Wiggins - could this be a Similar issue as Lance A ?
Discussion
Some Gump said:
JuniorD said:
Bloody good interview with Paul Kimmage re. Wiggins and Sky.
https://cyclingtips.com/2017/03/interview-paul-kim...
One thing that can be said for Kimmage is that he's usually found to be right in the end
It reads to me like a bitter bellend gobbing off. Seems everyone he's ever worked with doesn't want to speak to him. Strange that.https://cyclingtips.com/2017/03/interview-paul-kim...
One thing that can be said for Kimmage is that he's usually found to be right in the end
Not defending sky, but this kimmmage bloke has been on a crusade to chat s
t since before I even started watching. He says he's not there to speculate whilst speculating wildly. He clearly feels rejected by sky and has gone after them like a woman scorned. Where us his vendetta against astana? Bit gutted that the whole of British cycling and sky are now suspect, the sport is still as murky as ever. If sky are all doped to the eyeballs, but often get pasted - what does that say about the rest of the front runners? Sky hire the best from the other dreams because they have the best budget, allegedly fiull them with drugs, then don't win. The whole thing is like Strava drafting a lorry with a tailwind
Rejected by Sky ? He certainly was, they offered him access when they thought they were going to win clean, and were on a crusade telling everyone who would listen the could do it. It then became apparent to them that they couldn't so they withdrew it. Very odd too isn't it ? A team launched in a blaze of clean publicity. Can't imagine why that would annoy him?
And lastly, yes he does sound like a dog with a bone, but perhaps if other "Journalists" started reporting these coincidences then he might not sound so much like a one man band.
epom said:
Some Gump said:
JuniorD said:
Bloody good interview with Paul Kimmage re. Wiggins and Sky.
https://cyclingtips.com/2017/03/interview-paul-kim...
One thing that can be said for Kimmage is that he's usually found to be right in the end
It reads to me like a bitter bellend gobbing off. Seems everyone he's ever worked with doesn't want to speak to him. Strange that.https://cyclingtips.com/2017/03/interview-paul-kim...
One thing that can be said for Kimmage is that he's usually found to be right in the end
Not defending sky, but this kimmmage bloke has been on a crusade to chat s
t since before I even started watching. He says he's not there to speculate whilst speculating wildly. He clearly feels rejected by sky and has gone after them like a woman scorned. Where us his vendetta against astana? Bit gutted that the whole of British cycling and sky are now suspect, the sport is still as murky as ever. If sky are all doped to the eyeballs, but often get pasted - what does that say about the rest of the front runners? Sky hire the best from the other dreams because they have the best budget, allegedly fiull them with drugs, then don't win. The whole thing is like Strava drafting a lorry with a tailwind
Rejected by Sky ? He certainly was, they offered him access when they thought they were going to win clean, and were on a crusade telling everyone who would listen the could do it. It then became apparent to them that they couldn't so they withdrew it. Very odd too isn't it ? A team launched in a blaze of clean publicity. Can't imagine why that would annoy him?
And lastly, yes he does sound like a dog with a bone, but perhaps if other "Journalists" started reporting these coincidences then he might not sound so much like a one man band.
But Paul Kimmage was asked by Team Sky to join them and then the offer was later rescinded/ He's not just stamping his feet because he didn't get an invite on the road trip. Besides, he fell out pretty publicly (well, as far as cycling goes) with David Millar, and who is a director at Team Sky? I'm not surprised at all it was rescinded.
Bitter or not at least he's not like the rest of the sports journalists who just ask vacuous st such as "does winning make you happy?" Most sports journos should hang their heads in shame considering what's going on in world sport at the moment.
Surely if it could be shown that TUE's were obtained when they were not actually required for the reasons stated we might see a few people with bans and stripped of titles? Who knows.
As Kimmage also points out, the peletons silence is deafening on the subject. People may think he comes across as bitter, but whats happening now shows that what he has been saying for years isn't simply sour grapes. People need to wake up, professional sport (not just cycling) is a corrupt and drug fuelled joke most of the time.
Bitter or not at least he's not like the rest of the sports journalists who just ask vacuous s
t such as "does winning make you happy?" Most sports journos should hang their heads in shame considering what's going on in world sport at the moment.Surely if it could be shown that TUE's were obtained when they were not actually required for the reasons stated we might see a few people with bans and stripped of titles? Who knows.
As Kimmage also points out, the peletons silence is deafening on the subject. People may think he comes across as bitter, but whats happening now shows that what he has been saying for years isn't simply sour grapes. People need to wake up, professional sport (not just cycling) is a corrupt and drug fuelled joke most of the time.
Thing is we're now looking at the benefit of hindsight.
Kimmage has made so many accusations, for so long that now he gets to go "AHA!!!one1!! I was right! Where are the detractors now?!"
If he was the Michael Burke hard hitting journo of the Peleton, I'd be on his side. Instead, he says "I'm not speculating" then speculates. He's totally all in against sky, but has never (that I've read) had a go at teams caught cheating. If Sky are dirty (which it looks like they are) then fk them and the horse thy ride on - just like Astana, US postal, whoever else is in that camp.
Instead, he uses a shotgun approach of slinging a lot of st then claiming credibility when some sticks. In that article, literally everyone he's ever worked with doesn't want to work with him again, often to the point of not even taking a call. What does that tell you? Bloke is a nutter!
Kimmage has made so many accusations, for so long that now he gets to go "AHA!!!one1!! I was right! Where are the detractors now?!"
If he was the Michael Burke hard hitting journo of the Peleton, I'd be on his side. Instead, he says "I'm not speculating" then speculates. He's totally all in against sky, but has never (that I've read) had a go at teams caught cheating. If Sky are dirty (which it looks like they are) then f
k them and the horse thy ride on - just like Astana, US postal, whoever else is in that camp. Instead, he uses a shotgun approach of slinging a lot of s
t then claiming credibility when some sticks. In that article, literally everyone he's ever worked with doesn't want to work with him again, often to the point of not even taking a call. What does that tell you? Bloke is a nutter!Sky have made a bed with their endless harping on about marginal gains, this that and the other, then the riders have too, Wiggins especially has contradicted himself and been a total hypocrite on numerous occasions. This all serves to make it a bit sweeter for Kimmage and the like when it comes crashing down.
That's why he's all in against them I should think...butter wouldn't melt, well actually it has, and the pan is smoking...
That's why he's all in against them I should think...butter wouldn't melt, well actually it has, and the pan is smoking...
Rich_W said:
I've never really warmed to him, but I suspect that Froome is playing it straight.
Photos and anecdotal things don't look good for the alien. That's what my wife calls him. The whole "veins came" bit is circumstantially very bad indeed. The bit I'm mainly focussed on is this: That several teams want nothing whatsoever to do with you doesn't make them dirty, even if 1 comes out as dirty. it makes you a bellend because no-one in your network wants to work with you, because you're horrible to be around. Sky may well be dirty, but that doesn't make Kimmmage the messiah.
In news terms, it'd be like Ian Hislop being right that a peer had his thing in a him, then applying it to all of Private Eye's accusations over the years. Sure, they've won some, but they have lost as well. Being right 30% of the time dosen't make the you oracle, when being the oracle destroys careers. This is doubly so if e.g the Eye picks a stance to go over 1 party over another. Kimmage is gunning for town against sky (and if they are wrong then they should hang for it), but is silent on the known cheating of Astana. He's not anti- cheat, he's anti-Sky, and it all started when they told him he wasn't welcome.
Granfondo said:
Looks like Sky warned the riders to tweet support for Brailsford or risk the team folding but Froome stays silent!
Masterstroke from Froome.He is likely the only one really who is big enough to get the top paying job in another team. It matters less to him than it will the others.
neilr said:
Bitter or not at least he's not like the rest of the sports journalists who just ask vacuous st such as "does winning make you happy?" Most sports journos should hang their heads in shame considering what's going on in world sport at the moment.
t such as "does winning make you happy?" Most sports journos should hang their heads in shame considering what's going on in world sport at the moment.Kimmage is a journalist, whereas most other "journalists" are merely reporters. I think even David Walsh has lost credibility with is fall in to the bosom of Team Sky.
It's people like Kimmage who make a difference.
Seems Sky are screwed here no matter what they do.
Every report on them is prefaced by "It must be said that there is absolutely no evidence of wrongdoing" followed by lots of speculation about all the wrongdoing.
Ultimately you can't prove a negative, so what could they ever do to remove this shadow over them?
st like this makes it hard to be a fan of cycling.
Every report on them is prefaced by "It must be said that there is absolutely no evidence of wrongdoing" followed by lots of speculation about all the wrongdoing.
Ultimately you can't prove a negative, so what could they ever do to remove this shadow over them?
s
t like this makes it hard to be a fan of cycling.
epom said:
Is that ad suggesting he didn't actually cycle the bike at all himself ?
Advertising is a funny business. Do the marketing team really think that people will go and buy a Superb because Wiggins is standing next to it? I wonder how many sales that actually generates?What does the strapline mean as well? "Make your own choices..." when in a cycling team you do exactly what you are told or get the boot...
Some Gump said:
Rich_W said:
I've never really warmed to him, but I suspect that Froome is playing it straight.
Photos and anecdotal things don't look good for the alien. That's what my wife calls him. The whole "veins came" bit is circumstantially very bad indeed. The bit I'm mainly focussed on is this: That several teams want nothing whatsoever to do with you doesn't make them dirty, even if 1 comes out as dirty. it makes you a bellend because no-one in your network wants to work with you, because you're horrible to be around. Sky may well be dirty, but that doesn't make Kimmmage the messiah.
In news terms, it'd be like Ian Hislop being right that a peer had his thing in a him, then applying it to all of Private Eye's accusations over the years. Sure, they've won some, but they have lost as well. Being right 30% of the time dosen't make the you oracle, when being the oracle destroys careers. This is doubly so if e.g the Eye picks a stance to go over 1 party over another. Kimmage is gunning for town against sky (and if they are wrong then they should hang for it), but is silent on the known cheating of Astana. He's not anti- cheat, he's anti-Sky, and it all started when they told him he wasn't welcome.
Kimmage has, post Armstrong, become the witch finder general. Call many a cheat and when it comes true bask in the "glory" And as you rightly say he focuses far too much of his time on Sky.
Not that they are beyond investigation. I believed for a good few years, I believed in Wiggins. But this TUE s
te has irritated a lot.But because he NEVER questions anyone else. Had Yates ridden for Sky you can guess how he would have taken the Drs mistake
Wada makes move to ban controversial drug used by Bradley Wiggins
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/mar/08/wada...
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/mar/08/wada...
Interesting.
I must admit that this saga has changed my perspective on what Wiggins and Sky have achieved.
It's a damn shame really as I've followed the sport for years. Sick of seeing it being dragged through the gutter in so many ways.
It's pretty obvious that it's very, very difficult to do anything honestly and cleanly in this sport. It's probably time to just let the dopers get on with it. Let's stop pretending that this sport can be clean.
I must admit that this saga has changed my perspective on what Wiggins and Sky have achieved.
It's a damn shame really as I've followed the sport for years. Sick of seeing it being dragged through the gutter in so many ways.
It's pretty obvious that it's very, very difficult to do anything honestly and cleanly in this sport. It's probably time to just let the dopers get on with it. Let's stop pretending that this sport can be clean.
Gassing Station | Sports | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff