Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

Page 1116 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re:

Robert5091 said:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/chris-froomes-salbutamol-case-reportedly-heading-to-uci-anti-doping-tribunal/
Can't wait to get this season started!!
Plan A - ADT hopefully short ban from Vuelta, Race Giro & Tour
Plan B - Bad outcome at ADT - appeal, appeal appeal. Race Giro & Tour - hope for ban over Winter 2018/2019

Whatever happens, let us hope that no "fan" takes matters into his own hands.
I hope we all can agree on that. I actually fear for his safety. No matter what you think about Froome, he doesn't deserve to get attacked by spectators.

That's why it's best to make a low-key debut at Ruta Del Sol. Although it's not a "high risk" race.
 
May 11, 2009
1,301
0
0
I'm not a Froome fan however it seems to me that the percentage of salbutamol in his urine is not affected by his hydration status.
 
Re: Re:

ClassicomanoLuigi said:
Poursuivant said:
Let's say he gets a ban at tribunal next month, and he immediately appeals to CAS, can he still ride?
Froome will be banned from the day the Anti-Doping Tribunal judge signs his/her Judgment, it will take effect immediately. And then he seeks to have his ban reduced / overturned at CAS if he chooses to appeal. But he doesn't get to ride during appeal process
Thanks
 
Mean time from appointment of judge to final decision is a little over three months, regardless of hearing (I didn’t include the Matzka case, as an outlier). My impression is that when the case drags out, the judge (on his/her discretion or at UCI’s request) is inclined not to hold a hearing, perhaps because s/he feels there is enough information from all the back-and-forth at that point. In any case, the result is that hearing or no hearing, cases on average take about as long to conclude once the judge has been appointed. Only one case other than Matzka took longer than four and a half months from the appointment of the judge.

It seems that the judge for Froome’s case was appointed in the beginning of February. So history indicates there’s a reasonable possibility that a decision will be reached before the Giro, particularly if it’s expedited for that purpose. It would be very unusual if a decision were not reached before the Tour.

Edit: Wrong again. I guess the proceedings are just being opened next week, which means the judge hasn't been appointed yet. So have to add 2-3 weeks to the time table I outlined.
 
ClassicomanoLuigi said:
It would be in Froome's best interest to participate himself in the process. He doesn't necessarily have to appear in person, they can do hearings via videoconference
As far as I can tell, the hearing usually takes only one day, maybe several days at most. So most of the time, Froome is free to carry on as usual. If there is a hearing, he can certainly request a particular date that's most convenient to him. Even if, to take a worst case scenario, the hearing were to be held in the middle of the Giro (though it would almost certainly be postponed till after the Giro was over), he could at least request it take place on a rest day.

avanti said:
I'm not a Froome fan however it seems to me that the percentage of salbutamol in his urine is not affected by his hydration status.
You mean the concentration is not affected by dehydration? What data are you basing this on?
 
Jul 14, 2015
708
0
0
Ehh, this ADT is a rubberstamp kangaroo court, it's FISA without federals. It was "extracted" from the UCI because having McQuaid "adjudicate" cases was too ridiculous a look even for cycling. Created by none other than Brian Cookson (remember this guy?) and staffed with a bunch of PhD students (hello Ms. Bachmann). No one takes it serious, which is you can appeal all of its decisions to CAS and CAS will never consider any of its findings.

I don't think it actually does any "findings". It's a glorified decision tree.
 
Re:

hazaran said:
Ehh, this ADT is a rubberstamp kangaroo court, it's FISA without federals. It was "extracted" from the UCI because having McQuaid "adjudicate" cases was too ridiculous a look even for cycling. Created by none other than Brian Cookson (remember this guy?) and staffed with a bunch of PhD students (hello Ms. Bachmann). No one takes it serious, which is you can appeal all of its decisions to CAS and CAS will never consider any of its findings.

I don't think it actually does any "findings". It's a glorified decision tree.
Ehh, this WADA is a rubberstamp get-out-of-jail free card, it's Wall Street without financiers. It was "extracted" from the law because having civilian courts dispense real justice was too threatening a look even for deep pocket sponsors. Created by none other than the IOC (remember this organization?) and armed with a bunch of ridiculously lax doping standards (hello, salbutamol). No one takes it seriously, which is why you can you can appeal all of its decisions to the passport, and the passport will never consider any of its negative tests.

I don't think it actually does any "tests". It's a glorified early warning system.

I guess you could say the one balances the other.
 
Re:

Robert5091 said:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/chris-froomes-salbutamol-case-reportedly-heading-to-uci-anti-doping-tribunal/
Can't wait to get this season started!!
Plan A - ADT hopefully short ban from Vuelta, Race Giro & Tour
Plan B - Bad outcome at ADT - appeal, appeal appeal. Race Giro & Tour - hope for ban over Winter 2018/2019

Whatever happens, let us hope that no "fan" takes matters into his own hands.
Plan C - Froomes team presents an air tight case. And he was able to show those numbers again. Hopefully, No ban
Plan D - Froomes team proves his kidney malfuntioned. Hopefully, No ban.

Cool! :) :razz:
 
Feb 5, 2018
270
0
0
Re: Re:

silvergrenade said:
Robert5091 said:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/chris-froomes-salbutamol-case-reportedly-heading-to-uci-anti-doping-tribunal/
Can't wait to get this season started!!
Plan A - ADT hopefully short ban from Vuelta, Race Giro & Tour
Plan B - Bad outcome at ADT - appeal, appeal appeal. Race Giro & Tour - hope for ban over Winter 2018/2019

Whatever happens, let us hope that no "fan" takes matters into his own hands.
Plan C - Froomes team presents an air tight case. And he was able to show those numbers again. Hopefully, No ban
Plan D - Froomes team proves his kidney malfuntioned. Hopefully, No ban.

Cool! :) :razz:

you should definitely go down to ladbrokes or paddy power and back those ootcomes, i would imagine you would get great odds, like 250-1
 
Re: Re:

ontheroad said:
TourOfSardinia said:
Looks like CF's hit the nebulizer already in this Gazzetta photo taken in the Hotel
Not a great photo but he looks deathly there.
remember the sicker he gets the faster he goes...and he's really only been experimenting with some low grade illnesses, bronchitis/asthma/badzilla and the likes...I sense he's going to up the game this season...
 
Re:

ClassicomanoLuigi said:


This explains a lot. Froome's nonchalance about getting banned from the GT's is because he has already moved on to a new career beyond cycling.
I'm surprised everyone in that photo and in team sky don't wear a mask around Froome...you don't know what you'll catch.....
 
He should have taken this year off or at least not raced at all until this is resolved.

This is so disappointing. I dont like Froome or Sky and they gotta do better than this. He shouldnt be racing at all right now.

Hopefully he will be declining anyway.
 
Mar 7, 2017
1,098
0
0
Re:

ClassicomanoLuigi said:


This explains a lot. Froome's nonchalance about getting banned from the GT's is because he has already moved on to a new career beyond cycling.
They giant nappy suggests stomach problems will be next added to the Dawg's ever expanding defence

Dehydration + asthma attack + renal malfunction + stomach problems + antibiotics = elevated salbutamol innit :eek:
 
Salvarani said:
He should have taken this year off or at least not raced at all until this is resolved.

This is so disappointing. I dont like Froome or Sky and they gotta do better than this. He shouldnt be racing at all right now.

Hopefully he will be declining anyway.
Tell that to the organisers of the Ruta del Sol...
 
Salvarani said:
brownbobby said:
Salvarani said:
He should have taken this year off or at least not raced at all until this is resolved.

This is so disappointing. I dont like Froome or Sky and they gotta do better than this. He shouldnt be racing at all right now.

Hopefully he will be declining anyway.
Tell that to the organisers of the Ruta del Sol...
I blame the team and himself.
I'm sure you do, that wasn't my point...which was that not everybody is unhappy to see Froome still riding.
 
brownbobby said:
Salvarani said:
brownbobby said:
Salvarani said:
He should have taken this year off or at least not raced at all until this is resolved.

This is so disappointing. I dont like Froome or Sky and they gotta do better than this. He shouldnt be racing at all right now.

Hopefully he will be declining anyway.
Tell that to the organisers of the Ruta del Sol...
I blame the team and himself.
I'm sure you do, that wasn't my point...which was that not everybody is unhappy to see Froome still riding.
If you support that kind of stuff, I am sure they not.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY