....but still no guilt proven (or disproven)
Oh bugger, was just too slow posting my thread 😀
Oh bugger, was just too slow posting my thread 😀
you need to up your intake of salbutamolin then...
😂
I bet he rides in the end - "great" publicity for teh tour though
Good.
Oh god, I can hear the stampeding footsteps of the purists rushing to the thread to declare justice having been done.
I wish someone more eloquent than me could explain why cheating, nefariousness, shadiness and general human nature go hand in hand with sport. I think VAR is a good example of why it's sometimes more entertaining having villains getting away with things and general injustice going unpunished, rather than a whiter than white spectacle of fair play and transparency.
Anyway, like I said, if someone with, like, good words and stuff could just take that and make it into a nice convincing argument I would be much obliged ; )
It'll really open up the race if he's out. I reckon he'll still ride though.
After Hinaults comments I Imagine ASO probably scared of ugly scenes
you need to up your intake of salbutamolin then…
😀
Funnily enough was recently prescribed salbutamol, clearly doing nothing for me.
As much as I like Geraint, I really doubt he’d be a serious GC contender
As much as I like Geraint, I really doubt he’d be a serious GC contender
You could see him being in yellow for the first week though.
You could see him being in yellow for the first week though.
Certainly!
mrlebowski
Worth a read:
http://suppversity.blogspot.com/2014/09/albuterol-salbutamol-doping-works.html
/blockquote>
I had no idea it was available in pill form!
This week could be a fun game of Froome Hokey Cokey. 😆
Can you imagine the disappointment if Froome doesn't start for the fans who have spent hours preparing inhaler costumes and devising ways to keep these costumes hidden until the camera bikes pass? [sadface]
If he ends up being cleared after been blocked from racing it makes the result just as much of a farce as if he does race and is subsequently stripped
The other question for me is are the organisers also banning anyone else with a dodgy test hanging over them (would they know)? If it's one rule for froome and another for everyone else, and he is subsequently cleared, then he has every right to sue them Imo.
Wow that's big news.
I suspect ASO have a bit more insight into the ongoing UCI investigation than the rest of us. If it's looking likely that the UCI will act to ban Froome then I guess ASO think it's better to remove him from the race than have yet another final TdF result changed after the race has finished.
It's a shame for so many reasons. Bernard Hinault can do one though.
Edit: more info here: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/aso-try-to-block-chris-froome-from-racing-tour-de-france/
The ASO has cited article 28 of its rules, which "expressly reserves the right to refuse participation in - or to exclude from - the event, a team or any of its members whose presence would be such as to damage the image or reputation of ASO or the event."
What a mess.
Im sure the French fans will be holding onto all the bottles of piss they've got stored in case the appeal is successful
Mature decision made by ASO IMO.
Saves the “name” of the race and sends more of a poinient message to those that are under investigation that you can’t join in until a clear pass decision has been made.
However, Sky are insisting they are going to fight the decision. I hope it comes to nothing and the ASO sticks to its ethos.
I’m not sure the ASO know anymore than we do about the result, but regardless the result ought to come from WADA them being the testing body after all. I’m sick of these “leaks” and “informal press releases” Once a decision is made, announce it once and once only.
I think if ASO were serious they would have announced this earlier. I'll believe Froome is out when he doesn't roll out on stage 1.
Hopefully he won't be racing but regardless I think ASO had to do it - even if they're forced to let him race they can state that they tried to prevent it when he does (probably) get banned.
My gripe is why do these things take so long to sort? I think he was caught in September last year, so some 9 months on and still not sorted it out.
IMO if the authorities cannot get their act together, the rider should be given the benefit of the doubt until the case is heard and resolved.
If they have evidence to ban him, then ban him now and dont drag the thing on.
With Froome not racing, are we going to see him podcasting/commentating (alongside Mr Millar perhaps?)
Hinault should keep his opinions to himself, the guy was as flawed (and as brilliant) as the best, but his role at ASO doesn't require home to mouth off.
As for the ASO role, reading Charly Wegelius story I think WADA really need to take the lead. INRG has some good pieces on doping in cycling.
As for the ASO role, reading Charly Wegelius story I think WADA really need to take the lead
Yes the ASO should have been all over the UCI and WADA to get this sorted in a timely fashion.
I wish someone more eloquent than me could explain why cheating, nefariousness, shadiness and general human nature go hand in hand with sport
Not saying I'm more eloquent and knowing this is unlikely not to have crossed your mind, but it's simply ego X money isn't it.
Sky shouldn't fight it imo. Be better to accept their image isn't great as it is and figure out what to do about that. But ego and money will mean they carry on as they do.
My issue is the lack of consistency and rational for the ban though. He's not been banned because he's under investigation, hes been banned because everyone knows he's under investigation. Which is the result of a leak that should never have happened.
There may be other riders also under investigation who we don't know about and who are able to ride. That's not correct.
And if he doesn't ride and is subsequently cleared then the winner will have a huge asterisk against his name given the circumstances.
There may be other riders also under investigation who we don’t know about and who are able to ride. That’s not correct.
Given the number of adverse findings mentioned in another thread that seems inevitable. So how about leaking those too and deciding if those riders should all be told they are unwelcome. Especially if one or more turn out to be French.
There may be other riders also under investigation who we don’t know about and who are able to ride. That’s not correct.
Except that ASO is attempting to bar Froome because of potential reputational damage to its event. If there are other riders in a parallel situation, ASO wouldn't know that and their participation wouldn't cause reputational damage, because their situation isn't publicly known.
It's all a bit Catch 22.
I get what you're saying btw, but if you look at it from ASO's standpoint, there is an internal logic to what they're doing even if you think it's unfair on Froome.
It’s all a bit Catch 22.
Kafkaesque more like, they're barring him because they know of an investigation (remember Froome isn't yet guilty of anything) ASO only know as the investigation was made public, presumably there are more riders under investigation that ASO (and the idiotic Hainault) don't know about that are free to compete but may or may not (depending on the likelihood of them winning presumably) be banned from racing?
Risky for them as the chances of being sued if Froome is innocent must be pretty high? Plus this very same tactic last time they used it (cocaine use by Boonan) didn't work.
Mad scenario.
If it’s one rule for froome and another for everyone else, and he is subsequently cleared, then he has every right to sue them Imo.
Very much this. I'd bet on him riding though. I can't see independent arbitration seeing his exclusion as anything but an injustice.
Better he rides and is stripped of the title, than not being allowed to ride and then found innocent.
@slowoldman and tpbiker I'm with you on that. Any investigation/ban needs to be based on facts and it must be timely. The ASO shouldn't be stopping riders based on perception. That's a very slippery slope. (And yes I realise I'm sounding like a Lance apologist.)
I imagine he will be allowed to ride.
I also question why they are banning him, I certainly don't believe it's motivated by his nationality!
I'm just not enough of a "Little Englander" to subscribe to that POV I'm happy to say..
They may have a sniff of what's coming & are acting pre-emptively.
Certainly under the rules his AAF should never have been made public - I'd argue that they all should be.
Except that ASO is attempting to bar Froome because of potential reputational damage to its event
I absolutely get that rational. But conversely if he misses out then is found innocent the entire result becomes pretty much null and void which will make a complete mockery of the event.
Personally I think that would have a greater affect on its reputation than letting him ride, obviously the organisers think otherwise.
On a side note, I'm astounded froome would want to ride the tour under these circumstances. Clearly they don't want him there, the French fans are hostile at the best of times, and it'll be absolute misery for him for 3 weeks. If it was me I'd sit it out and ride the veulta instead.. The Spanish fans clearly don't care if you are cheating or not.. And he will still have the chance to go for 2 grand tour wins in the year. Unless his plan is to go for all 3 of course.
On a side note, I’m astounded froome would want to ride the tour under these circumstances.
He is in the category where the measure of greatness is how many TDF's did you win, each one is another level up really.
There is no real right answer to this one, he rides and wins then gets banned? We have 2 grand tours that have no winner because of the impact he made. They ban him and he is innocent then it's a tour win without the main contender.
The biggest issue for the ASO is not ending up with a farce where they have to nullify a number of stages after somebody knocks him off or throws tacks on the road.
My issue is the lack of consistency and rational for the ban though. He’s not been banned because he’s under investigation, hes been banned because everyone knows he’s under investigation. Which is the result of a leak that should never have happened.
There may be other riders also under investigation who we don’t know about and who are able to ride. That’s not correct.
You're right. My post saying was the sort of reaction that many who don't read into the detail of all this, or care for that detail, might have. Fairly or not. And that's why the ASO is banning him I guess, because whatever the points related to the leak, Sky have a dodgy rep these days and that's what many know about, this adverse test result is just part of all that. Much of the value of the TDF is with people who simply watch a bit of sport or know little about cycling apart from the tour, perhaps that's why they want him and Sky out if this isn't all cleared up.
In short, this might not just be about Froome, who may well have done nothing wrong himself.
why would you want to race where you are not welcome, the reaction would have been bad before this decision if he "forces" way onto the roster using sky financial muscle and a posse of lawyers the french fan reaction is not going to be welcoming
i bet that if Froome was french it would be a different story.
i bet that if Froome was french it would be a different story.
Perhaps. Different reaction from UK TDF fans, or from the ASO?
To me, this is all about how fantastically useless the UCI is.
The chatter has focused on Froome but it's the UCI that is the problem. Either their rules are crap, their security is crap, or their ability to sort this out is crap. Pick any one.
And to ask Froome to fall on his sword, just because the UCI can't sort this out, is pathetic.
ASO tried the same thing with Tom Boonen after his Peruvian Marching Powder incident in 2009. The UCI cleared him to ride (remember Froome is also clear to ride just now despite the AAF) but ASO tried to ban him from the TdF and they lost on appeal. Same thing likely to happen here. Expect Froome to be on the starting line
It's going to be like the Hokey Cokey all this week!
At the end of the day the Tour is ASO's baby and I guess it's up to them who they allow to play with their toys irrespective of all the other official bodies that may be involved [they also own l'Equipe so a good story is always good for publicity]. There will be a few lawyers better off by the end of the week, that's for sure.
I still think the real issue is the UCI. The incident under investigation took part 10 months ago. How much longer do the powers that be need to determine a riders innocence or guilt? It is appalling it got leaked, and who knows how many other riders especially team leaders and their 2 chief domestiques are also under investigation but cleared to ride? I dont suppose Froome is the only one.
If the ban is upheld I wonder if Sky will race at all? Im sure they have a plan B incase this does happen. Do they give one of the others the chance to win, do they switch to a stage winning strategy and forego the CG, assuming they have the riders to do this. Do they start and then withdraw at some stage? Lots of options for them.
