Ag2r

Page 6 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Fearless Greg Lemond said:
Last year he would have been 6th - 7th, minus Froome = Conta = Rodriquez and the fact that this years mountainracing is full on gung ho style could explain something.
The problem with this kind of reasoning is that it ignores the people who didn't show up, crashed out or otherwise didn't perform last year when he'd have been 6th-7th. Because that happens every year, really. If you did it for a couple of years in a row, you'll be able to justify just about any top 10 contender winning the Tour.
 
Apr 20, 2012
6,321
0
0
hrotha said:
The problem with this kind of reasoning is that it ignores the people who didn't show up, crashed out or otherwise didn't perform last year when he'd have been 6th-7th. Because that happens every year, really. If you did it for a couple of years in a row, you'll be able to justify just about any top 10 contender winning the Tour.
Good point, and, agreed, but, lets look at Peraud's performances this year par the Dauphinee; didnt he crash?

When he is a donk I will stop watching cycling for ever.
 
Mar 13, 2009
5,246
0
0
difdauf said:
if it is his true level you have to wonder why he came to road so late. I agree his results ask many questions.
I think he also just really loves MTB. I saw an interview with him last year and they asked, would he prefer to win the Tour or the Olympic gold medal in MTB and he chose the latter (he already won silver in Peking)
 
Jun 15, 2009
8,530
1
0
I think, hope, wish, Peraud is ok. The german commentators just said he has a good job/study. His future was save even before deciding to go pro road racing... and, I don´t know, he seems smart and a good guy with emotions and suffering (even in slipstream). Plus I read he has a 85 VO-max (at sportsscientists.com), still didn´t push more than 5.8 w/kg at Hautacam...
IOW, the complete opposite of arrogant crooks like LA and Horner...

Just my 2 cents. OFC I could be wrong (doping-wise), you never know...
 
westerner said:
http://http://www.cyclisme.ag2rlamondiale.fr/en/ethique/ethique

I don't see any info like this on the web sites of the self professed leaders and standard bearers for transparency and cleanliness in cycling ....Garmin and Sky?

Guarantees nothing of course, but great to see a team giving their fans some credit and outlining its policies in public, in black and white for all to see.
That link does not appear to be working
 
del1962 said:
That link does not appear to be working
I've posted this before but the link is and in English:

http://www.cyclisme.ag2rlamondiale.fr/en/ethics/our-commitment

I'm more impressed by the university allowing the young riders to complete their degrees whilst racing.

Be good to makes sure the new generation is at least educated :cool:

But the ethics charter is good. It appears no one at Sky knows what their policy is let alone have any ethics.
 
thehog said:
I've posted this before but the link is and in English:

http://www.cyclisme.ag2rlamondiale.fr/en/ethics/our-commitment

I'm more impressed by the university allowing the young riders to complete their degrees whilst racing.

Be good to makes sure the new generation is at least educated :cool:

But the ethics charter is good. It appears no one at Sky knows what their policy is let alone have any ethics.
From the policy

The doctor, medical officer of the team AG2R LA MONDIALE, is also invested as a medical evaluator to consider requests of Therapeutic Use Exemptions for the French Anti-doping Agency as well as a member of its medical commission.
Surely a conflict of interest?
 
del1962 said:
From the policy



Surely a conflict of interest?
Yes it's a real conflict having the team doctor evaluate the need for a TUE prior to making the request.

I just can't believe they would use a Doctor to look at medical conditions. They should be using a lawyer.

Are you slow or something?
 
Mar 9, 2013
1,996
0
0
BYOP88 said:
Wait so the Froome defense doesn't work with Peraud?


The theory was that Froome developed later because he took up (road) cycling at a later age.
Froome actually conteded for La Vuelta at 25-26, how isit comparable?, but i personally think Froome must be on stuff, Peraud im not sure
 
thehog said:
He/She doesn't work for the anti-doping agency. Can you actually read?

Read it it again and understand what it actually states.
No read it again, the statement says that they work for the French Anti-doping agency, it seems quite clear, so unless something has been lost in translation you are barking up the wrong tree Hoggie
 
del1962 said:
No read it again, the statement says that they work for the French Anti-doping agency, it seems quite clear, so unless something has been lost in translation you are barking up the wrong tree Hoggie
Ok here we go. Lesson 1: sentence construction.

Now please pay attention.

Here we have a paragraph;

The doctor, medical officer of the team AG2R LA MONDIALE, is also invested as a medical evaluator to consider requests of Therapeutic Use Exemptions for the French Anti-doping Agency as well as a member of its medical commission.
1. The team Doctor whom is known as the "medical officer" for AG2R is the "medical evaluator" for the consideration for requests of a TUE.

ie the rider whom is sick/injured etc. sees the team doctor to be evaluated and if medication is required and is a banned substance then the "medical officer" of the team will make that request on behalf of the rider. Meaning a rider or a personal doctor cannot make the request. Only the team doctor.

Got it?

Ok, next part;

2. All TUE requests go to the national anti-doping agency. In this case as it's a French team of French riders so that would be the "French Anti-Doping agency".

Therefore
....consider requests of Therapeutic Use Exemptions for the French Anti-doping Agency
Meaning the application "for" the anti-doping agency is only made by the teams "medical officer".

3. The team Doctor/medical officer is also a "member" ie not employed of the French anti-doping "medical commission".

ie the doctor is a member of an organisation upholding the values of anti-doping etc.

They are not employed and there is no conflict of interest. In fact it's the highest standard of ethics to have a single process with no outside forces to cause a conflict or infiltrate the procedure.

Having a medical professional being part of a "commission" is very normal, similar to a real world medical doctor being part of hospital commission or the medical board etc.

End of lesson.
 
thehog said:
Ok here we go. Lesson 1: sentence construction.

Now please pay attention.

Here we have a paragraph;



1. The team Doctor whom is known as the "medical officer" for AG2R is the "medical evaluator" for the consideration for requests of a TUE.

ie the rider whom is sick/injured etc. sees the team doctor to be evaluated and if medication is required and is a banned substance then the "medical officer" of the team will make that request on behalf of the rider. Meaning a rider or a personal doctor cannot make the request. Only the team doctor.

Got it?

Ok, next part;

2. All TUE requests go to the national anti-doping agency. In this case as it's a French team of French riders that would be the "French Anti-Doping agency".

Therefore

Meaning the application "for" the anti-doping agency is only made by the teams "medical officer".

3. The team Doctor/medical officer is also a "member" ie not employed of the French anti-doping "medical commission".

ie the doctor is a member of an organisation upholding the values of anti-doping etc.

They are not employed and there is no conflict of interest. In fact it's the highest standard of ethics to have a single process with no outside forced to cause a conflict.

Having a medical professional being part of a "commission" is very normal, similar to a real world medical doctor being part of hospital commission or the medical board etc.

End of lesson.
You need to chill more, you seem very irrate

Anyway its your interprataion Hoggie, and you are always going with one that suits your agenda, whether correct or not

Anyway I wouldn't worry as we all know the French don't dope so conflicts of interest don't really matter.

A word of advice though, chill a bit more and keep your snout out of the trough and look up beyond youre prejudices, you might even learn something.
 
Nov 29, 2010
2,326
0
0
I still wish teams would get rid of any dodgy doctors from the past.

Having Jean-Jacques Menuet on the staff list is hardly encouraging.
 
May 19, 2010
1,899
0
0
thehog said:
Ok here we go. Lesson 1: sentence construction.

Now please pay attention.

Here we have a paragraph;



1. The team Doctor whom is known as the "medical officer" for AG2R is the "medical evaluator" for the consideration for requests of a TUE.

ie the rider whom is sick/injured etc. sees the team doctor to be evaluated and if medication is required and is a banned substance then the "medical officer" of the team will make that request on behalf of the rider. Meaning a rider or a personal doctor cannot make the request. Only the team doctor.

Got it?

Ok, next part;

2. All TUE requests go to the national anti-doping agency. In this case as it's a French team of French riders so that would be the "French Anti-Doping agency".

Therefore

Meaning the application "for" the anti-doping agency is only made by the teams "medical officer".

3. The team Doctor/medical officer is also a "member" ie not employed of the French anti-doping "medical commission".

ie the doctor is a member of an organisation upholding the values of anti-doping etc.

They are not employed and there is no conflict of interest. In fact it's the highest standard of ethics to have a single process with no outside forces to cause a conflict or infiltrate the procedure.

Having a medical professional being part of a "commission" is very normal, similar to a real world medical doctor being part of hospital commission or the medical board etc.

End of lesson.
It is UCI which evaluate TUE's for World Tour teams, not the national Anti-doping agency, so the AG2R doc is not sitting on both sides of the table when a AG2R rider needs a TUE. Let's remember who Sky called when Froome needed his TUE. It was uncle Zorzoli, not UK Anti-doping.
 
del1962 said:
You need to chill more, you seem very irrate

Anyway its your interprataion Hoggie, and you are always going with one that suits your agenda, whether correct or not

Anyway I wouldn't worry as we all know the French don't dope so conflicts of interest don't really matter.

A word of advice though, chill a bit more and keep your snout out of the trough and look up beyond youre prejudices, you might even learn something.
Cheers.

You can always tell when someone has been made a fool of themselves when they jump for the personal attacks.

I also wouldn't be too worried about me. I'd be more concerned about your ability to read a straight forward paragraph of writing. You appear somewhat impaired on that front. This is not the first time you've made such a basic mistake.

Nevertheless, you could always link the ethics charter from the Sky webpage to compare? :rolleyes:

Or perhaps don't reply to my posts citing conflict of interest deep inside the French anti-doping agency! :cool:
 
neineinei said:
It is UCI which evaluate TUE's for World Tour teams, not the national Anti-doping agency, so the AG2R doc is not sitting on both sides of the table when a AG2R rider needs a TUE. Let's remember who Sky called when Froome needed his TUE. It was uncle Zorzoli, not UK Anti-doping.
That was for an "emergency TUE" fast track. Not a regular TUE applied for "ahead" of competition with the national anti-doping agency.

It's a slightly different procedure and clear Zorzoli pulls favours whereas UK-AD may not.
 
del1962 said:
But as one poster says they do have a nice ethics statement.
Ethics statements cannot be "nice". Ethics statements are just that. A statement. Unless that statement strokes you hair as you fall asleep it could never be nice.

This is poor expression on your behalf.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
westerner said:
http://www.cyclisme.ag2rlamondiale.fr/en/ethique/ethique

I don't see any info like this on the web sites of the self professed leaders and standard bearers for transparency and cleanliness in cycling ....Garmin and Sky?

Guarantees nothing of course, but great to see a team giving their fans some credit and outlining its policies in public, in black and white for all to see.
Maybe someone already said this, but did you read:


The doctor, medical officer of the team AG2R LA MONDIALE, is also invested as a medical evaluator to consider requests of Therapeutic Use Exemptions for the French Anti-doping Agency as well as a member of its medical commission.
ie the doctor who evaluates TUE requests for the AFLD is the team doctor for AG2R. That same doctor is also a member of AFLD's medical commission.

Conflict of interest much?
 
Dear Wiggo said:
Maybe someone already said this, but did you read:




ie the doctor who evaluates TUE requests for the AFLD is the team doctor for AG2R. That same doctor is also a member of AFLD's medical commission.

Conflict of interest much?
Did you ever read the last few posts? :eek:
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY