El-Reacho

Kayal and Wanayama from Celtic talked about on twitter would like either of them ase both are mobile and good passers of the ball,

Defence has to be key now. At least a LB and a CB. Does KEA do what Kayal and Wanyama do?

Agreed Defence will be strengthened IMO Possibly Ramis and would love Kjaer but that wouldnt happen

Kayal is more attack minded and Wanayama is a midfield destroyer.... could work alongside KEA...

Why would Kjaer not happen? He will not be going back to Wolfsberg thats for sure, didn't have a great season at Roma either, he's available.

Surely it's as likely to happen as the last time we went to Italy to sign a highly rated Danish centre half who had failed to bed into a top Serie A side after being outstanding at a mid table Serie A side.

AC Milan are reportedly interested in bringing Carroll in on loan. Their fans are not happy.

One thing is for sure, is that Boardo is tight.

Of course I can see similarities between USPS and Sky, but the first really super team which redefined the sport IMO was La vie Claire, coached by Paul Keochli, who applied science and preparation and the selection of riders to a new level. Look at the dominance of the sport, something Sky or USPS will never reach; 85 Tour, 1, 2 & 10, 86 Tour 1, 2, 4 & 7.

Quiet why Tapei decided to dump Hampsten and Lemond is beyond me!

By the way I love this quote from a judge yesterday on Lance

"This Court is not inclined to indulge Armstrong's desire for publicity, self-aggrandizement or vilification of Defendants, by sifting through eighty mostly unnecessary pages in search of the few kernels of factual material relevant to his claims."

and in the footnotes

Contrary to Armstrong's apparent belief, pleadings filed in the United States District Courts are not press releases, internet blogs, or pieces of investigative journalism. All parties, and their lawyers, are expected to comply with the rules of this Court, and face potential sanctions if they do not.

I saw that yesterday - and this is a judge in Austin, Texas. Lance must be starting to panic....

http://alturl.com/ymxo4

Cofidis have been raided this morning.

Are people suggesting that say Wiggins has doped throughout his career, or just now?

Are people suggesting the doping is encouraged by Brailsford?

Are people suggesting Cavendish is on drugs?

Was Boardman on drugs?

Was Cancellara on drugs to beat Wiggy in the prologue?

Are the entire British track cycling team on drugs?

Are people also therefore saying that Wiggy has been on drugs all season (he has come into this tour as favourite after all - after 3 big wins).

Was Froome on drugs during the Tour of Spain last season.

It's nonsense.

I would say it's impossible to answer any of those questions Jon. Only the very inner core of professional cycling could answer them with any certainty.

The one I would answer with most conviction is that no, Chris Boardman was not on drugs.

Radioshack's issues regarding team leadership had no bearing on Fabian's performance today because he said when he finished he felt that no one would beat his time.

Radioshack are in utter chaos. The word was that the recent article in the Dutch newspaper was actually placed by the former manager of USPS, none other than the missing Bruyneel.

Cancellera can say what he likes, but he’s not the unbeatable figure he was.

Froome’s performance I agree are remarkable; he was a virtually unknown cyclist until the Vuelta. I certainly didn’t know he was going to be released by Sky.

As for Sky like USPS. Maybe more like La vie Claire

Therein lies the strange allure of the sport. I agree with you about BMC yet am still pulling for Cadel. I still follow this sport religiously despite the fact that logic suggests that it is corrupt to the core and I should just switch off.

Surely you can see the similarities between Sky and USPS though? Lance and Johan were giving us all of this stuff about the detail they went into to shave off milliseconds, they all add up. It was about knowing the routes inside out etc. But as you rightly say Radioshack are in chaos. I know Lance and Bruyneel aren't there but they own the team surely they would have instilled those same values in the staff and riders?

I disagree with you re. Fabian though. He's had a bad year with injuries and that but I think he's still at the top of his game.

Sherwen and Liggett will have their heads up the ass of all three of the American teams because that's were their wages come from. I think ITV4 pay a negligible amount of money to use their commentary feed but the American networks are the guys that are footing the bill for it - maybe someone could correct me on that?

I think they'll both be forced into retirement if Lance does get convicted. They've invested both of their reputations on him being clean. The Motorola clique of the 90's still seems to be very tight though doesn't it?

^^ I notice Nike are no longer part of the Tour. I'm not sure they have any sponsorship in cycling anymore?

I remember they came in and threw money at the sport after Armstrong's first win.

Murky just about sums it up.

The more I think of how the Tour is panning out the more I doubt Froome to be honest, as opposed to Wiggins and Sky as a whole. If Froome wasn't there and Wiggins had achieved what he has so far I think that's plausible enough because we all knew Wiggo and Cadel would be the two favourites and the ITT's would be decisive. Wiggo's transformation to GC contender is also plausible as it wasn't necessarily overnight and he talked about it before he actually did it.

Froome on the other hand was set to be released by Sky before the Vuelta last year. His palmares barely registers before then and now he's contending the Tour. If as you suggest Sky are ignorant of what the riders do then Brailsford must be panicking about this guy. I take your point re. Wiggins' performance today, but Froome's never won a TT before and yet puts half a minute into Cancellara? Radioshack's issues regarding team leadership had no bearing on Fabian's performance today because he said when he finished he felt that no one would beat his time.

I can see the argument. But on the other hand look at what the team who put Sky together, did at track cycling. To be honest a great deal of these cycling teams are pretty amateurish, and Sky have applied the same rigorous approach to road cycling (with an enormous budget to boot). Sure people at the team like Sean Yates have come from the bad old days, but most of the management team haven’t. Sure someone like Rodgers has a somewhat dubious past, so its not impossible that he has doped and is still doping; most of the cyclists spend most of their time away from the team, and often the team really are ignorant of what they do

When Sky dropped most of the peleton on Saturday it wasn’t simply because they were better. It was because they had actually looked at the course and worked out they could do something. Most teams looked at that and said category 1 finish, only 6k long, not very difficult. They walked into a trap.

Paulo, those are exactly the same arguments that USPS gave for their total dominance. I completely disagree that they're simply able to put more effort into the smaller details. It's disrespectful to suggest that anyone who harbours any aspirations of either winning GC, or mountain stages isn't going to do training runs on a climb they've never used in the Tour before. BMC and AG2R certainly did in the run up to the Tour.

It's also worth pointing out that Sky have employed Rabobank's former Doctor, who has major question marks over him after the Rasmussan affair. Fair enough they can only be considered question marks, but for everything thing they're able to do with regard to bringing new techniques from other sports and other disciplines of cycling, why do they need to revert to bringing guys like him and Yates on board. Particularly when they so steadfastly refuse to allow Millar, who you would consider to be the most outspoken anti-doper in the peloton to join.

Also when Wiggo was at Garmin he made a big point about the need to publish his own blood values after the tour. Why has he not felt the need to do this in the time he's been at Sky? If he's going to be so aggressively defensive about the integrity of his performances, Sky should publish all of their rider's values on a regular basis.

Clark. Empower the youth - let them take ownership of this team.

Am feeling like I felt when Armstrong won in '99. Only with all the hindsight....

Not sure what that means? Negative, Positive? Or both?

What do you guys think?

Until now I've considered Sky, along with Garmin and the French teams to be clean. But if Liquigas, randomly picked for example, showed the dominance that Sky have shown over the last three days, with two riders that have dramatically transformed themselves into GC contenders in a way that only Armstrong has done before, I would simply turn the TV off. I knew Wiggins would do well today, and we've talked about Froome being competitive but to simply blow Evans, Cancellara, and Menchov to pieces like that makes me feel pretty uncomfortable particularly with regard to Froome.

Froome was obviously not instructed to hold back in any way today so his performances in the mountains this week will be interesting to say the least.

Am feeling like I felt when Armstrong won in '99. Only with all the hindsight....

This time trial stage is looking ominous

What exactly are you referring to 'LondonLax' - if indeed that is your real name?? :winkold:

I actually don't agree. A lack of English speaking teams never hindered Millar, Roche, Kelly, LeMond, Anderson, Hampston etc

Armstrong was the first english speaker to go to the Tour and dictate his own terms, shunning the french media culture etc. Whilst the increase in American teams is down to his legacy, I don't know that that is something long term because the USADA verdict will have a huge impact on cycling in America.

I think British Cycling's success on the track over the past decade has had more to do with Sky's investment than Armstrong IMHO.

As a man who rides a Hampsten (and did the logo!) you could get it right

Personally I think the generation in the 80s were the ones who changed it; Anderson refusing to drink perrier and drinking Coke instead, the 7/11 team, but more than anyone the legend that is LeMond. First million dollar rider. Did what the hell he wanted, much to the annoyance of the Badger, etc. I think its hard to imagine Armstrong ever existing without LeMond. LeMond got the US interested (wasn’t he the first cycling Sports Illustrated winner?) and the TV networks. He was also the first to get all of the big sponsorship deals.

Agree that British cycling from those humble beginnings in Barçelona in 1992 has allowed Sky to develop. They had a plan, and its beginning to bear rich fruit.

Fair play Paulo, excuse my ignorance. They look like lovely bikes.

That image of Hampsten in the snow when he won the Giro is absolutely iconic.

The psychological battles between LeMond and Hinault when they crossed the line arm and arm, and then subsequently the '89 tour with Fignon are just brilliant. The officials asking Fignon to cover up his yellow jersey after losing a TT finish on the Champs Elysee when he was utterly distraught - you really couldn't make up stuff like that if you tried. It's no wonder the Americans absolutely loved it.

I think the money, the sports science, the PR machines and everything else have sterilised cycling these days - you can probably say that about alot of sports mind.

It's genuinely so strange to hear about us going for young foreign starlets. I love it!!

Yes just as long as the core of the team remains British. this is important in my opinion.

I couldn't give a stuff where they came from as long as they are good, improve us and enable us to compete a lot higher up the table

Absolutely I agree but for this to happen the majority of the squad should dare I say "need" to be British. This is a British club competing in a British league. To fill the team with a smorgasboard of nationalities cannot help team bonding.

Can't agree with this. Not being able to bond successfully as a team because of different nationalities is a ridiculous notion. I have no doubt whatoever that statistics would show that in modern football there is no advantage in having a 'core' of players native to the league a certain team is playing in. Arsenal's invincibles certainly didn't. Inter has had a core of Argentinians for the last 10-15 years and have done alright. The idea that you can't bond with someone because they're foreign is absurd. Or that someone who's foreign can't form part of the core of the team.

Petrov has been a stronger presence in the Villa side for the past six years than any British player has.

It's not difficult to see where the adoration for Lance from the Anglophone cycling world comes from.

2000 TdF teams, by country

USA - US Postal

Spain - Banesto, ONCE, Kelme

Italy - Mapei-Quick Step, Mercatone Uno, Saeco, Polti, Vini Caldirola

Netherlands - Rabobank, Farm Frites

Germany - Telekom

France - AG2R, Festina, Cofidis, Francaise des Jeux, Credit Agricole, Bonjour

Belgium - Lotto

Denmark - Memory Card

2012 TdF teams, by country

France - AG2R, Cofidis, Saur, Europcar, FDJ

Italy - Lampre, Liquigas

Australia - Orica

UK - Sky

Netherlands - Argos, Vacansoleil, Rabobank

Spain - Euskaltel, Movistar

Belgium - Omega-Quick Step, Lotto

Kazakhstan - Astana

Russia - Katusha

USA - BMC, Garmin, Radioshack

Denmark - Saxo Bank

1 of 20 to 5 of 22 teams have English as their primary language, and the chances for an anglophone cyclist to race at the highest level have never been better. It's quite probable that absent Armstrong, neither Evans nor Wiggins would be road racing at this level.

I actually don't agree. A lack of English speaking teams never hindered Millar, Roche, Kelly, LeMond, Anderson, Hampston etc who all moved to Europe, learned their host's respective languages and ingrained themselves in the continental cycling culture.

Cadel only rode for an english speaking team when he joined BMC and was an established Tour contender (and WC) before then. Likewise Wiggins spent the first half of the decade riding for french teams.

Armstrong was the first english speaker to go to the Tour and dictate his own terms, shunning the french media culture etc. Whilst the increase in American teams is down to his legacy, I don't know that that is something long term because the USADA verdict will have a huge impact on cycling in America.

Germany simply won't invest in cycling as they see it as tarnished after T-Mobiles repeated positives. They don't even show coverage of the tour. I think Denmark is similar now days after Rasmussan? Look at the trouble Riis has had trying to find a sponsor and he has Contador, who could win tours for the next 5 years +.

I think British Cycling's success on the track over the past decade has had more to do with Sky's investment than Armstrong IMHO.

Yeah I know what you mean. I think this year's Tour will be more exciting in terms of establishing who will contend for the next few years. Sagan looks incredible, and I really hope he's as good as he seems. But Taaramae, Gallopin, Rolland, Van Garderen, Boassan Hagen, will all only get better. I really hope Dan Martin finds his climbing legs too, because he could be leading Garmin in a year's time. Throw in A Schleck, and Contador next year too, and Chris Froome is only 27.

Even more interesting

In the year of 2000, after consulting Michele Ferrari and under the management of Mr. Tony Rominger, he shifted to full time road cycling.

That fills me with dread :shock:

Yeah, it would do to be fair. But then Wiggo's comments about Lance really annoyed me. Brad was struggling as a clean rider throughout the early 00's - he would have seen Lance's reaction to Simeoni and Bassons for breaking the 'omerta'. Yet he comes out and basically falls at Armstrong's feet in adoration for the guy and what he's done for cycling.

Whilst I still have faith the guy is clean, his comments today were ominously similar to Armstrong's 'plea' after he won the Tour in 2005 - begging for us all to have faith in Jan Ullrich and Ivan Basso.

If I'm honest I get pretty cynical with so many riders these days but I've always given Cadel the benefit of the doubt. I really hope I'm right.

Let's look at the time trials before we jump to any conclusions; Wiggins form this season has been sensational, particularly in TT. He's his own man, with a dry and often misunderstood humour. Funny you should say Wiggins is a bit if a prick as Evans has hardly covered himself in glory over the years, and until recently was a press nightmare; didn't he hire Lance's bodyguards!!

I actually met Cadel at the Dauphine in 2008 - he was the nicest guy in the world, had time for everyone at the finish and again the start the next day. When he went on to the tour that year he seemed to implode with the pressure of everything, but has adjusted since then. Didn't know about Lance's bodyguards mind you.

I took exception to Wiggins' treatment of Garmin after they had the confidence to back him in the Tour. He dropped them like a stone at the end of that season, his Wigan to Man Utd comments were a bit of a slap in the face I thought, particularly when Sky hadn't even entered a race at that stage.

Do you guys reckon Wiggins will win?

If he can keep any sort of team around him in the mountains, yes. Rogers and Knees need to stay both crash free and on form.

Evans's team is looking strong in these early stages ...

Think you missed out Froome; he was sensational at the Vuelta last year.

Knew Froome was the man. I think he’s a strong possibility for a place on the podium. If only he hadn’t lost that time...

Froome looked incredible today. Really think Sky should have thought about this guy leading rather than Wiggins. If they'd put as much effort into getting Froome through the first week intact as they had Wiggins I think they would have a better chance of winning overall.

I reckon Evans can drop Wiggo on the longer mountain stages, but Froome looke better than anyone on that climb today.

If Sky had been bold in the Vuelta they would have made Froome leader and made Wiggo work for him and they'd have won it. They could end up making exactly the same mistake here.

I know I'm being negative about Wiggins but I think he comes across as a right prick. Would much rather Evans or Froome won it.

I don't think Hutton deserves all the stick he gets.

I agree. Warnock is much worse. LB is more of a priority for me.

Absolutely agree with this. Fair enough Hutton had a shocker of a season last year. But Lichaj was consistently very good when he got in. The best right back performance of last year was when Herd came in against Wolves.

So we have Lichaj(23?), Hutton, and Herd(22?) and have gone and bought another young right back.

Meanwhile on the left we have Warnock who has been terrible since O'Neill left, is oldish and is on big money, and Stevens, whilst I really hope he can do a good job (as an Ireland fan also), he has a big question mark over whether he can make it. Surely a loan deal to the Championship would be a good idea?

Anyway I'd rather we were after the left back version of Howton/Clyne/Naughton. I know the three are capable of playing at LB but essentially they are right backs. Taylor from Swansea was the one for me - with Lichaj at RB.

Have just noticed Michael Bradley has signed for AS Roma today. Seems to have done alright since we decided he wasn't good enough for us.

Thats **** all on a mountain stage though.......

I think it's more than enough to knock him out of contention for the win, particularly this Tour when the time trials will probably decide it. If the favourites all reach Paris without having crashed I think the gaps will actually be quite small.

Have just noticed he's 1'41 down. Bizarre that all the hype is around Wiggins and there's barely been a mention of Froome.