Cavendish: “Can you be 100% that one of these journalists isn’t f***ing your wife?”

Mark Cavendish love a good ol’ Omerta, if nothing else.

First he blamed Riccardo Ricco for all cycling’s ills, back in 2011:

“The sport’s better off without him,” Cavendish said. “He’s not a problem that the sport faces, he is the problem that the sport faces.

“He doesn’t mirror a lot of riders, he’s a special case and I think we’re better off without him,” Cavendish continued as those gathered who don’t swallow looked at each other and rolled their eyes. “Obviously I hope he does recover well, but I really do hope he becomes someone’s bitch in prison.”

OK the last part was funny but still, the point was clear – ‘blame Ricco, it’s all his fault.’

Then there was the Armstrong love, then the ‘anger’ as expressed in his autobiography and yet, somehow, he told us it was all ok to still cherish those memories of LA in his pomp:

“Now we’re asked to comment on Armstrong and have our morals judged on the strength of what we say, when a lot of us are, rightly or wrongly, too preoccupied with the here and now to have an opinion. Even though I was watching those Tours that Lance won, wide-eyed and innocent, I also can’t pretend that I’m eaten up with resentment or feel betrayed now I know it was a big charade.

“As unjust, as distressing as it may be, as hard as it is for us to accept, I’m sure that Lance still feels that no one and nothing can take away the emotions of those seven Tours at the time, and the same really goes for those of us who were watching.”

Then there was this episode at a Quickstep meet and greet last year:

And now this gem. Again, the message is quite clear: shut the **** up about doping, nothing to see here, move along, it’s all much better now.

Omerta? Who said that?



Author: Lee Rodgers

Cycling coach, race organiser, former professional cyclist and the original CrankPunk.

7 thoughts

  1. Love the way Kwiatkowski tries to hide while Cavendish talks. He clearly understands English well enough.

  2. I get really depressed by this little prick, his attitude to everything (doping, knocking people of their bikes, general approach to the media to name but three) is toxic. But the thing that gets me down is that the British public love him for the single fact that he’s British, so he gets away with behaving like a petulant child because people turn a blind eye his toolishness. It looks more like football than cycling.

    1. please can all sportsmen continue to behave like petulant children and brighten up my day.
      Do I want to snooze through Nibali or Froome droning away with meaningless platitudes about their rivals, or sit on the edge of my chair waiting to see what bomb a Wiggo or Cav might drop. These guys behave like real people, and are under pressure that you or me can’t dream about – a perfect tonic for the airbrushed PR-coached snorefest that is most sporting interviews these days…

  3. While I understand there are a lot of questions (regarding doping) that need to be asked, you can see many of the riders are extremely tired about being asked them by journalists and the public, especially when there is not much new to the question itself. What do the public and the journalists expect them to say in response to these questions? We are not going to get any confessions or direct accusations about someone else; there will be mostly denials and platitudes.

    I think the worst questions are when one is asked about another rider, who the interviewee may or may not know, or a situation where they do not have any first hand knowledge of. These guys have egos; they want to talk about their plans/teams/sponsors/races; if you take the attention off them, and towards a general subject or a 3rd party, the answers are typically not going to be inspiring. If you want a unique story, you can’t just ask typical questions, particularly if they are soft and unoriginal.

    While one may not like Cav, at least doesn’t always respond based upon his media training scripts; you’ll know when you’ve annoyed him. This doesn’t necessarily mean he has anything to hide, and if he has an opinion/answer which differs from the status quo of these banal questions, at least therein lies a potential story.

Leave a Reply