# The pro peleton needs Wiggins.



## elgee (26 Jul 2014)

I'm happy to be shot down in flames but sport needs characters like Wiggo. Moto GP would not be anywhere near as successful around the World as a spectator sport without Rossi. Sadly, Mr Brailsford failed to recognise this and the Sky team popularity has suffered as a consequence, at least in this household.

We need Wiggins in the peleton because he is British, is a proven winner of major track & road, has a down-to-earth attitude and is a bit of a rebel to boot!

Team selection should not be based solely on the most recent results alone. That ignores factors like a 'winning temperament' , not to mention the luck or bad luck that can beset a team at any moment. Personally, I believe that had Wiggins and Froome been selected together we would still be watching the Tour with a British rider fighting for the win.

I'll duck now in expectation of the usual barrage of put-downs from people who a more 'qualified' to provide an opinion!


----------



## Flying_Monkey (26 Jul 2014)

What we don't need is another thread on this subject - you do know there's already been several?


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (26 Jul 2014)

Flying_Monkey said:


> What we don't need is another thread on this subject - you do know there's already been several?



I've already asked for it to be merged with one of the many other threads. Great to see new members in Pro Race, maybe it's enthusiasm that results in not looking before starting a thread.


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (26 Jul 2014)

User said:


> Are you on happy pills?



I'm always deliriously happy


----------



## elgee (26 Jul 2014)

So what is wrong with starting a new one to focus people's thoughts with a specific title? Why do you assume that I have not bothered reading the threads? I have and as it happens I could not find a debate specifically devoted to this contentious issue. Perhaps you could direct me. Oh, and I would have thought that the aim of a forum was to attract constructive debate, not tirelessly look for idiots who can' t be bothered searching through endless posts to make sure they are not cluttering the forum's pages with repeated content.perhaps I have missed something but I thought it was a subject worth airing for those that missed it first time around?


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (26 Jul 2014)

elgee said:


> So what is wrong with starting a new one to focus people's thoughts with a specific title? Why do you assume that I have not bothered reading the threads? I have and as it happens I could not find a debate specifically devoted to this contentious issue. Perhaps you could direct me. Oh, and I would have thought that the aim of a forum was to attract constructive debate, not tirelessly look for idiots who can' t be bothered searching through endless posts to make sure they are not cluttering the forum's pages with repeated content.perhaps I have missed something but I thought it was a subject worth airing for those that missed it first time around?



OK I was giving you the benefit of the doubt, you a clearly a nobber.


----------



## elgee (26 Jul 2014)

User said:


> Why?


Read the rest of my reasoning and not just an isolated thought!


----------



## Crackle (26 Jul 2014)

elgee said:


> So what is wrong with starting a new one to focus people's thoughts with a specific title? Why do you assume that I have not bothered reading the threads? I have and as it happens I could not find a debate specifically devoted to this contentious issue. Perhaps you could direct me. Oh, and I would have thought that the aim of a forum was to attract constructive debate, not tirelessly look for idiots who can' t be bothered searching through endless posts to make sure they are not cluttering the forum's pages with repeated content.perhaps I have missed something but I thought it was a subject worth airing for those that missed it first time around?


It's been quite well covered in the Sky Team thread.


----------



## Flick of the Elbow (26 Jul 2014)

Bradley who ?

Forgotten already.


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (26 Jul 2014)

Here is a list which proves the OP is wrong:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/teams


----------



## elgee (26 Jul 2014)

Crackle said:


> It's been quite well covered in the Sky Team thread.


Thank you. At least yours is a civilised reply and not personal attack! I have
searched several threads but hadn't found anything that answered my question. Unfortunately, forum's are a magnet for narrow-minded bigots who feel that they are always right - not that I'm implying that there are any of those on this forum, of course. Don't forget that Brailsford and the Sky team have encouraged the idea that it is a 'British' team. Who better to be in that team than, arguably, the most successful of British cyclists?


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (26 Jul 2014)

The previous replies were civilised, with no personal attacks (I called you a nobber after my initial reply, which I thought was rather good of me). You seem rather "prickly", and your OP was rather antagonistic where it stated "I'll duck now in expectation of the usual barrage of put-downs from people who a more 'qualified' to provide an opinion". 

I've never seen you post in Pro Race before (you might have done but I'd certainly say you are not a regular) so I doubt you are in a position to know what the "usual position" is; in fact, the "usual position" is that newcomers are welcomed unless they are quite clearly trolls or set out to cause a stir or think they are the authority on everything and not open to challenge. I'm not sure which category you fall into but you are certainly a bit of a twit for not being able to find a current thread where you comment my have been relevant.


----------



## tigger (26 Jul 2014)

I used to like Wiggo, now I think he's a bit of a twat. His wife said something similar in the Road to Glory documentary, so I can't be wrong. I'd still like to see him on the road if he can dedicate to training and tune his attitude down a couple of notches. But no, the pro peloton doesn't NEED him as there are plenty of better riders than him now.


----------



## roadrash (26 Jul 2014)

she was asked what is he really like and replied

bradley the husband is fantastic

bradley the cyclist is a bit of a tw@t


----------



## elgee (26 Jul 2014)

Marmion said:


> The previous replies were civilised, with no personal attacks (I called you a nobber after my initial reply, which I thought was rather good of me). You seem rather "prickly", and your OP was rather antagonistic where it stated "I'll duck now in expectation of the usual barrage of put-downs from people who a more 'qualified' to provide an opinion".
> 
> I've never seen you post in Pro Race before (you might have done but I'd certainly say you are not a regular) so I doubt you are in a position to know what the "usual position" is; in fact, the "usual position" is that newcomers are welcomed unless they are quite clearly trolls or set out to cause a stir or think they are the authority on everything and not open to challenge. I'm not sure which category you fall into but you are certainly a bit of a twit for not being able to find a current thread where you comment my have been relevant.


I am new. I am an enthusiast. I do have an opinion. I do search but, since I have not followed all the threads for long enough to know my way around I decided to take a leap of faith. I don't think I am a 'nobber' , whatever you mean by that, nor am I a 'troll'. I am, however, a curious individual who enjoys constructive bebate. I would be interested in your perspective on the points I have made.


----------



## Shaun (26 Jul 2014)

Let's not get personal please. If you want to engage with elgee on his OP then please do so, otherwise let the thread to run its natural course.

Thanks,
Shaun


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (26 Jul 2014)

Fair enough boss


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (26 Jul 2014)

elgee said:


> I am new. I am an enthusiast. I do have an opinion. I do search but, since I have not followed all the threads for long enough to know my way around I decided to take a leap of faith. I don't think I am a 'nobber' , whatever you mean by that, nor am I a 'troll'. I am, however, a curious individual who enjoys constructive bebate. I would be interested in your perspective on the points I have made.



OK, fair enough. My apologies.


----------



## elgee (26 Jul 2014)

Marmion said:


> OK, fair enough. My apologies.


No probs. I accept that there are going to be a range of views scanning the whole spectrum. My point is that champions are often single-minded and not always people who garner the most sympathy because of their actions. However, they are winners - Sky purports to be British - Wiggins has a track record in big events - people ride themselves into events like the Tour despite lack of fitness initially - there are excellent riders but Wiggins is British. Are we saying that we would let personalities stand in the way of wanting a homegrown winner?


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (26 Jul 2014)

I think Wiggins is one of the best riders in the world - as you'd have seen if you'd found the other threads  - but the pro peloton do not "need" him. Team Sky may have pitched themselves as a British team, but they are not. If you look at the team composition then you will see they are very much an international bunch; they may have set out to be British but the reality is very much different - my view is that they maintain the "britishness" in a colonial manner, to try to keep johnny foreigner in line. Again, I have mentioned this on other threads, but I think the end is nigh for Sky, and I am not sure whether the legacy will be good or bad; maybe it will be good because it will turn out so bad. In my view, they have ruined the progression of many riders for the sole purpose of promoting Sir Dave Bloody Brailsford's very narrowly focused ideas. He was lauded as the great saviour of British Cycling due to success on the track yet his approach of focussing on only those who met the "numbers" resulted in many promising riders leaving the sport far too early. And he can't call a race worth a damn. 

But going back to Bradley Wiggins; I reckon he rocks. His Tour win was one of the most significant events in recent years. but probably not for the reasons that Brailsford or the mainstream media think. But the pro peloton do not need him.


----------



## 400bhp (26 Jul 2014)

Marmion said:


> ... He was lauded as the great saviour of British Cycling due to success on the track yet his approach of focussing on only those who met the "numbers"



I was thinking of what to post in this thread.

I watched the Chris Hoy story earlier in the week. I half watch things these days, but a couple of words caught my attention.

Hoy said something like "it's all about the numbers" when he was looking to earn his place in the 2012 Olympic Team. It is pretty clear to me following the omission of Wiggins from the Tour this year (and I agree Marmion) that Sky are a one trick pony on the road. They only see numbers and that's it.

I don't think Sky arer finished though. Too much money being thrown their way. They will appoint some good tacticians and they will learn from their mistakes.

Wgere this leaves Wiggins - he should have quit immediately he learned he wasn't in the Tour team. The fact he didn't possibly speaks more, in that he isn't that bothered about riding road at the moment (I say at the moment because he blows hot and cold). He would so easily get another ride for a top team.


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (26 Jul 2014)

400bhp said:


> I don't think Sky arer finished though. Too much money being thrown their way. They will appoint some good tacticians and they will learn from their mistakes.



Not unless they change their "no dopers" policy - they had Yates, they had Rogers. They got rid of both. Both of them, despite their past, could have helped Sky mature as a team. Yates could call a race. Unrepentant dopers should not be involved in the pro game; if people acknowledge that they made the wrong choices and evidence a commitment to change then I'm all for them being part of the change - then again, Brailsford said "no TUE's" yet he now allows them and Tramadol. And who knows what else; maybe it's just detectable doping he does not like.


----------



## elgee (26 Jul 2014)

Good points from both posts. I pretty much agree with what has been said. Wiggins would be much better off on a team that values him, like Cav has managed to do. Team politics must really p..s off true competitors.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (26 Jul 2014)

Tramadol, as I understand it, is controlled not prohibited. And TUEs, like ''controlled'' drugs/medications, would need a highly esteemed lawyer/expert in medicine and employment law to legislate against. For me, every day is a TUEsday because of a medical problem but it's really not a sackable offence.

As for the Yates, there might eventually be a replacement pair of Yates in the Sky team.


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (26 Jul 2014)

elgee said:


> Good points from both posts. I pretty much agree with what has been said. Wiggins would be much better off on a team that values him, like Cav has managed to do. Team politics must really p..s off true competitors.



OK, I'll admit I got it wrong earlier re this thread, as there is not one on this subject. And I'm glad the mods ignored me (as usual) and did not amalgamate into other threads.

Team "politics" are and always have been part of pro cycling. Armstrong was poisonous at a personal level. I reckon Sky are poisonous at a team level.


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (26 Jul 2014)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> Tramadol, as I understand it, is controlled not prohibited. And TUEs, like ''controlled'' drugs/medications, would need a highly esteemed lawyer/expert in medicine and employment law to legislate against. For me, every day is a TUEsday because of a medical problem but it's really not a sackable offence.
> 
> As for the Yates, there might eventually be a replacement pair of Yates in the Sky team.



True, but Sir Dave seems to have changed his tune. I reckon he is more "corporate" than USPS/Discovery and have concerns.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (26 Jul 2014)

Marmion said:


> True, but Sir Dave seems to have changed his tune. I reckon he is more "corporate" than USPS/Discovery and have concerns.


Corporate certainly. It's a kind of business version of success he seeks. That said, he's quite good at it.


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (27 Jul 2014)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> Corporate certainly. It's a kind of business version of success he seeks. That said, he's quite good at it.



I'm not sure he is. He has "delivered" on a very narrow focus. And been found wanting on the majority of pro cycling. And ruined many riders.


----------



## Dogtrousers (27 Jul 2014)

I'm a Wiggins fan but ... everything for BW's win in 2012 was at full stretch: He seemed to have put almost more into his training, mentally and physically, than he could stand; events conspired to his advantage: the TT heavy parcours, the personnel for Sky's race suffocation tactics, the lack of Bertie, and he just made it. He's now nearer the end of his career than the start, and the planets won't align that way for him again.

I don't think the sport needs any one individual, especially not one in the twilight of his career. It needs the current crop of youngsters to come good and not to turn out to be dirty.


----------



## montage (27 Jul 2014)

Marmion said:


> And he can't call a race worth a damn..



He actually sleeps in the back of the bus during the majority of stages.

True story


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (27 Jul 2014)

montage said:


> He actually sleeps in the back of the bus during the majority of stages.
> 
> True story



That makes sense. He'd be no use if he was awake.


----------



## Mattonsea (27 Jul 2014)

Marmion said:


> The previous replies were civilised, with no personal attacks (I called you a nobber after my initial reply, which I thought was rather good of me). You seem rather "prickly", and your OP was rather antagonistic where it stated "I'll duck now in expectation of the usual barrage of put-downs from people who a more 'qualified' to provide an opinion".
> 
> I've never seen you post in Pro Race before (you might have done but I'd certainly say you are not a regular) so I doubt you are in a position to know what the "usual position" is; in fact, the "usual position" is that newcomers are welcomed unless they are quite clearly trolls or set out to cause a stir or think they are the authority on everything and not open to challenge. I'm not sure which category you fall into but you are certainly a bit of a twit for not being able to find a current thread where you comment my have been relevant.


Oh sorry I didn't realize you started CC, so your opinions are more valid than a new member. Its a good post so let it run !!


----------



## Crackle (27 Jul 2014)

Sky's defeciencies are being painfully exposed and I do wonder if they have any tactical nouse in the team. It was a citicism I first read in Robert Millr's book. Recently reading Yates's book, he describes riding a stage in advance and planning the exact attack point, that as a DS he's thinking 5 days ahead, I wonder if that's still happening. He also said Brailsford often stays in the bus because he gets frustrated in the car not being able to see what's happening.

How many promising riders have not progressed with Sky, how many have been passed over. EBH, Lopez, the Yates twins plus others. Wiggins and Kennaugh not in this team, Cavendish's treatment. I can't think of many other teams who seem to foul things up so much.


----------



## 400bhp (27 Jul 2014)

Crackle said:


> Sky's defeciencies are being painfully exposed and I do wonder if they have any tactical nouse in the team. It was a citicism I first read in Robert Millr's book. Recently reading Yates's book, he describes riding a stage in advance and planning the exact attack point, that as a DS he's thinking 5 days ahead, I wonder if that's still happening. He also said Brailsford often stays in the bus because he gets frustrated in the car not being able to see what's happening.
> 
> How many promising riders have not progressed with Sky, how many have been passed over. EBH, Lopez, the Yates twins plus others. Wiggins and Kennaugh not in this team, Cavendish's treatment. I can't think of many other teams who seem to foul things up so much.



But (in their eyes) it's all about the win, not the individual. So they just treat everyone as pawns. It's a "team" set up and run like a corporation. I'm not as blunt as Marmion and they will survive but he has made some good points. They have money to throw at it so they don't care about "casualties".

But this is also their weakness. I reckon Nibali would have beaten Froome anyway at this year's tour. His tactics were fantastic and they [Astana] had clearly decided to attack when they weren't supposed to attack. Brilliant.

If we look at risk vs reward, they try and remove one aspect of the internal risk (lets call it alpha risk), be that having a team of individuals that have the "numbers", such that one can replace another in the Sky train. What they hadn't covered is the beta risk, i.e. the risk that their top rider exits the tour early. Now for most teams, they cover the beta risk to some extent, but with Sky this is one area where they could have covered it almost in full, i.e. because of their money they could put in Wiggins.

Another aspect is the fear factor on the other competitors when a big name/former world champion/TDF winner is in the team. It puts doubt in other cyclists minds. Sky had the opportunity to use this but didn't. Look at the effect that Jason Kenny's Olympic champion had on the sprints yesterday in the Commonwealth sprint. He isn't in form but could progress to some extent because of his status.


----------



## Flick of the Elbow (27 Jul 2014)

^ That's all very well if Wiggins could be relied upon to play the loyal team mate whilst Plan A is in operation. But that's the problem, he's too much of a prima donna for that to work.


----------



## AndyRM (27 Jul 2014)

I've been thinking about the criticism of Wiggins as a prima donna with a massive ego quite a lot recently.

The way I see it, he has been built up to have that ruthless, arrogant streak by Dave Brailsford. To be dropped from the team the way he has been is sure to cause bitterness and resentment. Coupled with the media furore around Wiggins/Froome I think that a person who has spoken candidly about mental health issues is obviously having a hard time.

He is undoubtedly a hugely talented cyclist and will always have my respect. Personally though, I think he is quite a fragile character, which isn't always considered.


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (27 Jul 2014)

Mattonsea said:


> Oh sorry I didn't realize you started CC, so your opinions are more valid than a new member. Its a good post so let it run !!



I didn't realise you only read part of threads before replying; if you had continued to read the thread beyond that post then you'd have seen I admit I got it wrong. But thanks for your contribution. As always.


----------



## 400bhp (27 Jul 2014)

Flick of the Elbow said:


> ^ That's all very well if Wiggins could be relied upon to play the loyal team mate whilst Plan A is in operation. But that's the problem, he's too much of a prima donna for that to work.



I see where you are coming from. If that's the case what the hell are Sky's plans for him? To arse around on the track and bugger off to California once a year.

I don't buy it.


----------



## raindog (27 Jul 2014)

Crackle said:


> Sky's defeciencies are being painfully exposed


Indeed, and I think the fact that Porte was not only included in the squad, but was designated team leader when Froome crashed out, is far more interesting than Brad not being included.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/porte-says-sky-has-taken-anabsolute-kicking-at-tour-de-france


----------



## Mattonsea (27 Jul 2014)

Marmion said:


> I didn't realise you only read part of threads before replying; if you had continued to read the thread beyond that post then you'd have seen I admit I got it wrong. But thanks for your contribution. As always.


No problem anytime


----------



## elgee (27 Jul 2014)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> Corporate certainly. It's a kind of business version of success he seeks. That said, he's quite good at it.





400bhp said:


> But (in their eyes) it's all about the win, not the individual. So they just treat everyone as pawns. It's a "team" set up and run like a corporation. I'm not as blunt as Marmion and they will survive but he has made some good points. They have money to throw at it so they don't care about "casualties".
> 
> But this is also their weakness. I reckon Nibali would have beaten Froome anyway at this year's tour. His tactics were fantastic and they [Astana] had clearly decided to attack when they weren't supposed to attack. Brilliant.
> 
> ...


A good argument. I think my reason for posting initially was to see if I was missing something underpinning the decision to leave Wiggins out. At the end of the day he is a winner with all the baggage that goes with that - we don't have to think too hard to come up with a list of champions in all disciplines who have generated a range of opposing sentiments - the thing they all share though is a will to win even in the most adverse circumstances. Personally, I think his inclusion in the team would have provided an exciting edge. Who knows what would have happened but my guess is that Sky would have had somebody on the podium. His future surely lies with another team run by people with nounce and a modicum of loyalty (perhaps a British trait rather than a corporate one).


----------



## AndyRM (27 Jul 2014)

elgee said:


> A good argument. I think my reason for posting initially was to see if I was missing something underpinning the decision to leave Wiggins out. At the end of the day he is a winner with all the baggage that goes with that - we don't have to think too hard to come up with a list of champions in all disciplines who have generated a range of opposing sentiments - the thing they all share though is a will to win even in the most adverse circumstances. Personally, I think his inclusion in the team would have provided an exciting edge. Who knows what would have happened but my guess is that Sky would have had somebody on the podium. His future surely lies with another team run by people with nounce and a modicum of loyalty (perhaps a British trait rather than a corporate one).



I agree with all of that, but not your brackets.

I may be misreading your post, but for me the idea of loyalty in professional sports is nonsense.


----------



## elgee (27 Jul 2014)

AndyRM said:


> I agree with all of that, but not your brackets.
> 
> I may be misreading your post, but for me the idea of loyalty in professional sports is nonsense.


I agree but to me loyalty, not blind or irrational,
includes the proviso that an athlete who has a proven track record has the wherewithal to come good on the day. Over the years there have been many top athletes who were not selected because they had not peaked when selection trials were held. Maybe I'm wrong but to me it pays to look at the bigger picture and stay loyal to people who have proved themselves over the long-term. Hope this clarifies my post.


----------



## 400bhp (27 Jul 2014)

Just listening to lemond on eurosport, speaking to vinokourov about signing new riders.

"I want to see froome, nibali, contador, wiggins at the tour de france"...


----------



## suzeworld (27 Jul 2014)

I've said it before and will say it again, wiggo should have been in the team for the tour this year. 
I do not really buy this prima donna thing, and what I see of froome makes me think he's the one with the attitude problem between them. But what can we really know from the outside, and reading partial / biased accounts?

As for whether the peleton needs him? Probably not. Yes, he's a character and I like him lots, but there are other characters in the sport and life goes on .. You know summed up in this: "The king is dead, long live the King"


----------



## HF2300 (27 Jul 2014)

Brailsford's quoted in the Guardian yesterday as saying they'll support Wiggins' attempt on the classics, and also would be interested in the one hour record, provided the deal works for both sides. He also says _'...it's up to us to support him and give him what he needs...'

_


----------



## elgee (27 Jul 2014)

400bhp said:


> Just listening to lemond on eurosport, speaking to vinokourov about signing new riders.
> 
> "I want to see froome, nibali, contador, wiggins at the tour de france"...


This is why I said the peleton needs him, not in the sense of there not being talent in it already, but in the sense of ramping up the competition and bringing more fans to the sport (that's the 'character' bit, like Rossi has done in Moto GP). Look what's happened in Formula 1 this season - cars actually overtaking each other and enough top drivers to ensure close racing (not withstanding Mercedes dominance) - you can't have enough competition in the peleton, surely? That still leaves plenty of room for the young pretenders, who can watch and learn from the older pros, as they learn their trade and eventually take their places.


----------



## John the Monkey (28 Jul 2014)

elgee said:


> This is why I said the peleton needs him, not in the sense of there not being talent in it already, but in the sense of ramping up the competition and bringing more fans to the sport (that's the 'character' bit, like Rossi has done in Moto GP).


I don't know this Rossi fellow, but I found Wiggins' mod stylings, surly outbursts &c a bit tedious, tbh. Shouldn't it be about the racing?

Admittedly, it's about Cricket, but I think this Ed Smith piece is interesting on the thin line "difficult" characters walk within teams;



> When mavericks slide from outright brilliance to mere high competence they find patience runs out alarmingly quickly. There is a lot of high competence around. It is replaceable. Not so genuine brilliance.



http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/745367.html


----------



## elgee (28 Jul 2014)

John the Monkey said:


> I don't know this Rossi fellow, but I found Wiggins' mod stylings, surly outbursts &c a bit tedious, tbh. Shouldn't it be about the racing?
> 
> Admittedly, it's about Cricket, but I think this Ed Smith piece is interesting on the thin line "difficult" characters walk within teams;
> 
> ...


I agree, it should be about racing but realistically, it also has to be about broadening the fan base to a wider mass market with attendant media coverage and better sponsorship deals. It's either that, and accept all the negatives that go with the intense pressures put on professional athletes, or go back to the grudging tolerance of other road users who remain ignorant of the sport and resent the inconvenience caused by club toad races. It's about time UK cycle sport had the prestige it enjoys on the continent. Unfortunately, that brings the down sides as well, including over-bloated egos and demands for ever higher rewards etc. As I see it, popularising the sport has many more up-sides than down, not least of which would be a greater understanding, awareness and tolerance of cyclists by motorists generally. One way of achieving this is to nurture talent, raise the public profile of our best riders in the media and accept that there will be tantrums and inflated egos from time to time.


----------



## HF2300 (28 Jul 2014)

User said:


> I thought Wiggins was a free agent after this season....



I think he is, but that still means he could re-sign with Sky, and to do so may well be better for him in terms of Rio 2016 than signing with a trade team who have no connection with the British national team. I also get the impression that Brailsford meant on the assumption that they do agree a deal, though perhaps there's some loyalty there after all.

I can't find a link to the article, so maybe they haven't put it online.



John the Monkey said:


> ... the thin line "difficult" characters walk within teams ...



Though it has to be remembered that people can be seen as difficult, in businesses and teams, when in fact the management's actions have created those difficulties (and I'm not necessarily commenting on Wiggins here).


----------



## rich p (28 Jul 2014)

Wiggins, like him or loathe him, has/had only a year or so on the road left anyway given that he was determined to go back to the track for Rio.
The OP's question is redundant or should be altered to " The Pro peloton needs Wiggins for another 12 months maximum"


----------



## Hont (28 Jul 2014)

I don't think the pro-peloton _needs _Wiggins, but it's a more interesting place with him in and there are lots more things I would have liked to see him do on the road. I don't really have any interest in seeing him back on the track where he has nothing to achieve but demonstrate his decline, but it's his life - whatever (he thinks) makes him happy.

His latest musings seem to stem from Sky not being a very warm place. Which we kind of knew from Cav. I think British Cycling/Sky are brilliant at performance management but they're not much cop at man-management (read Vicky Pendleton's book, Cav's tweets after joining OPQS, Kennaughs moan after the Tour of Austria). When riders have an alternative (another team) this could prove to be a real weakness which is far less important in British Cycling where the track stars have nowhere else to go.


----------



## Flying Dodo (28 Jul 2014)

About a month ago, Wiggins was giving large hints about possibly leaving Sky and signing for another team, to have another go at the TdF. It may of course be the case that another Pro peloton team may not want to sign him due to his baggage, hence his more recent comments about concentrating on the track.


----------



## ayceejay (28 Jul 2014)

I heard Wiggins himself complain about Sky tactics on the tour where you/he gets an early lead and then sits within a protective team cushion for two weeks. This worked until other teams wised up and invented a few tactics of their own. It was pathetic watching Froome challenged when he was on his own (in the Giro, I think) and personally I prefer the spectacle of individuals taking a risk and using their own racing moxey.


----------



## smutchin (28 Jul 2014)

I agree Wiggo should have been in the TdF team as a superdomestique but I'm not convinced he'd have been any better as a Plan B than Porte. 

I'm also not convinced that having a Plan B is such a good idea anyway. It's fine if you have, say, Hinault and Lemond in your team but on the other hand, not if you have, say, Cadel Evans and Tejay Vangarderen, as BMC did in last year's Tour, to the benefit of neither. 

Being able to implement Plan B, should the need arise, is another matter. 

Geraint Thomas might have had a chance of winning the TdF in 2011 if Sky hadn't made him wait when Wiggo fell off. Froome definitely would have won the 2011 Vuelta if they hadn't made him wait for Wiggo on the Angliru. Although the way he almost overturned the deficit on Peña Cabarga shows what a classy racer Froome is when he's allowed/needs to follow his instinct rather than a strict by-the-numbers gameplan. 

To be fair to Brailsford, I don't think he has ever claimed to know much about road racing.


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (28 Jul 2014)

Saxoff-Tinko had a good enough Plan B. Sky did not have a Plan B because their Plan A focused too much on using riders they have not developed as well as they should have.


----------



## laurence (28 Jul 2014)

in answer to the OP.

no, no it doesn't.


----------



## roadrash (28 Jul 2014)

its my opinion, anyone that rides for sky is expendable, just a part of a machine , a number, there is no empathy , no human element, if that makes any sense , i dont think im explaining what i mean very well , its like brailsford is trying to create a cycling team on par with ivan draggo in the rocky film ,if you know what i mean.


----------



## Hip Priest (28 Jul 2014)

It wasn't really a Wiggins parcours this year. He needs more TT miles as he had in 2012. I prefer Wiggins as a character, but there's no doubt in my mind that Froome was Sky's best bet for this year, and they did the right thing in building a team around him. Of course, it all went to pot when he broke his wrist, but that's racing.


----------



## 400bhp (28 Jul 2014)

roadrash said:


> its my opinion, anyone that rides for sky is expendable, just a part of a machine , a number, there is no empathy , no human element, if that makes any sense , i dont think im explaining what i mean very well , its like brailsford is trying to create a cycling team on par with ivan draggo in the rocky film ,if you know what i mean.


Comes back to "its all about the numbers" as per british cycling mantra. Which us clearly more appropriate in a sterile track environment.


----------



## Hip Priest (28 Jul 2014)

400bhp said:


> Comes back to "its all about the numbers" as per british cycling mantra. Which us clearly more appropriate in a sterile track environment.



That approach bagged them two tours on the bounce. They may well have added a third if Froome hadn't fallen off. I think it's a bit early for the post-mortem. It reminds me of whenever Barcelona lose a match. "Tiki taka is dead!"


----------



## 400bhp (28 Jul 2014)

Hip Priest said:


> That approach bagged them two tours on the bounce. They may well have added a third if Froome hadn't fallen off. I think it's a bit early for the post-mortem. It reminds me of whenever Barcelona lose a match. "Tiki taka is dead!"


It worked for various reasons.

They were blinded by their own rigidity this time round.


----------



## jifdave (28 Jul 2014)

i heard today it was wiggins choice to not go to altitude camp in tenerife with the rest of the tour squad... all the PR stuff he's done afterwards has been fun but i wish he'd have committed properly


----------



## Strathlubnaig (28 Jul 2014)

Marmion said:


> Saxoff-Tinko had a good enough Plan B. Sky did not have a Plan B because their Plan A focused too much on using riders they have not developed as well as they should have.


Saxov-Tinko, this is actually what Brian Smith called them during the Tour de Wallonie coverage today.


----------



## Strathlubnaig (28 Jul 2014)

The peloton doesn't need Wiggins any more than anyone else, but he still could have something to give as a competitive rider. The whole plan A plan B thing I think is a peculiarly British (English) concept, like the football team where it is felt you need to send all your best individuals rather than your best team.


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (28 Jul 2014)

Strathlubnaig said:


> Saxov-Tinko, this is actually what Brian Smith called them during the Tour de Wallonie coverage today.



He calls them that all the time, hence my wording. He's still better then Liggett who still calls them Team Home - Jack & Jones (he doesn't but he might as well)


----------



## smutchin (28 Jul 2014)

Marmion said:


> Saxoff-Tinko had a good enough Plan B.



Aye, three stage wins and a polka dot jersey is a pretty good haul in anyone's book, even if it's not what they aspired to pre-race. Maybe Sky's mistake is thinking a second assault on GC was a viable Plan B. 

They should have let Nieve off the leash in the mountains - although Nieve did finish a fair bit higher in GC than Majka, he essentially has nothing to show for his efforts.


----------



## smutchin (28 Jul 2014)

Hip Priest said:


> That approach bagged them two tours on the bounce. They may well have added a third if Froome hadn't fallen off.



Might have been a fourth if Wiggo hadn't fallen off in 2011. 

But it's a moot point. To finish first, first you must finish.


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (28 Jul 2014)

smutchin said:


> Aye, three stage wins and a polka dot jersey is a pretty good haul in anyone's book, even if it's not what they aspired to pre-race. Maybe Sky's mistake is thinking a second assault on GC was a viable Plan B.
> 
> They should have let Nieve off the leash in the mountains - although Nieve did finish a fair bit higher in GC than Majka, he essentially has nothing to show for his efforts.



Indeed, their Plan B had the same goal as Plan A; which indicates that Team SKY have a very narrow focus on what constitutes "success"


----------



## smutchin (28 Jul 2014)

It might have worked if Porte really were a GC contender (see earlier comment re Hinault/Lemond), but I'm coming round to the idea that he's not, whatever DB might say.

Feet of clay.


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (28 Jul 2014)

smutchin said:


> It might have worked if Porte really were a GC contender (see earlier comment re Hinault/Lemond), but I'm coming round to the idea that he's not, whatever DB might say.
> 
> Feet of clay.



Unfortunately Sir Dave cannot see anything beyond GC contenders or people supporting GC contenders. He's a bit of a twat when it comes to knowing much about the (majority) bit of pro cycling that is not a Grand Tour GC win.


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (28 Jul 2014)

I reckon Sir Dave should employ me. I'd sort them oot.


----------



## Dogtrousers (28 Jul 2014)

smutchin said:


> I'm also not convinced that having a Plan B is such a good idea anyway._* It's fine if you have, say, Hinault and Lemond in your team*_ but on the other hand, not if you have, say, Cadel Evans and Tejay Vangarderen, as BMC did in last year's Tour, to the benefit of neither.



Thanks for articulating something I've thought about this whole "plan B" thing, especially if "plan B" is "keep gunning for the top of the GC".

To win or place high in a GT is going to be hard enough. But to expect someone you have already decided is not your main man to step up, and do it with a reduced team is a bit much.


----------



## thom (30 Jul 2014)

Plan B GC riders - it's true, perhaps the only viable rider to be a plan B in recent times was when Froome rode for Wiggins in the Vuelta in 2011 and the Tour in 2012.
It took an exceptional rider to allow people to talk about SKY and their plan Bs. The problem for Wiggins' 3 week GC chances these days is he likely requires someone of Froome's capability (ie. better than him) to make him a GC winner on a parcours suited to his attributes. 
The pro tour doesn't need that - it needs proper man to man racing, not the tedious delivery of a bonkers strong SKY train...


----------



## John the Monkey (30 Jul 2014)

roadrash said:


> its my opinion, anyone that rides for sky is expendable, just a part of a machine , a number, there is no empathy , no human element, if that makes any sense , i dont think im explaining what i mean very well , its like brailsford is trying to create a cycling team on par with ivan draggo in the rocky film ,if you know what i mean.


Ah, if only your post could then cut to a montage of Wiggins running along dragging tyres through the snow, and so forth.


----------



## jarlrmai (30 Jul 2014)

That's how we train up north.


----------



## smutchin (30 Jul 2014)

John the Monkey said:


> Ah, if only your post could then cut to a montage of Wiggins running along dragging tyres through the snow, and so forth.



Better leave out the bits where he's being injected with dubious substances though.


----------



## Pedrosanchezo (30 Jul 2014)

thom said:


> Plan B GC riders - it's true, perhaps the only viable rider to be a plan B in recent times was when Froome rode for Wiggins in the Vuelta in 2011 and the Tour in 2012.
> It took an exceptional rider to allow people to talk about SKY and their plan Bs. The problem for Wiggins' 3 week GC chances these days is he likely requires someone of Froome's capability (ie. better than him) to make him a GC winner on a parcours suited to his attributes.
> The pro tour doesn't need that - it needs proper man to man racing, not the tedious delivery of a bonkers strong SKY train...


Good point Thom, i do wonder what is more lethal though: 

1) Froome as leader and being led by Porte, or similar. 

or 

2) Wiggins as leader and being led by Froome? 

It brings to the table an actual plan B that could work should Wiggins fail or crash out. Unlike the 2011 Vuelta though, there could be no uncertainty as to who the leader should be. It might be the best option for Sky but it is never going to happen again i think. The 2 times they have done it in a grand tour though they have had 1st and 2nd (TDF 2012) and 2nd and 3rd (Vuelta 2011). 

Have they enjoyed such success since? 

Froome is in the unfortunate position of not having his own Froome dog super domestique and as such all the other members of team Sky come off looking rather average, even if harshly so. 

Just thinking out loud........


----------



## thom (30 Jul 2014)

Pedrosanchezo said:


> Good point Thom, i do wonder what is more lethal though:
> 
> 1) Froome as leader and being led by Porte, or similar.
> 
> ...


No argument these days - 1) better than 2).
Froome is only unfortunate in that he fell off his bike - Wiggins was unreasonably fortunate to have had Froome.
This is rather tedious innit ?


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (30 Jul 2014)

thom said:


> This is rather tedious innit ?



I did try...


----------



## John the Monkey (31 Jul 2014)

elgee said:


> I agree, it should be about racing but realistically, it also has to be about broadening the fan base to a wider mass market with attendant media coverage and better sponsorship deals. It's either that, and accept all the negatives that go with the intense pressures put on professional athletes, or go back to the grudging tolerance of other road users who remain ignorant of the sport and resent the inconvenience caused by club toad races.



That assumes that success for UK sport cyclists equates to an improvement on our treatment on UK roads. Even at the high points of GB/Sky's success, my experience was merely that people said "Wiggo/Brad" more often than they had said "Lance" when telling me to "get on the f* cyclepath"


> ...popularising the sport has many more up-sides than down, not least of which would be a greater understanding, awareness and tolerance of cyclists by motorists generally.


I think that's an unproven (possibly unprovable) assumption. As much as I enjoy it, promotion of sport cycling (which takes place at "special" times, and at "special" places, may not do much for better treatment of the quotidian cyclist in the UK, and I think it's optimistic, at best, to place too many of our eggs in that particular basket.

UK Cycling is hamstrung by the idea that "encouragement" and "inspiration" (cheap, and without the troublesome need to inconvenience motorists) will be enough to produce a "cycling revolution".


----------



## tigger (31 Jul 2014)

Is this a tread about the pro peloton needs Wiggins (answer is no) or team sky needs Wiggins (answer maybe for a year mainly due to PR value) or British Cycling needs Wiggins (answer maybe until Rio but probably stretching it). Or is it a thread about should Wiggins have been in the Sky Tour de France team ( answer yes on form and ability, but clearly and understandably no due the disruptive influence in the team and his sour relationship with Froome). And whilst we're at it lets have a Wiggins v Froome debate too. 

What is this crazy hybrid nonsense of a thread? The answer to the original question is clearly "no". Are there not other threads which have already dealt with the rest of the tedium?


----------

