Forum menu
As per my previous post I received a warning, and it’s clear that I’ve been overly aggressive and come across as a dick. Ironically being as I accused others of ethical issues I let my own drop so I am not going to ‘contribute ‘ further to this (or other ‘doping’ threads).
peace out.
Well you may pass the vast majority of your breath tests, but there is an 84% chance you will not have a license by the end of the year
except I believe you'd be allowed to challenge the result and ask for a retest (blood sample) which would exonerate you - and nobody outside of the local nick would ever know about the breathalyser result.
... which is what ought to happen in the case of a successfully defended AAF.
That said, I (and I think many, many others) mistrust Sky these days - the observations don't match the projected image and their handling of the jiffybag/triamcinolone bulk stocks/dogatemylaptop/testosterone delivery error etc is fishier than ... and THAT it why Froome's under such sceptical/cynical "scrutiny" by the general public. Since "nobody" has any facts to work with, even many months after the AAF, and the relevant authorities are moving at glacial pace, all we're left with is smoke - and of course that might well mean fire
What if he is guilty of being over the limit, but it is the limit that is flawed?
I don't think there have been any credible suggestions that the Salbutamol test is inherently flawed, and there don't seem to be huge numbers of cyclists failing Salbutamol testing, which would also tend to suggest that the limit is not flawed, wouldn't it?
I don’t think there have been any credible suggestions that the Salbutamol test is inherently flawed,
It's been mentioned though.
and there don’t seem to be huge numbers of cyclists failing Salbutamol testing, which would also tend to suggest that the limit is not flawed, wouldn’t it?
Question goes how many had AAF's? We don't know
This could have been Sky Flying close to the sun, we will find out
Though as the last few races have shown we have aero gel on the legs, drafting behind team cars and vans on the TT, hanging onto the side of cars
https://twitter.com/velocast/status/904660253203189760
Can't see if those guys were banned?
What's all that got to do with Chris Froome's AAF?
Nothing more a question about what people call cheating these days, gamming the rules etc.
Nothing more a question about what people call cheating these days, gamming the rules etc.
I’m not sure what you a getting at either. Hanging onto cars isn’t allowed, never has been. It’s not really comparable to gaming TUEs.
Well in that case I'd assume you would go for severe penalties fro those offences, we now have a situation where using the full width of the rules is called cheating and hanging off a car or drafting a van on a TT is a slap on the wrists.
To complain about the TUE use etc. is one thing, BUT like every other sport people will go right up to the line without crossing it.
Well, this may shed some light... something about cats and pigeons...
People have always hung on to cars and used "sticky bottles". It's quite often overlooked by the commissaire when it is used to get back to the bunch after a puncture or a mechanical, or where it is briefly done by a rider who is not contesting the overall GC or a stage result. In other words it can be a way of cutting someone a bit of slack where the overall results are not influenced, and everyone understands that.
However, if it is blatantly used to gain an unfair advantage that affects the race result, you will get more than a slap on the wrist. In fact, some chap called Froome was DQed from the 2010 Giro for hanging on to a motorbike!
If he wishes to avoid professional misconduct as well as criminal charges, he is going to have to tread a very fine line there.
Aha ha ha ha ha ha ha...