Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

Page 1179 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Mar 7, 2017
1,098
0
0
Re: Re:

fmk_RoI said:
Wiggo's Package said:
fmk_RoI said:
Wiggo's Package said:
But as usual you're aligning yourself with fanboy central. That quacking like a duck thing again
As the prodigal son of anti-doping, you have that horrid holier-than-thou born again thing going on, I get that. But you need to stop seeing things as black and white, saints and sinners, fanboys and the righteous chosen ones.
Quack! :D
One day you'll have to tell us just how much of a fanboi you were before your Damascene conversion. It must have been bad. Did you believe in ZTP? Extract of beetroot juice? There was a lot of fashionable nonsense about, did you hold with the view of that Bike Pure journalist that Brailsford heralded the end of omertà? That one really tickled me pink.
If you saw through Sky before they even started then why do invariably align yourself with the fanboys? Best to judge folk on what they say. Not what they claim to say. And you quack like a duck, dude :p

Like when the Dawg says he's doing everything in his power to resolve his AAF asap. A cynical misdirection playing to those left in the fanboy bleachers, IMO. Fanboys got no rational answer to that so retort with sarcasm heavy deflection tactics. Fair enough, it's a forum. But you're front and centre on the bleachers as usual, leading the jeers ;)
 
"I certainly haven't been charged (with) anything as of yet and I hope to be fully exonerated of any wrongdoing because I know I didn't do anything wrong," Froome said last week when Sky announced their Giro line-up.
https://au.news.yahoo.com/cloud-hangs-over-history-seeking-froome-giro-221134318--spt.html

That sounds like a denial that he ever was given an Acceptance of Consequences letter. Again, where are the journalists doing their freaking job? When are we going to have a cycling official who can actually speak clearly and coherently about what’s going on in this case? If he was given an Acceptance of Consequences letter, then that statement is blatantly false (one could argue it was false the day he was notified of his positive). If he wasn’t, then reports that the Tribunal is involved should be false.

All the legal talk has focused on whether the TDF could actually ban Froome from riding. But a more interesting question to me is, if he were banned some time before the Tour, could he appeal to CAS for a stay on the ban—allowing him to ride the Tour—pending the CAS decision? I’ve seen that speculated on a little in the media—even to the point of a suggestion that if a ban were handed down during the Giro, Froome might be allowed to finish the race--but I haven’t heard a lawyer weigh in.
 
Re: Re:

fmk_RoI said:
Examples of cases where CAS has 'stayed' a ban?
That's kind of what I was asking. See below.

ClassicomanoLuigi said:
If he appeals to CAS, which he probably will, he doesn't get to ride, before or during, the appeals process.
That’s kind of what I was questioning.

Since no one wanted to help, I went looking:

Within the CAS there is an option to request an immediate stay of execution, which was used in the past by Barcelona, and which enables the court to reach a verdict in a very short space of time.
http://www.marca.com/en/football/real-madrid/2016/01/16/569aaf97e2704ee6318b4657.html

The author describes how an appellant can ensure that the financial order is not enforced and the disciplinary sanction is not served pending the outcome of the appeal.
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-90-6704-808-8_14

https://books.google.com.ph/books?id=0vgC42I_H4MC&pg=PR12&lpg=PR12&dq=CAS+stay+of+execution+Barcelona&source=bl&ots=W_ujPxOmQ4&sig=ZLkQELarX0NoMmO5li0rTl4LHbc&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiA9YKIt-TaAhXIwbwKHXNgC6gQ6AEIRDAF#v=onepage&q=CAS%20stay%20of%20execution%20Barcelona&f=false

Here's an example where a stay was granted by CAS:

The Spanish club Real Madrid CF has informed the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) that it will file an appeal within the next days against the decision rendered by the FIFA Appeals Committee on 8 September 2016, confirming the decision previously taken by the FIFA Disciplinary Committee on 23 July 2015, following an alleged breach of the FIFA Rules concerning the transfer of minor players. Pursuant to such FIFA decision, Real Madrid is prevented from registering any players at national and international level for the next two complete and consecutive registration periods.

Prior to the filing of the appeal, Real Madrid CF has requested urgent interim measures from CAS in order to stay the execution of Point 6 of the FIFA decision. Such request was granted by CAS earlier today.
http://www.tas-cas.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Media_Release__English__4785.pdf

Here's an example involving a doping ban:

KINGSTON, Jamaica -- Former 100m world record holder Asafa Powell and Olympic silver medallist Sherone Simpson are now free to compete after their application to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) for a stay of the execution of the suspension were upheld.

Both sprinters were serving 18-month bans handed down by Jamaica Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel Tribunal on April 8 and the 10 and were due to return to action in December 2014.

Powell, 31 and Simpson, 29 are now free to compete in the Jamaican National Championships next week making them eligible for selection to the Commonwealth games set for July in Scotland.

But they may have to serve the remaining part of their ban later if the sanction is eventually confirmed by CAS. Both were banned following failed drug tests last year and both appealed. The hearing is scheduled for July 7-8.
http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/sport/Powell--Simpson-get-stay-of-execution-from-CAS

Another stay in a case involving doping:

The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) has granted a stay of execution of a six-month ban imposed on former Portugal coach Carlos Queiroz, the organization announced on Friday.

Queiroz was banned by the Portuguese Anti-Doping Agency after allegedly refusing doping controllers access to Portuguese players before the World Cup in South Africa.

The 57-year-old coach approached CAS to temporarily lift the ban until such time as a proper hearing could take place, expected sometime in mid-November.

Queiroz was dismissed by the Portuguese football federation a few days after being banned.
http://www.kooora.com/?n=77392

Finally, from CAS, Procedural Rules:

The Appellant shall submit to CAS a statement of appeal containing:
• the name and full address of the Respondent(s);
• a copy of the decision appealed against;
• the Appellant’s request for relief;
• the nomination of the arbitrator chosen by the Appellant from the CAS list, unless the Appellant requests the appointment of a sole arbitrator;
if applicable, an application to stay the execution of the decision appealed against, together with reasons;
• a copy of the provisions of the statutes or regulations or the specific agreement providing for appeal to CAS.
The CAS Court Office shall communicate the statement of appeal to the Respondent, and the President of the Division shall proceed with the formation of the Panel in accordance with Articles R53 and R54. If applicable, she/he shall also decide promptly on any application for a stay or for interim measures.
http://www.tas-cas.org/en/arbitration/code-procedural-rules.html
 
Re:

Parker said:
I'm certain that if Froome went down the Powell/Simpson appeal route, the ASO would exclude him - and would have solid grounds for doing so.
I can think of a couple of situations in which Froome might ask for a stay, though he probably wouldn't get it:

1) A ban is announced during the last week of the Giro. Froome argues that he should be allowed to finish, so that if he wins on appeal, he doesn’t lose his results because of a few days bad timing. Morgan would probably claim that Froome wasn't allowed to present his case fully, and that the ban should be reversed on a technicality.

2) A backdated ban of one year is announced between the Giro and the Tour, so he not only loses the Giro results, but can’t ride the Tour. Froome argues that based on history, CAS might reduce his ban to nine months, ending before the Tour, so he should be allowed to ride the Tour in case that happens. Morgan could also argue that by the rules, the ban should not have been backdated.

This is Mike Morgan, so I wouldn't rule out anything.

red_flanders said:
Interesting comments from Westra (http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/westra-admits-using-tramadol-and-caffeine-as-performance-enhancers/)

People say: 'why do you use tramadol? Why a puffer? You do not have asthma anyway'," he told the newspaper. "The answer is simple: because it is allowed and because you will perform better. And if I do not, someone else will. That's what a cyclist thinks.
Not to mention, of course, that as a general rule, a doper only admits to the mildest forms of doping he's engaged in. If he's willing to admit taking tramadol for PE, who knows what else he was taking and won't talk about.

And this is classic:

According to Volkskrant, Westra also admitted to buying his first professional victory at the 2009 Arno Wallaard Memorial...In the interview with Volkskrant, Westra maintained that he hadn’t done anything wrong and that neither case was cheating.
If buying a win isn't cheating, then what is? Note, too, how casually doping is associated with other ways of getting an edge. I have to admit that after reading this, I'm a little less skeptical of motorized bikes. The end justifies the means.
 
I swear he becomes more and more insufferable every month, every interview. He needs to stop spending time with brailsford, or maybe he was always like this and never let it show. At least before he was sort of polite and occasionally humble. Now he's arrogant and rude.

I hope the International Soviet Cycling Union unleash their communism on him soon
 
Re:

Brullnux said:
I swear he becomes more and more insufferable every month, every interview. He needs to stop spending time with brailsford, or maybe he was always like this and never let it show. At least before he was sort of polite and occasionally humble. Now he's arrogant and rude.

I hope the International Soviet Cycling Union unleash their communism on him soon
What's he said that is arrogant and/or rude as a matter of interest ? What I've read he has just repeated what he said before, didn't seem arrogant or rude. He seems fairly confident he will get off, personally I can't see it but maybe he knows something we don't or is a bit delusional or hoping for the best from his perspective.
 
Re: Re:

Merckx index said:
Parker said:
I'm certain that if Froome went down the Powell/Simpson appeal route, the ASO would exclude him - and would have solid grounds for doing so.
I can think of a couple of situations in which Froome might ask for a stay, though he probably wouldn't get it:

1) A ban is announced during the last week of the Giro. Froome argues that he should be allowed to finish, so that if he wins on appeal, he doesn’t lose his results because of a few days bad timing. Morgan would probably claim that Froome wasn't allowed to present his case fully, and that the ban should be reversed on a technicality.

2) A backdated ban of one year is announced between the Giro and the Tour, so he not only loses the Giro results, but can’t ride the Tour. Froome argues that based on history, CAS might reduce his ban to nine months, ending before the Tour, so he should be allowed to ride the Tour in case that happens. Morgan could also argue that by the rules, the ban should not have been backdated.

This is Mike Morgan, so I wouldn't rule out anything.
Good points, but I don't either scenario happening. The case hasn't gone to a hearing yet and if Froome is required to appear (even as a witness for his own side) then it will be delayed until he can.

I can't see a backdated ban without Morgan pushing for it, so he can't argue against it. (Also as Froome has been racing there would seem to be no valid reason to backdate)
 
Re: Re:

bigcog said:
Brullnux said:
I swear he becomes more and more insufferable every month, every interview. He needs to stop spending time with brailsford, or maybe he was always like this and never let it show. At least before he was sort of polite and occasionally humble. Now he's arrogant and rude.

I hope the International Soviet Cycling Union unleash their communism on him soon
What's he said that is arrogant and/or rude as a matter of interest ? What I've read he has just repeated what he said before, didn't seem arrogant or rude. He seems fairly confident he will get off, personally I can't see it but maybe he knows something we don't or is a bit delusional or hoping for the best from his perspective.
Yeah, you're right. He's just a f...ing dip ***. How's that?
 
“I'm confident that when we get to the end of the case people will see it from my point of view.”
I see it from your point of view now, Chris. Unfortunately, your point of view is self-serving--and irrelevant. Doping cases don't hinge on someone's point of view, they hinge on facts supportive of an explanation, and if we know anything at all about your case, it's that no such facts have been presented so far. If they had, we wouldn't be about to enter the ninth month of the case.

"I'm absolutely confident of where I am in this," he added. "I have done nothing wrong and I will demonstrate that."
Maybe the stress of the case is getting to Froome. CN quoted him as saying, “there are lots of time trials” in the Giro. But by his definition of “lots of”—as in, lots of riders are supportive of my racing with an unresolved AAF; lots of athletes have been cleared of a salbutamol positive without their cases ever becoming public; I’ve had lots of bad days on the bike because of schisto —I guess that would at least be consistent.

https://news.sky.com/story/chris-froome-asks-fans-not-to-make-up-their-minds-amid-doping-case-11356243

Brailsford refused to answer whether he would sack Froome should he be suspended for an anti-doping rule violation. “That’s not a question for now,” he said. “We have to respect the race.”
Respecting the race by dodging a question about zero tolerance.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/may/02/chris-froome-prepares-giro-d-italia-team-sky-main-men-brailsford
 
Ugh? Seems odd ... or the Froome plan of a ban after Tdf is on track -

http://www.velonews.com/2018/05/giro-ditalia/giro-director-uci-assured-us-froome-wouldnt-stripped-giro-win_464992
Chris Froome will not be stripped of victory should he triumph at the Giro d’Italia this month, race organizers insisted on Thursday.
...
That raised the possibility that he could win the Giro but then be stripped of victory if he is subsequently banned.

Giro director Mauro Vegni insisted he had assurances from UCI president David Lappartient that such an eventuality wouldn’t happen.
 
Re:

Robert5091 said:
https://www.bbc.com/sport/cycling/43980237
Asked if he will be cleared, Froome said: "Yes. I certainly expect to be."
BS-ing or knows something? :confused:
Seriously, what do you expect him to say? If he's innocent, that's exactly what you'd expect him to say. If he's guilty, that's exactly what you'd expect him to say. Come on, what are you hoping for here, that in an unguarded moment he'll reply that he's absolutely shitting himself with the panic, that he can't sleep, he's off his food, he's kicked the cat?

Come on, it's a pre-Giro presser, it's not meant to elicit truths, it's there to fill air time and provide column inches...
 
Jul 14, 2015
708
0
0
Robert5091 said:
Ugh? Seems odd ... or the Froome plan of a ban after Tdf is on track -

http://www.velonews.com/2018/05/giro-ditalia/giro-director-uci-assured-us-froome-wouldnt-stripped-giro-win_464992
Chris Froome will not be stripped of victory should he triumph at the Giro d’Italia this month, race organizers insisted on Thursday.
...
That raised the possibility that he could win the Giro but then be stripped of victory if he is subsequently banned.

Giro director Mauro Vegni insisted he had assurances from UCI president David Lappartient that such an eventuality wouldn’t happen.
That sounds like a crass procedural misstep that would sink any UCI case. Thats alongside the other procedural issues we already have ("leaks").
 
Re:

Djoop said:
Isn't it a bit strange that the same guy who called out Sky to suspend Froome has made a deal with the Giro director to secure his participation in the Giro? And what kind of assurances can the UCI president give.. officially?
First, Vegni could be full of ***, let's not forget that. Saying he's had assurances when he's had no such thing. Second, Lappartiant could have explained the rules to him, which seem to be that there's a better than evens chance that no ban will impact on results other than the Vuelta. The first is the more important point, but the second is just as important.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts