collapse


Capt_Cavman

  • Road Captain
  • Country: jp
  • Posts: 1917
  • Liked: 1285
Re: Sky
« Reply #360 on: October 15, 2012, 11:04 »
What can they say apart from that they cocked up monumentally?

Are we or can we even try to expect credibility from this? I certainly don't see any from Sky for a while, or for that matter most teams.
Actually it is more that subsequent events caught them out.

The time line is...

2009 - Leinders leaves Rabobank

2010 Vuelta - Soigneur dies and rest of team suffering in the heat and generally unhappy with medical care. Leinders signed 'in extremis', so thorough checking very unlikely to have happened. The most likely reasons for hiring him are: 1) He was available, 2) He had a lot of experience at the highest level, 3) He, presumably like all Dutch I've ever met, spoke excellent English, 4) Personal testimony from riders who had worked with him at Rabobank.

2012 Giro - The story comes out that Rabobank management knew about and sanctioned doping while Leinders was employed by them.

2012 post season USADA affidavits appear to show that some Rabobank medical staff had been active in managing doping programmes.


Personally, I can't believe that if you have a cunning plan to achieve world domination, you employ the pivotal figure during the Vuelta when it just so happens that your team's demanding a change of medical staff.

Unless anyone can demonstrate that negotiation took place outside the time frame of the Vuelta, his employment was a reaction to circumstance and not pre-planned. If it's not pre-planned, then it's harder to argue that he was brought in in order to run some USPostal type team doping policy.

So what should Sky have done?

a) Not replaced the team doctor? presumably, they didn't take this decision without a pressing need to. Although they probably wish they hadn't.

b) Got rid of Leinders the moment they actually did some checking on his past, assuming they ever did.

c) Got rid of Leinders the moment the Rabobank story broke.

For b&c it is an issue of public reputational damage against cycling reputational damage. With Barry, Possoni and now Leinders, Sky have shown a tendency not to make a big show of sacking somebody but to ease them out of the picture until they can find somewhere else or retire. This will make Sky seen as 'good' employers and make their targets more likely to work for them. In the Leinders case I wouldn't be surprised if the real reason for releasing him was that Leinders' reputational damage through his association with Sky was becoming a big problem for Leinders' future employment prospects.
  • ReplyReply
  • « Last Edit: October 15, 2012, 11:16 by Capt_Cavman »

     

    * Dark Side Chatbox

    Sorry, this shoutbox does not exist.

    Recent Posts

    Re: Race news 2020: Rumours , Dates, Parcours , Wildcards by LukasCPH
    [January 24, 2020, 20:30]


    Re: [2.Pro] Vuelta a San Juan by Joelsim
    [January 24, 2020, 19:45]


    Re: [2.Pro] Vuelta a San Juan by search
    [January 24, 2020, 19:41]


    Re: Mens' transfers and Rumors 2019-20 by Joelsim
    [January 24, 2020, 18:59]


    Re: Where to watch Cycling on TV 2020 by Joelsim
    [January 24, 2020, 18:53]


    Re: [2.Pro] Vuelta a San Juan by Joelsim
    [January 24, 2020, 18:47]



    Top
    Back to top