Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

Page 1140 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re: Re:

Wiggo's Package said:
yaco said:
ClassicomanoLuigi said:
Froome signed with Team Sky for three years last summer

https://www.teamsky.com/article/chris-froome-confirms-new-contract-with-team-sky

I had been told his contract would be up at the end of 2018 but nothing could be further from the truth. Very basic fact that I was misinformed and wrong about. So, it's not an option for Team Sky to just not renew a Froome contract... to sack him would require dissolving the existing contract based on the "zero tolerance" clause, or whatever method.
Presumably if the whole team folds, Froome doesn't get paid for not riding for a defunct team
It's not unusual for riders to switch teams while under contract - My guess is Froome will change teams if he receives a sanction for Salbutamol.
Why would a team sign a rider and take on their contract if that rider's just been banned for 2 years?
It's wishful thinking to think Froome will get two years.
 
Time to kick the sleeping dog.

Tirreno-Adriatico is almost upon us. Froome is a participant. And an invited guest at today's presser.

So - clearly - no playing of the Disrepute card by Vegni.

If Froome's presence is likely to damage the repute of the Corsa Rosa, surely he's equally likely to damage the repute of the Race of the Two Seas, especially if he's talking at the race's launch press conference?

Anyone still clinging to the Disrepute raft want to explain that one to me?
 
Mar 7, 2017
1,098
0
0
Re:

rick james said:
Ethics = an imaginary boundary decided by the clinic when it suits them
I'm going to throw this one in here, even though I know the response from some quarters: Roger Pielke's recent book The Edge – The War Against Cheating and Corruption in the Cutthroat World of Elite Sports makes some interesting distinctions between breaking rules and deviating from norms and argues that not all rule breaking can be considered to be cheating.
In sport, some rules are meant to be broken. Breaking rules is in fact often part of the game. Athletes calculate costs and benefits of breaking rules and the chance that a penalty will be enforced. Should a cornerback on a football field commit pass interference on a long pass down the field? Should a centreback on a soccer field foul a striker heading toward her team's goal? Should a basketball team start fouling at the end of a game to try and catch up? The breaking of rules is an essential part of the fabric of sport norms and rules. So the act of breaking the rules, even intentionally, is not by itself enough to qualify as “cheating.”
Cheating, Pielke argues, is the breaking of a particular kind of rule, a constitutive rule (the rules for a game), as opposed to a regulatory rule (the rules of the game):
Ultimately, the decision to define an activity as against the rules of a game versus the rules for a game is the result of a negotiation among those who have a stake in the the game, along with those with authority to make changes. Sport is a constant negotiation between fans, administrators, athletes and others. We change rules all the time, both rules for the sport and rules of the sport. Sometimes we even move rules from one category to the other. Cheating is thus a moving target rather than something to be defined once and for all.
If you're bored by the reductive black and white certainty of some, it's worth taking a look at. Quite where gaming the TUE system sits, well let's say it's not black and white...
 
Feb 5, 2018
270
0
0
Re:

fmk_RoI said:
Time to kick the sleeping dog.

Tirreno-Adriatico is almost upon us. Froome is a participant. And an invited guest at today's presser.

So - clearly - no playing of the Disrepute card by Vegni.

If Froome's presence is likely to damage the repute of the Corsa Rosa, surely he's equally likely to damage the repute of the Race of the Two Seas, especially if he's talking at the race's launch press conference?

Anyone still clinging to the Disrepute raft want to explain that one to me?
last weeks news! wiggins is the plat du jour. personally i find the idea of repute/disrepute in cycling is a lost battle; cycling will always be tainted by drugs scandals (and i fully appreciate that other sports (football, tennis, athletics, boxing MMA, even goddam curling and golf ffs!!) are as bad if not worse for illegal doping, and those sports make more money so get a free pass from authorities, fans and media alike; the authorities turn a blind eye and may as well not even pretend they are testing)
 
Oct 4, 2011
905
0
0
Re: Re:

fmk_RoI said:
rick james said:
Ethics = an imaginary boundary decided by the clinic when it suits them
I'm going to throw this one in here, even though I know the response from some quarters: Roger Pielke's recent book The Edge – The War Against Cheating and Corruption in the Cutthroat World of Elite Sports makes some interesting distinctions between breaking rules and deviating from norms and argues that not all rule breaking can be considered to be cheating.
In sport, some rules are meant to be broken. Breaking rules is in fact often part of the game. Athletes calculate costs and benefits of breaking rules and the chance that a penalty will be enforced. Should a cornerback on a football field commit pass interference on a long pass down the field? Should a centreback on a soccer field foul a striker heading toward her team's goal? Should a basketball team start fouling at the end of a game to try and catch up? The breaking of rules is an essential part of the fabric of sport norms and rules. So the act of breaking the rules, even intentionally, is not by itself enough to qualify as “cheating.”
Cheating, Pielke argues, is the breaking of a particular kind of rule, a constitutive rule (the rules for a game), as opposed to a regulatory rule (the rules of the game):
Ultimately, the decision to define an activity as against the rules of a game versus the rules for a game is the result of a negotiation among those who have a stake in the the game, along with those with authority to make changes. Sport is a constant negotiation between fans, administrators, athletes and others. We change rules all the time, both rules for the sport and rules of the sport. Sometimes we even move rules from one category to the other. Cheating is thus a moving target rather than something to be defined once and for all.
If you're bored by the reductive black and white certainty of some, it's worth taking a look at. Quite where gaming the TUE system sits, well let's say it's not black and white...
Can't disagree that the TUE system is a grey area when used correctly. Its actual (mis)use by athletes across all sports is fairly black and white though when you dig a little.No use going over old ground on that front. I do think certain Drugs which have known enhancement effects should be banned completely when alternative treatments are available. That would go some way to cleaning up the system.

A question on the press release- the MPCC recalled the request for a ban on certain drugs....why would they do that if they are trying to clean up cycling ? Surely they would reiterate

The board formally asks UCI and WADA for a standardization of the procedures and that a rider facing a pending antidoping enquiry should have to stop racing systematically. The MPCC also recalls its requests for a ban of the corticosteroids and tramadol use in competition.
 
Re: Re:

noddy69 said:
Can't disagree that the TUE system is a grey area when used correctly. Its actual (mis)use by athletes across all sports is fairly black and white though when you dig a little.
I guess where Froome fits, where Wiggins fits, on this is in gaming the TUE system. The point about calling it gaming is that just about all rules get gamed. A general point Pielke makes is that there are some things that can never be 'fixed', there are some problems ('wicked problems', he refers to them as) that you are always going to be in a constant struggle with. So, the TUE system, we'll firm it up (or tear it down and replace it with something else and get back to more or less the same starting point in due course), someone will come along and game the revised rules. I think a lot of us posting in the Clinic would argue that WADA hasn't made much of an effort to stop the TUE system being gamed, that really all it's done is try to make TUE's less of a public embarrassment, by removing the need for them for things like inhalers etc.
 
Re: Re:

fmk_RoI said:
noddy69 said:
Can't disagree that the TUE system is a grey area when used correctly. Its actual (mis)use by athletes across all sports is fairly black and white though when you dig a little.
I guess where Froome fits, where Wiggins fits, on this is in gaming the TUE system. The point about calling it gaming is that just about all rules get gamed. A general point Pielke makes is that there are some things that can never be 'fixed', there are some problems ('wicked problems', he refers to them as) that you are always going to be in a constant struggle with. So, the TUE system, we'll firm it up (or tear it down and replace it with something else and get back to more or less the same starting point in due course), someone will come along and game the revised rules. I think a lot of us posting in the Clinic would argue that WADA hasn't made much of an effort to stop the TUE system being gamed, that really all it's done is try to make TUE's less of a public embarrassment, by removing the need for them for things like inhalers etc.
So simple ... yet so true ... so pragmatic.

Show me a high school ... where, despite threats of detention, calls to parents, marks deducted, etc, etc ... that kids coming late for class is not an 'issue.' always will be an annoying issue ... but not the end of the world, really. Drop it, schools, You've lost the war on that one. Adapt. lesson learned.
 
Re: Re:

Alpe73 said:
Show me a high school ... where, despite threats of detention, calls to parents, marks deducted, etc, etc ... that kids coming late for class is not an 'issue.' always will be an annoying issue ... but not the end of the world, really. Drop it, schools, You've lost the war on that one. Adapt. lesson learned.
An oddly reductive black and white response from you, Alpe. :rolleyes:

Let's try this one. In the century and a quarter or so since we've had rules of the road - where to drive, who can drive, how to drive etc - we have yet to get to a point where everybody obeys the rules, we still have a substantial number of people breaking the rules on a daily basis. Drop it, traffic people. You've lost the war on that one. Adapt.

Or how about rape? Or murder? Drop it, admit defeat, adapt?
 
Look, it’s been said a thousand times..

It ain’t gaming the rules when you use the products in question for their performance enhancing capabilities, as opposed to their medicinal purpose. It’s breaking the rules, full stop.

So enough with that talking point, please ..
 
Re: Re:

TourOfSardinia said:
rick james said:
Wiggo's Package said:
lol are they for real? its nothing to do with them, sticking their oar for some free press when the team and rider has nothing to do with them and why the hell should sky do what this joke of an outfit say?

MPCC are a force for evil in cycling
:confused: Why evil James?
because they don't really care about clean cycling
 
Mar 7, 2017
1,098
0
0
Re: Re:

Wiggo's Package said:
rick james said:
Wiggo's Package said:
lol are they for real? its nothing to do with them, sticking their oar for some free press when the team and rider has nothing to do with them and why the hell should sky do what this joke of an outfit say?

MPCC are a force for evil in cycling
Kool Aid and the Gang logic

Ethical = Evil
Already time for an update to the Kool Aid and the Gang logic:

Ethical = Evil

Complying with Rules = Mug's Game


As a defence of how Team Sky has ended up in the here and now it's revealingly circular. If you think cheating is OK then cheating is of course OK. Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world

Quite how to square this off with Brailsfraud's stated aims for Team Sky when he set it up in 2010 is the puzzle of the day. Time for the Gang to get their logical mobius strips out again

Meanwhile the sneering against those who suggest ethics or rules should matter in sport is instructive. Have we reached the point yet where the only fanboys left are morally bankrupt? Team Sky's legacy
 
Feb 5, 2018
270
0
0
Re: Re:

Wiggo's Package said:
Wiggo's Package said:
rick james said:
Wiggo's Package said:
lol are they for real? its nothing to do with them, sticking their oar for some free press when the team and rider has nothing to do with them and why the hell should sky do what this joke of an outfit say?

MPCC are a force for evil in cycling
Kool Aid and the Gang logic

Ethical = Evil
Already time for an update to the Kool Aid and the Gang logic:

Ethical = Evil

Complying with Rules = Mug's Game


As a defence of how Team Sky has ended up in the here and now it's revealingly circular. If you think cheating is OK then cheating is of course OK. Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world

Quite how to square this off with Brailsfraud's stated aims for Team Sky when he set it up in 2010 is the puzzle of the day. Time for the Gang to get their logical mobius strips out again

Meanwhile the sneering against those who suggest ethics or rules should matter in sport is instructive. Have we reached the point yet where the only fanboys left are morally bankrupt? Team Sky's legacy
its a compulsion it seems. even now, there are plenty of LA fanboys on the net
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS