world.

The bit in bold is the key part.

Twitter is a broadcast medium. Followers are listeners. If you've three followers no one gives a monkeys what you tweet. Once you build a following your tweets become relevant, not for their content but for how widely they're distributed.

See McAlpine V Bercow.


I'm only guessing here but it wouldn't surprise me if there was no specific libel action rather a cull by twitter of arseholes with reasonable followings or he's made an allegation against someone outside his normal target zone who've said to hell with that......

"Chat shi t, get banged"

Macaloon

TailWindHome wrote:

Twitter is a broadcast medium. Followers are listeners. If you've three followers no one gives a monkeys what you tweet. Once you build a following your tweets become relevant, not for their content but for how widely they're distributed.

Buy followers - most of his 1000s were fake accounts.

tailwindhome

Macaloon wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

Twitter is a broadcast medium. Followers are listeners. If you've three followers no one gives a monkeys what you tweet. Once you build a following your tweets become relevant, not for their content but for how widely they're distributed.

Buy followers - most of his 1000s were fake accounts.

It t'wasn't libel yer honour, sure I was only talkin' til meself.