Poll-Brailsford

[oldpotatoe]

Have no idea how to set one up but I think Brailsford is not long for this world, to stay at team Sky..

Again, thanks to Cyclingtips.

https://cyclingtips.com/2016/12/commentary-team-sky-has-a-history-of-credibility-issues-with-dave-brailsford-at-centre-stage

[fignon's barber]

Uuhh,oohh.....Castelli has marked down Team Sky gear by 75%:rolleyes:


Seriously, with regard to professional cycling, I like bikes and the institution of the races. It's the people that suck.

[soulspinner]

if its too good to be true....

[merckx]

OP, my answers to your poll:

yes
yes
and yes

[christian]

Look, I think Sky is dirty, dirty, dirty. And I thought (and documented here, and was proven right) that USPS/Discovery/Lance was dirty, dirty, dirty. And well, I think we all remember Festina.

But the fact is, the rules of the game haven't ever changed. If you want to win - you must push the doping envelope and try for plausible deniability. It's fantastical to believe that Brailsford can be the best team manager, totally committed to doping prevention, and a truth-telling boy scout. At best, he's no worse than the rest and about 20% less hypocritical than Vaughters. At worst, he's just Stapleton/Bruyneel 2.0. My guess is that version 2.0 just includes more plausible deniability as a feature.

[merckx]

^^^all of this^^^

[bobswire]

http://i64.tinypic.com/250lbuo.jpg

After all, "these guys are professionals"!

[FlashUNC]

https://annamirer.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/renault.gif

[PQJ]

If Sky get rid of Brailsford, don't they risk having a loose cannon out there over which they have zero control? Seems to me they are better off locking him up tight, long term.
Sky is clean like I'm a billionaire.

[MattTuck]

Remember when TUE used to be short for Tuesday?

Ahhhh, the good old days.


My general feeling is that you're going to have people doping and/or pushing right up to the boundary of what is considered doping. The best you can do (as a governing body) is to try to keep the controls and limits such that the punishments for violations are strict, and the benefits from the crimes are limited, such that you make people do the cost/benefit analysis and decide that it isn't worth it.

The objective function isn't to stop doping, it's to have more fair competitions. If that makes any sense.

[guido]

Its nice to see the arrogant ones fall, but sad when they take the credibility of rest of the sport with them... Another example of when it is too good to be true it probably is.

[Black Dog]

Its nice to see the arrogant ones fall, but sad when they take the credibility rest of the sport with them... Another example of when it is too good to be true it probably is.

:rolleyes:

[fiamme red]

Have no idea how to set one up...http://forums.thepaceline.net/faq.php?faq=vb3_reading_posting#faq_vb3_polls

[72gmc]

He's just dancing until the right people can put enough marginal gains in offshore accounts ...

[TheEnglish]

I will always question athletes that can ride The Tour, crush the mountains, crush the TT, and never have a bad day. That's the lesson I learned from Tyler Hamilton. Dope allows athletes to never have a bad day and be competitive in disciplines their physiology wouldn't otherwise support. Froome and Wiggins are examples of this. Froome doesn't seem to crack ever (at least at The Tour... remind you of anyone?) and Wiggins' victory came out of nowhere, then he ducked out at the right time. Sky is just too strong as an overall team and too consistent to not be dirty.

[Lovetoclimb]

That article on Cycling Tips is rather damning. If that evidence is true he cannot be long for the sport.

[Red Tornado]

Arrrrrrgh!! Will it never end?
Never really cared for Brailsford. He always came off to me as arrogant and aloof, and sometimes even a bit condescending. That has nothing to do with the issue at hand, just the vibe I picked up from him.
If he/Sky really did have something to hide, I hope they pay for it big time. If not, let him be. Hopefully the "process" will work like it's supposed to.

[Joxster]

Playing devils advocate...........

What makes you think Sky are dirty?

Bending the rules has been done for the last 60yrs, how do you interpret those rules to suit?

[FlashUNC]

Playing devils advocate...........

What makes you think Sky are dirty?

Bending the rules has been done for the last 60yrs, how do you interpret those rules to suit?

Cuz basically every team that's won at a high level consistently over the last four decades has been?

At a certain point surprise just indicates naivete.