Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

Page 1140 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
rick james said:
TourOfSardinia said:
Alpe73 said:
gillan1969 said:
The Giro killed the GT career of that other skinny no hope GC-er that became super-dominant...we can live in hope that, like the 'transformation' history repeats itself...
"Live in hope."

Here's to you, Gillian! I hope you go the distance, brutha. It'll make you a much better person.
Hey Alp73 :confused: GIllian is already a better person.
In any case if there is intense cold at the Giro the odds on CF surely drop.
Witness how he lost 48s to Nibali on the penultimate stage of T-A in 2013 when Sagan
won the stage and VIncenzo moved into the azzurra jersey.
Being so skinny in the cold is a liablity.
Yes, winner winner chicken dinner....knew this extra lard would come in handy for something
Not much lard there:
http://static.suipedali.it/625X0/www/suipedali/it/img/Tirreno-Adriatico-2013-bis-Vincenzo-Nibali.jpg
 
Alpe73 said:
gillan1969 said:
The Giro killed the GT career of that other skinny no hope GC-er that became super-dominant...we can live in hope that, like the 'transformation' history repeats itself...
"Live in hope."

Here's to you, Gillian! I hope you go the distance, brutha. It'll make you a much better person.
Froomes demise = one less fraud who is (to use one of Hick's better lines) "tainting our collective unconscious and making us pay a higher psychic price than we can imagine" ;)

besides...all this talk of boring GTs....it's Belgium this weekend...proper racing :)
 
gillan1969 said:
Alpe73 said:
gillan1969 said:
The Giro killed the GT career of that other skinny no hope GC-er that became super-dominant...we can live in hope that, like the 'transformation' history repeats itself...
"Live in hope."

Here's to you, Gillian! I hope you go the distance, brutha. It'll make you a much better person.
Froomes demise = one less fraud who is (to use one of Hick's better lines) "tainting our collective unconscious and making us pay a higher psychic price than we can imagine" ;)

besides...all this talk of boring GTs....it's Belgium this weekend...proper racing :)
After a coupla beer, we're all frauds, Gillian. ;)
 
Re: Re:

spetsa said:
bambino said:
King Boonen said:
RCS are bound by the World Tour regulations they agreed to when they applied for WT status for the Giro. They are required to invite all WT teams and have no control over who those teams bring.
Absolutely correct. Though I don't think it generically prevails 2.2.010bis. If it does, the whole 2.2.010bis is meaningless (for WT events) and should be removed completely.
These kind of rules are fairly common I believe, it's the use of them that is important. Whichever side of the argument people fall on, it's hard to say that this applies in this case. Froome, so far, is free to race. I do agree that the chance for him to bring the race into disrepute is higher, if we interpret disrepute as reassigning results, but this could equally apply to certain sprinters, teams with a history of doing, riders with a history of offensive views etc. I honestly find it hard to believe the Giro would win that fight, but I do think they would have a case.
Yep. This is aligned with my view.
King Boonen, in one post you claim RCS has no say in who teams invite due to the races WT status. In the next post you say although success is unlikely, RCS could attempt to exclude Froome, and in fact they have a case. :confused:
Yes, but that's pretty standard. The regulations I quoted have to be adhered to by all WT event organisers. One of the main aims of these regulations is to help secure a sustainable future for cycling. Sponsors know that sponsoring a WT team gets them exposure in the biggest races of the year. No WT means ASO, RCS etc. pick and choose who they want and it all becomes a lottery or based on how much money people throw at riders. All parties benefit from the WT structure (and in some ways lose out), event organisers get the best riders, teams know their participation is guaranteed and the UCI gets the best races as part of its calendar.

However, because the regulations the event organisers sign up to mean they have to accept third parties there will always be a clause that allows them to challenge the inclusion of these third parties. This is the disrepute clause that is being discussed. The thing to understand about this clause is it doesn't allow RCS to just say no and that's it, it specifically requires agreement between the parties and if agreement isn't reached it will go before CAS (or the Chambre for the TDF). The barrier for RCS saying no is high and this discussion should be centred on whether Froome's participation reaches it. Personally I find it very, very difficult to see RCS winning.
 
Re: Re:

bambino said:
I'm with you (and Alpe73). I think we all start to agree there is a case for RCS to decline his participation, but it will be hard and their motives to do so are questionable.
Bambino - given that for more than a month now your clear position has been the clause exists and the presence in it of the word "might" means RCS don't have to prove disrepute, just claim it, and given that for more than a month now you've chosen to ignore expert legal opinion on the difficulties that can be encountered with claims of disrepute, and given that for more than a month now you've chosen to ignore the decision in the Valverde case, perhaps you could explain for us schmucks in the cheap seats why you suddenly now believe that winning a disrepute case "will be hard."
 
Re: Re:

King Boonen said:
The thing to understand about this clause is it doesn't allow RCS to just say no and that's it, it specifically requires agreement between the parties and if agreement isn't reached it will go before CAS (or the Chambre for the TDF). The barrier for RCS saying no is high and this discussion should be centred on whether Froome's participation reaches it. Personally I find it very, very difficult to see RCS winning.
Perhaps we could start with the claim by legal experts on disrepute that we have to separate the actions of the athlete from the media circus surrounding the public discussion of them.

Then we could move into the area of pre-crime: the probability of the AAF becoming an ADRV, times the probability of the sanction being of sufficient length to remove Froome from the Giro, times the probability of Froome actually winning the Giro being a number sufficiently high to pre-emptively ban him. An argument which the Valverde case says breaks the principle of nulla poena sine culpa if the athlete is cleared and the double jeopardy principle if he's guilty.
 
Re:

TourOfSardinia said:
I'm not a Mod but fmk_RoI and bambino please revise this Moderate advice viewtopic.php?p=2226469#p2226469
Especially:
2. You are not required to reply to every single post in a topic. If you disagree with something you can either reply or ignore it.
Your ego is your own concern not ours - pls deal with it by PM not public forum.
Follow your own advice ToS. Ironic, isn't it?
 
Re: Re:

fmk_RoI said:
TourOfSardinia said:
I'm not a Mod but fmk_RoI and bambino please revise this Moderate advice viewtopic.php?p=2226469#p2226469
Especially:
2. You are not required to reply to every single post in a topic. If you disagree with something you can either reply or ignore it.
Your ego is your own concern not ours - pls deal with it by PM not public forum.
Follow your own advice ToS. Ironic, isn't it?
We are not all here solely for you. It is a forum for many. Perhaps loosen the grip slightly and learn to interoperate with all that are here. ToS is talking sense.
 
Re: Re:

thehog said:
fmk_RoI said:
TourOfSardinia said:
I'm not a Mod but fmk_RoI and bambino please revise this Moderate advice viewtopic.php?p=2226469#p2226469
Especially:
2. You are not required to reply to every single post in a topic. If you disagree with something you can either reply or ignore it.
Your ego is your own concern not ours - pls deal with it by PM not public forum.
Follow your own advice ToS. Ironic, isn't it?
We are not all here solely for you. It is a forum for many. Perhaps loosen the grip slightly and learn to interoperate with all that are here. ToS is talking sense.
To repeat the response previously given: medice, cura te ipsum.
 
Re: Re:

fmk_RoI said:
thehog said:
fmk_RoI said:
TourOfSardinia said:
I'm not a Mod but fmk_RoI and bambino please revise this Moderate advice viewtopic.php?p=2226469#p2226469
Especially:
2. You are not required to reply to every single post in a topic. If you disagree with something you can either reply or ignore it.
Your ego is your own concern not ours - pls deal with it by PM not public forum.
Follow your own advice ToS. Ironic, isn't it?
We are not all here solely for you. It is a forum for many. Perhaps loosen the grip slightly and learn to interoperate with all that are here. ToS is talking sense.
To repeat the response previously given: medice, cura te ipsum.
Well that’s just silly. You’re trying to show off again, learn to interact and discuss with others, you never know you might enjoy it :cool:
 
Re:

fmk_RoI said:
It's amazing how often people screaming "DISRUPTION!" totally disrupt attempts at discussion. Especially amazing is when they can't follow their own advice.
Nothing to do with disruption. You’re making up the narrative again. What I said it learn to listen and discuss with others.

This single post from you all on its own has just proven you can’t listen and can’t interact with others :cool:
 
Re: Re:

MartinGT said:
Parker said:
MartinGT said:
I'm just listening to that Moore interview.

Absolutely laughable. The bloke (Dawg) is a complete and utter fraud. He says that loads of jurnos were asking if he was ill, as mentioned previously. Yet not ONE word of this was put out to the general public. He tells that many lies he doesn't understand reality now/
Eh? You expect him to tell everyone he's ill in the middle of a race? Who would do that?
So the jurnos who apparently see him on deaths door, almost on a ventolator if you beleive what he is saying, they wouldnt write that?

Aye you are correct, how silly of me.

'Today Froome looked good at the end of the stage, almost as if he had just walked into the breafast room ready for a day fishing'

:lol: :lol:
There was a fair few comments floating around the media centre that Froome was suffering with breathing and noticed by various journalists during interviews. The fact it isn't necessarily talked about in the press at the time, is because Froome didn't necessarily say he was having breathing difficulties, so they can't just put it in a piece about Froome if he didn't confirm it. Since Vuelta finished i've read/heard several journalists say they noticed Froome was not breathing so good and sounding like he was suffering at Vuelta more than they are used to noticing.
Clearly as a rider, you might confirm crash injuries in a generic sense of the usual, yes, i'll have a bad nights sleep and we'l' see how bad it is in the morning. Every riders knows you've crashed, they'll all know the next 48 hours especially will be your worst, so you can't hide from them knowing that. You can however not say you're ill, even if asked if you're ill you will obviously not tell the whole truth for feat of giving away your weakness as opportunity to others to attack you perhaps in ways to reduce you GC lead even more. I think when you are not GC leader, things can be a bit more transparent with the press as generally, the leaders jersey doesn't attack you, but rather defends the jersey as a less risky preference to maintaining it.
 
Re:

Robert5091 said:
Maybe it'll come down to will the Israelis (who've put up a lot of money for race) want a rider with a doping ban hanging over him participating? People will not be talking of "history, heritage, “magical views” and holy sites" but Froome's urine.
They might welcome it to draw the attention away from Bibi.
 
Re: Re:

samhocking said:
MartinGT said:
Parker said:
MartinGT said:
I'm just listening to that Moore interview.

Absolutely laughable. The bloke (Dawg) is a complete and utter fraud. He says that loads of jurnos were asking if he was ill, as mentioned previously. Yet not ONE word of this was put out to the general public. He tells that many lies he doesn't understand reality now/
Eh? You expect him to tell everyone he's ill in the middle of a race? Who would do that?
So the jurnos who apparently see him on deaths door, almost on a ventolator if you beleive what he is saying, they wouldnt write that?

Aye you are correct, how silly of me.

'Today Froome looked good at the end of the stage, almost as if he had just walked into the breafast room ready for a day fishing'

:lol: :lol:
There was a fair few comments floating around the media centre that Froome was suffering with breathing and noticed by various journalists during interviews. The fact it isn't necessarily talked about in the press at the time, is because Froome didn't necessarily say he was having breathing difficulties, so they can't just put it in a piece about Froome if he didn't confirm it. Since Vuelta finished i've read/heard several journalists say they noticed Froome was not breathing so good and sounding like he was suffering at Vuelta more than they are used to noticing.
There was? You were in the media center to hear these comments? :cool:
 
Re: Re:

samhocking said:
There was a fair few comments floating around the media centre that Froome was suffering with breathing and noticed by various journalists during interviews.
Are you a reporter who was there? How would you know this?

The fact it isn't necessarily talked about in the press at the time, is because Froome didn't necessarily say he was having breathing difficulties, so they can't just put it in a piece about Froome if he didn't confirm it.
So if they noticed he wasn’t breathing so well, they couldn’t write that unless Froome confirmed it for them? If Froome was coughing a lot in interviews, can’t mention that unless Froome confirms he was coughing? I saw reports that Froome was smiling at the end of some stages, I guess they shouldn’t have written that unless Froome confirmed that he was smiling.

Since Vuelta finished i've read/heard several journalists say they noticed Froome was not breathing so good and sounding like he was suffering at Vuelta more than they are used to noticing.
Link?

You can however not say you're ill, even if asked if you're ill you will obviously not tell the whole truth for feat of giving away your weakness as opportunity to others to attack you perhaps in ways to reduce you GC lead even more.
If a rider will never confirm that he’s ill, and reporters won't write about something unless he confirms it, that sounds like an effective taboo on ever reporting on a rider's physical health. I wasn't aware that there was such a taboo.
 
Re: Re:

samhocking said:
MartinGT said:
Parker said:
MartinGT said:
I'm just listening to that Moore interview.

Absolutely laughable. The bloke (Dawg) is a complete and utter fraud. He says that loads of jurnos were asking if he was ill, as mentioned previously. Yet not ONE word of this was put out to the general public. He tells that many lies he doesn't understand reality now/
Eh? You expect him to tell everyone he's ill in the middle of a race? Who would do that?
So the jurnos who apparently see him on deaths door, almost on a ventolator if you beleive what he is saying, they wouldnt write that?

Aye you are correct, how silly of me.

'Today Froome looked good at the end of the stage, almost as if he had just walked into the breafast room ready for a day fishing'

:lol: :lol:
There was a fair few comments floating around the media centre that Froome was suffering with breathing and noticed by various journalists during interviews. The fact it isn't necessarily talked about in the press at the time, is because Froome didn't necessarily say he was having breathing difficulties, so they can't just put it in a piece about Froome if he didn't confirm it. Since Vuelta finished i've read/heard several journalists say they noticed Froome was not breathing so good and sounding like he was suffering at Vuelta more than they are used to noticing.
Clearly as a rider, you might confirm crash injuries in a generic sense of the usual, yes, i'll have a bad nights sleep and we'l' see how bad it is in the morning. Every riders knows you've crashed, they'll all know the next 48 hours especially will be your worst, so you can't hide from them knowing that. You can however not say you're ill, even if asked if you're ill you will obviously not tell the whole truth for feat of giving away your weakness as opportunity to others to attack you perhaps in ways to reduce you GC lead even more. I think when you are not GC leader, things can be a bit more transparent with the press as generally, the leaders jersey doesn't attack you, but rather defends the jersey as a less risky preference to maintaining it.
See you got the latest Sky press release this morning
 
Re: Re:

Merckx index said:
samhocking said:
There was a fair few comments floating around the media centre that Froome was suffering with breathing and noticed by various journalists during interviews.
Are you a reporter who was there? How would you know this?

The fact it isn't necessarily talked about in the press at the time, is because Froome didn't necessarily say he was having breathing difficulties, so they can't just put it in a piece about Froome if he didn't confirm it.
So if they noticed he wasn’t breathing so well, they couldn’t write that unless Froome confirmed it for them? If Froome was coughing a lot in interviews, can’t mention that unless Froome confirms he was coughing? I saw reports that Froome was smiling at the end of some stages, I guess they shouldn’t have written that unless Froome confirmed that he was smiling.

Since Vuelta finished i've read/heard several journalists say they noticed Froome was not breathing so good and sounding like he was suffering at Vuelta more than they are used to noticing.
Link?

You can however not say you're ill, even if asked if you're ill you will obviously not tell the whole truth for feat of giving away your weakness as opportunity to others to attack you perhaps in ways to reduce you GC lead even more.
If a rider will never confirm that he’s ill, and reporters won't write about something unless he confirms it, that sounds like an effective taboo on ever reporting on a rider's physical health. I wasn't aware that there was such a taboo.
Well one journalist seemed to think his fellow journo's had been talking about it, as posted upthread :cool:

'Here's Daniel Freibe asking him about the speculation that he's been ill: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkBT13_ELCM&t=54s'
 
Re:

TourOfSardinia said:
From the you tube interview:
CF: I felt quite within myself today
I felt fine today.
not a cough either...
Yes but don't forget he's had a few extra puffs to make sure he's not coughing during the interview on stage 18 :D

But seriously, surely we can agree that in sport at this level psychology plays a big part, and it would be foolish to not try and make light of any slight weaknesses for fear of encouraging your opponents to be a little more audacious in attacking than they might otherwise be?

The starting point of this little sub thread was the suggestion that there was no evidence that any journo's had been talking about Froome appearing unwell during previous Vuelta stages.

Surely the clip posted at least provides that evidence, even it doesn't prove much else...
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY