Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

Page 1010 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
"WADA’s Prohibited List provides that: “The presence in urine of salbutamol in excess of 1000 ng/mL or formoterol in excess of 40 ng/mL is presumed not to be an intended therapeutic use of the substance and will be considered as an Adverse Analytical Finding (AAF) unless the Athlete proves, through a controlled pharmacokinetic study, that the abnormal result was the consequence of the use of the therapeutic dose (by inhalation) up to the maximum dose indicated above.”

So the burden of proof now lies with Froome. Of course he/Sky will come up with all kinds of theories to try and explain these results, but proving these theories for something that occured several months ago now will be nigh on impossible.

About as likely as it was that Contador would ever have been able to prove that steak was responsible for the Clenbuterol in his system.

Will be very interesting to see how this plays out now, either way it will tell us an awful lot about the system
 
Re: Re:

TourOfSardinia said:
Brian Butterfield said:
So, if Froome is out of contention for the meantime - does that mean he can now make it along to the BBC sports personality of the year awards?
Still there: http://www.bbc.com/sport/sports-personality/42100015

I think the OP was saying can he make it to the awards i.e not just thanking everyone on the big screen. I.e staying away from the event due to 'training' commitments.
 
Re: Re:

TourOfSardinia said:
Yingge said:
Kept quiet for almost 3 months too...hmmmm.
He was notified of the "adverse analytical finding" on 20 September 2017.
the BBC reports
I would say thats right. Sample A Test + so they have to wait for Sample B to confirm it.

Funny how they didnt leak the Dawgs name on a A+ before his B confirmed it like a load of other athletes though isnt it?
 
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/chris-froome-returns-adverse-analytical-finding-for-salbutamol/
The test took place September 7 following stage 18 of the Vuelta
stage 18 was the day after Froome blew up on the Los Machucos
http://www.cyclingnews.com/vuelta-a-espana/stage-18/live-report/
After his problems yesterday, Froome fought back with help from Poels and Team Sky.
The ol' extra Weetabix after a bad day ...nothing new! :D

PS - could also explain Dawg's desire to take the 2 million Euro - game's up!
 
Re:

Poursuivant said:
If you're taking twice as many puffs; how did they think this wouldn't happen? How did they expect to hear no more about it?
You do have to wonder why, knowing with 100% certainty that he'd be tested, would they take the risk of using this in double the permitted quantity.

Its not like we're talking EPO here, salbutamol, taken purely for performance enhancing benefits is not a gamechanger that would make the difference between winning and losing the Vuelta.

Unless his asthma was genuinely becoming so bad that he risked having to withdraw from the race. In which case would he not have been allowed to apply for a TUE for the increased doseage/other medication to treat the condition?

Don't know the answers here, just curious as always....
 
Feb 15, 2015
158
0
2,680
Re: Re:

brownbobby said:
Unless his asthma was genuinely becoming so bad that he risked having to withdraw from the race. In which case would he not have been allowed to apply for a TUE for the increased doseage/other medication to treat the condition?
Then maybe he should've stayed within the rules and done his best. Winning a grand tour is not a human right.
 
Re:

Poursuivant said:
If you're taking twice as many puffs; how did they think this wouldn't happen? How did they expect to hear no more about it?
Maybe Brailsfraud can come up with another story about how some fan threw piss at froome at the vuelta (off camera conveniently and only witnessed by Sky) and the piss was laced with sambutamol to make him test positive.
 
Re: Re:

kosmonaut said:
brownbobby said:
Unless his asthma was genuinely becoming so bad that he risked having to withdraw from the race. In which case would he not have been allowed to apply for a TUE for the increased doseage/other medication to treat the condition?
Then maybe he should've stayed within the rules and done his best. Winning a grand tour is not a human right.
I dont disagree, and this kind of illustrates my point.....could he not have stayed within the rules by applying for a TUE (yes i know we can all debate about the ethics of the TUE system) rather than taking this increased doseage in the almost certain knowledge that it would show up in the test?
 
Re: Re:

The Hitch said:
Poursuivant said:
If you're taking twice as many puffs; how did they think this wouldn't happen? How did they expect to hear no more about it?
Maybe Brailsfraud can come up with another story about how some fan through piss at froome at the vuelta (off camera conveniently and only witnessed by Sky) and the piss was laced with sambutamol to make him test positive.
Yeah, maybe. Question is still good tho. Same for other known cases (ulissi etc) as well.

"Damn this asthma is really getting worse, well, let's take the amount of puffs which will surely go over every limit there is and hope nothing will happen" :confused:
 
Feb 15, 2015
158
0
2,680
Re: Re:

brownbobby said:
kosmonaut said:
brownbobby said:
Unless his asthma was genuinely becoming so bad that he risked having to withdraw from the race. In which case would he not have been allowed to apply for a TUE for the increased doseage/other medication to treat the condition?
Then maybe he should've stayed within the rules and done his best. Winning a grand tour is not a human right.
I dont disagree, and this kind of illustrates my point.....could he not have stayed within the rules by applying for a TUE (yes i know we can all debate about the ethics of the TUE system) rather than taking this increased doseage in the almost certain knowledge that it would show up in the test?
Yes, and this will be their spin. However, I'm sure there could be many reasons we are not aware of. I simply do not believe that inhaling the allowed amount suddenly can produce a doubled effect to the body due to some random factors made up by Brailsford.
 
Re: Re:

kosmonaut said:
brownbobby said:
kosmonaut said:
brownbobby said:
Unless his asthma was genuinely becoming so bad that he risked having to withdraw from the race. In which case would he not have been allowed to apply for a TUE for the increased doseage/other medication to treat the condition?
Then maybe he should've stayed within the rules and done his best. Winning a grand tour is not a human right.
I dont disagree, and this kind of illustrates my point.....could he not have stayed within the rules by applying for a TUE (yes i know we can all debate about the ethics of the TUE system) rather than taking this increased doseage in the almost certain knowledge that it would show up in the test?
Yes, and this will be their spin. However, I'm sure there could be many reasons we are not aware of. I simply do not believe that inhaling the allowed amount suddenly can produce a doubled effect to the body due to some random factors made up by Brailsford.
You may be right; but i'm sure there will be some very clever scientists and doctors working away right now who have been paid to disagree with you!
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS