Actually Woodie I never criticised him at all. That would be daft of me because I don't know much about Paul Watson. I was referencing a book which say he was taken to the Tour as a climber based on his showing in England. If this were the true reason for having him as a climber then if anything I am criticising this decision.
As for being a class rider, I am sure he was but in the context of the Tour, he was out of his depth, and Connor's take on his part in that British Team (which was the first British Based pro to take on the Tour) was not exactly filled with evidence of class.
This is a good interview with Paul, who comes across as a thoroughly decent chap, but hardly passionate about cycling. His race card shows he was towards the top in England, but couldn't/wouldn't compete in Europe to the same high levels.
Why do people on these Blogs get so agitated.
Actually Woodie I never criticised him at all. That would be daft of me because I don't know much about Paul Watson. I was referencing a book which say he was taken to the Tour as a climber based on his showing in England. If this were the true reason for having him as a climber then if anything I am criticising this decision.
As for being a class rider, I am sure he was but in the context of the Tour, he was out of his depth, and Connor's take on his part in that British Team (which was the first British Based pro to take on the Tour) was not exactly filled with evidence of class.
http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest/348110/anc-halfords-paul-watson.html
This is a good interview with Paul, who comes across as a thoroughly decent chap, but hardly passionate about cycling. His race card shows he was towards the top in England, but couldn't/wouldn't compete in Europe to the same high levels.
I hope this goes some way to calming you down.