Chris Froome tests positive for Salbutamol

AstraMonti

Andy Magic wrote: »

Surely motor pacing then? That avg speed and distance is super human?

A few puffs of the inhaler can be magic.

1bryan

Andy Magic wrote: »

Surely motor pacing then? That avg speed and distance is super human?

only achievable by a super-human, or one with 6 debilitating illnesses.

velo.2010

1bryan wrote: »

from what I can gather from his instagram (cos I'm blocked on twitter), it's all solo.

Yeah, solo behind a moped!

Still, that's some going. Replicating the conditions of riding two GT's, back to back, I assume Sky are building up a profile of Froome's response to exertion. If he doesn't come close to reproducing the AAF, Sky will say the test result was a false positive, an anomaly. However, the result stands and the onus is still on Froome to repeat that result.

Beyond that, the recent Strava uploads are PR for team Sky and Froome.

fishfoodie

1bryan wrote: »

only achievable by a super-human, or one with 6 debilitating illnesses.

Nope, just the next stage in Froomes evolution. He had so much trouble with his gammy lungs, & broken kidneys that he just had them all removed, & bang, super-human perfomance, now he doesn't have those extra organs holding him back.

4kg unnecessary weight dropped, & boooom !

CramCycle

velo.2010 wrote: »

Yeah, solo behind a moped!

Still, that's some going. Replicating the conditions of riding two GT's, back to back, I assume Sky are building up a profile of Froome's response to exertion. If he doesn't come close to reproducing the AAF, Sky will say the test result was a false positive, an anomaly. However, the result stands and the onus is still on Froome to repeat that result.

Beyond that, the recent Strava uploads are PR for team Sky and Froome.

Repeating the result is only positive if he dopes in the exact same way as which he doped before. It is possibly the stupidest stunt, and if entertained, it will be beyond ridiculousness. Unless there is an independent overseer, following him 24hours a day, every day, then the test is even more pointless as he can just cheat and say, hey look, same thing happened again.

My mind cannot get around the stupidty of it all but considering CAS upheld the excuse of excessive kissing, I have already given up.

not sane

Seen a documentary on him and a mate of his said when there where no steep hills close by he used to pull his brakes to make it harder. You couldn't make it up. The guy is dodgy at the least.

Maybe some movement on this http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/chris-froome-could-accept-salbutamol-responsibility-in-hope-of-lenient-ban/

Macy0161

Deleted User wrote: »

Maybe some movement on this http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/chris-froome-could-accept-salbutamol-responsibility-in-hope-of-lenient-ban/

I could see the UCI running with this, even if it is a cop out. Although at the very least, it should be from his last race day, which was the worlds, so 9 months would mean no giro.

Would have to put a massive question mark over him staying at Sky too - for going against their stated position, and accepting a failed test.

Andy Magic

He's just denied the report on FB

Keeks

Deleted User wrote: »

Maybe some movement on this http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/chris-froome-could-accept-salbutamol-responsibility-in-hope-of-lenient-ban/

that the focus is on exploring variables that could have skewed the sample.

I love this quote from Sky in the article....just sums the team up completely.....there are going to do down swinging...

MPFGLB

Froome with a top Strave performance proves nothing ...we saw him win 2 GTs back to back and with dodgy kidneys
So he can produce great results ...so what

What did he take to get there is the question ....and to lose the weight so fast

1bryan

best wishes to Froomey as he starts his racing season today. Here's hoping the sickest man on the planet has a great, safe race, and that he didn't forget to pack his medication.

Cycling news were reporting the case could begin this week or next, but they seem to a have a piece every other day with terms like "reportedly" used.

It's beyond a joke at this point, he/Sky have had 5 or 6 months now to make their case and I think even if he were to get a ban it would almost certainly be appealed to CAS and be further dragged out.

Still I'm looking forward to the racing this week in Spain and Portual.

Leroy42

I don't understand the logic behind putting Froome in these early season races. The overall goal is the TdF, so why why pull out of these and then claim they suspended him (they announce this only if he is ever found to be guilty) and this already served his time.

terrydel

Keeks wrote: »

I love this quote from Sky in the article....just sums the team up completely.....there are going to do down swinging...

They epitomise the modern world's obsession with bull**** and spin, they should probably consider joining up with fine gael at this stage. Does anyone talk honestly anymore?

Froome and Brailsford both gave interviews at Ruta Del Sol earlier, both saying the same thing. Blah blah lots of misinformation we're as anxious as everyone to have it cleared up /reaches for bucket.

terrydel

CramCycle wrote: »

Repeating the result is only positive if he dopes in the exact same way as which he doped before. It is possibly the stupidest stunt, and if entertained, it will be beyond ridiculousness. Unless there is an independent overseer, following him 24hours a day, every day, then the test is even more pointless as he can just cheat and say, hey look, same thing happened again.

My mind cannot get around the stupidty of it all but considering CAS upheld the excuse of excessive kissing, I have already given up.

Thats what I've been thinking, along with who is monitoring him in doing this, surely he will or at least could try any illicit means to replicate that failed test result? And if he replicates it, whos to say or prove he didnt cheat to do that? and even if he does replicate it, so what?
Sick to death of him, Sky and the whole sorry show that is pro cycling. Its a pitiful mess.

el tel

1bryan wrote: »

best wishes to Froomey as he starts his racing season today. Here's hoping the sickest man on the planet has a great, safe race, and that he didn't forget to pack his medication.

If ever a man needed a rub of a Padre Pio relic it was Chris.

lissard

I'd say racing this early in the year must be a right cross to bear, what with the oul bilharzia and chronic asthma. I'm sure with his doctors help he'll somehow surmount these obstacles and reinforce our faith in miracles.

elchupanebrey

terrydel wrote: »

They epitomise the modern world's obsession with bull**** and spin, they should probably consider joining up with fine gael at this stage. Does anyone talk honestly anymore?

I'd say you do chief!(tongue in cheek, i think this whole thing is a farce too)

Boscoirl

At least the Scumbags at the tour won’t be throwing piss at him this year.

He is going to get pelted by inhalers



I never really followed any of the other high profile drug test failures but were they as drawn out as this?

Contadors was if I recall.

Kaisr Sose

lissard wrote: »

I'd say racing this early in the year must be a right cross to bear, what with the oul bilharzia and chronic asthma. .

February is an awful month for pollen and tree spores too...

average_runner

benneca1 wrote: »

Read in the Spanish paper if he can explain why for thereputic reasons he needed such high doses he’ll be ok. Guess This will set Kimmage off again he was always a bit suspect of sky.

And good reason. We should all suspect sky of cheating.

Shoco83

I was watching a bit of the race today, Kirby was saying that if he was banned he would still get to keep his vuelta win, is that correct?

That surprised me too.

RobFowl

No, it is not correct.

Kaisr Sose

RobFowl wrote: »

No, it is not correct.

Proves Kirby is an idiot! How could he think he can keep the win if found to have failed a drug test ? Everybody would be running to the drug shop for pseudothis and effin ephriden or marginalgainodine

Eamonnator

Shoco83 wrote: »

I was watching a bit of the race today, Kirby was saying that if he was banned he would still get to keep his vuelta win, is that correct?

If he's banned, the ban will be backdated to the date he was caught, which was during the Vuelta. Any result after that date will be wiped.

1bryan

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

Proves Kirby is an idiot!

saying Kirby is an idiot is an insult to idiots.

robyntmorton

It was actually Matt Stevens was talking about it saying that he would keep the results, and mentioned that it was something to do with which list salbutamol was on.

I’ll agree about Kirby though. I heard him commentating on Olympic speed skating a few days ago, and listening to him cram in cycling terms was painful.

Lumen

robyntmorton wrote: »

I’ll agree about Kirby though. I heard him commentating on Olympic speed skating a few days ago, and listening to him cram in cycling terms was painful.

I vaguely remember a thread covering all the sports that Kirby has ruined.

elchupanebrey

Poor Chris looked a bit sheepish when being interviewed before todays stage, and said he didn't feel great yesterday. Probably in top shape so!!

Junior

Eamonnator wrote: »

If he's banned, the ban will be backdated to the date he was caught, which was during the Vuelta. Any result after that date will be wiped.

As far I know he'll lose the Vuelta, but keep the Worlds Medal.

RobFowl

Junior wrote: »

As far I know he'll lose the Vuelta, but keep the Worlds Medal.

You are incorrect. He will get a ban and it will start at the Vuelta and be at the very least 6 months and probably a good deal longer.
The Vuelta and worlds medal are all but gone already, by competing under a cloud he is all but losing the chance of a short ban too.

Hurrache

elchupanebrey wrote: »

Poor Chris looked a bit sheepish when being interviewed before todays stage, and said he didn't feel great yesterday. Probably in top shape so!!

Laying down his excuse for when he's pictured later sucking on his inhaler.

velo.2010

Bernal wins in Columbia, Kwia wins today in Algarve, and Poel's wins in Andalusia too. With strong performances from Thomas, the Henao's and Elissonde, it seems Sky wont be short of guys to potentially fill the leadership role for the GT's this year.

Expect Team Sky to dominate the rest of the early season stage races as riders try to prove their credentials as team leaders in waiting.

py

Froome will not be allowed enter Tour - report

https://www.rte.ie/sport/cycling/2018/0321/949173-froome-will-not-be-allowed-enter-tour-report/

Melodeon

py wrote: »

https://www.rte.ie/sport/cycling/2018/0321/949173-froome-will-not-be-allowed-enter-tour-report/

I'd say the Giro people will be well pissed off if it's true that they have no discretion on accepting or declining his entry, and the case isn't resolved one way or the other before the race starts.
Especially if he does well/leads/wins with all the attendant press attention during the race and the hullabaloo afterwards, and if the findings then eventually go against him.

Bristolscale7

LOL, no TdF for Froome! I suggest that he spend the time off in a sanitarium in a climate that will be easy on his asthma.

RobFowl

Melodeon wrote: »

I'd say the Giro people will be well pissed off if it's true that they have no discretion on accepting or declining his entry, and the case isn't resolved one way or the other before the race starts.
Especially if he does well/leads/wins with all the attendant press attention during the race and the hullabaloo afterwards, and if the findings eventually go against him.

Actually they do have discretion. They just don't want to use it.
UCI rule
2.2.010 Without prejudice to the disciplinary penalties provided for by the regulation, a licence holder or a team may be excluded from a race if he/it seriously blemishes the image of cycling or of the race.This exclusion can occur before or during the race

Keeks

RobFowl wrote: »

Actually they do have discretion. They just don't want to use it.
UCI rule
2.2.010 Without prejudice to the disciplinary penalties provided for by the regulation, a licence holder or a team may be excluded from a race if he/it seriously blemishes the image of cycling or of the race.This exclusion can occur before or during the race

But there is no precedence for this....If no one has been stopped before for an adverse finding to salbutamol then it will be a trip to court saying why are you picking on my client.....everyone else was allowed to ride....

I suppose neither the UCI or the Giro organizing have got legal advise on this and either don't want the hassle of appearing in courts or don't want to be seen to not be giving Froome a fair deal.

I have a feeling that UCI are damned if they do and damned if they don't...

Borderfox

Well let them be damned for doing something not just sitting on their hands

Leroy42

Keeks wrote: »

But there is no precedence for this....If no one has been stopped before for an adverse finding to salbutamol then it will be a trip to court saying why are you picking on my client.....everyone else was allowed to ride....

I suppose neither the UCI or the Giro organizing have got legal advise on this and either don't want the hassle of appearing in courts or don't want to be seen to not be giving Froome a fair deal.

I have a feeling that UCI are damned if they do and damned if they don't...

Wasn't Ulrich et al stopped back in the day? I didn't think they had actually been found guilty at the time.

The TdF is so big that is can basically invite anyone it wants. The Giro, IIRC, already has an agreement to pay Froome to compete and I wonder if there is no clause in their to exclude him unless he is found guilty. So Giro might be looking at having to pay him anyway. (I have no idea of the contract, just a thought)

CramCycle

Leroy42 wrote: »

Wasn't Ulrich et al stopped back in the day? I didn't think they had actually been found guilty at the time.

The TdF is so big that is can basically invite anyone it wants. The Giro, IIRC, already has an agreement to pay Froome to compete and I wonder if there is no clause in their to exclude him unless he is found guilty. So Giro might be looking at having to pay him anyway. (I have no idea of the contract, just a thought)

They would if that is what the contract stipulated. They would also have been fools not to have a clause in there to exclude him (or withhold money) for a variety of reasons similar to this but that's not to say fools and their money are easily parted.

Macy0161

Leroy42 wrote: »

Wasn't Ulrich et al stopped back in the day? I didn't think they had actually been found guilty at the time.

That was before the ASO/ UCI deal to guarantee World Tour teams spots though?

Giro probably have a bit of a catch 22 as well - it'll definitely be bigger news to the general public if he rides, so depends on whether they consider there is actually nothing worse than no publicity. Look at the increased interest in Ruta del Sol. The Tour is big news anyway.

It's also helping to bury the whole Israel state story....

Bristolscale7

Keeks wrote: »

I have a feeling that UCI are damned if they do and damned if they don't...

If they suspend Froome the only people unhappy are Froome, that tool of a team manager Sky has, and a few koolaid drinking fans. If they let Froome race then they alienate the public, fans, and advertisers.

CantGetNoSleep

Yeah I for one won't watch if Froome races

CramCycle

Bristolscale7 wrote: »

If they suspend Froome the only people unhappy are Froome, that tool of a team manager Sky has, and a few koolaid drinking fans. If they let Froome race then they alienate the public, fans, and advertisers.

You know alot of people will watch regardless, they will annoy the fans (some not all), the public will tune in to see what the hell it is all about, and advertisers give no sh1ts once peopel are watching and there name is nto tied to the person the public despise.

MPFGLB

The Giro will keep Froome as it brings attention to their race ....cycling be damned

But then again they are prepared to race in Israel for the money so letting Froome ride is small fry