Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

[Dazed and Confused]

For the life of me, I can't imagine where such rumors could have originated.

better stick to Sky Sports 1,2,3,4,5 or Times along with a couple of one liners for The Sun.

 

[thehog]

I haven't read the whole thread so I don't know if anything about Froome and TUE's has been mentioned. An interview with him has been played on 5Live tonight and he was asked about whether he had any. He said he didn't but I found it a bit odd that he was questioned specifically about them as if there might be some rumors that he actually does have some.

Funny that

 

[Afrank]

Chris Froome on @bbc5live says he & Team Sky have already beaten Contador so: "I don't think we have to be worried about him"..

Good, I hope they keep thinking like this. Thinking you don't have to worry about Contador could very well lead to the downfall of Sky in the Tour.

 

[BroDeal]

Chris Froome on @bbc5live says he & Team Sky have already beaten Contador so: "I don't think we have to be worried about him"..

The arrogance of these guys is amazing. It is like Armstrong when he knew he had UCI protection plus the best doping program.

The race is fixed from the beginning and these guys know it.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

“Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed: everything else is public relations.”― George Orwell

 

[Bag_O_Wallet]

The cycling media is still very much omerta. Everyone is printing that ridiculous badzilla story like its gospel and a perfectly reasonable explanation for why Froome is the new Riis.

Perhaps they think we're cows, and we need to keep eating the same regurgitated mess over and over again.

 

[BroDeal]

I wish I could say I am looking forward to laughing at the crap that is sure to be spewed by Liggett, but I don't intend to watch this joke of a Tour so I won't hear it first hand anyway.

 

[martinvickers]

Even though you have me on ignore I will admit. I love it.

Sans Dawg and there would be no comedy value at this Tour.

The only question. How genius will the Dawg go?

My heart would love to see Dan Martin do something special (I know, i know...)

MY genuine race fan mind is intrigued at Quintana

My 'aware of dope' head is franky more interested in the UCi election, and the Puerto appeal.

But I will admit, some weird part of me wants to see what happens in here if Froome goes all Kal-El. I sweat to Lord Yoda, there will be aneurisms in here.

 

[Ferminal]

I wish I could say I am looking forward to laughing at the crap that is sure to be spewed by Liggett, but I don't intend to watch this joke of a Tour so I won't hear it first hand anyway.

"Alberto Contador is a changed man"

Personally I'm interested in seeing how they will commentate for 50 hours without filling time with conversation about "a certain man by the name of..."

 

[vrusimov]

And here I didn't think CN could disgrace themselves any further.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/chris-froome-from-cycling-slum-dog-to-monte-carlo-millionaire

It reads like something forwarded directly from Froome's family members. WTF kind of article is that?

So instead, he had to settle for Michelle? Bet she's thrilled by that assessment.


Was that bit for comic relief?




LOL! If that's not trolling...


Such a lack of bias.


That's real journalism right there, kids.


FFS, what an absurd piece.

Yeah...I can't get my finger down my throat fast enough. Utter shamelessness!

 

[veganrob]

I wish I could say I am looking forward to laughing at the crap that is sure to be spewed by Liggett, but I don't intend to watch this joke of a Tour so I won't hear it first hand anyway.

Nah, me neither. Think I'll go dust the cobwebs off my bike and go for a ride. Something us Sky hating, badzilla loving, unicorn killers don't ever do.

 

[hiero2]

. . .
I believe one of the biggest issues is that if it is not 100% natural, it is probably 100% legal within the existing rules. It is also Very Expensive.

Yes - I think more than a few of us are of the same opinion. Legal, but pushing the envelope - watching the letter rather than the spirit of the rules - and likely expensive.

 

[Ripper]

And here I didn't think CN could disgrace themselves any further.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/chris-froome-from-cycling-slum-dog-to-monte-carlo-millionaire

I know! It's absolutely terrrible!

It reads like something forwarded directly from Froome's family members. WTF kind of article is that?

I called it fluff, but it's much worse. It's inventive fluff propoganda!

So instead, he had to settle for Michelle? Bet she's thrilled by that assessment.

Well, she's not a model. I guess he settled for something he could ignore?

Was that bit for comic relief?


LOL! If that's not trolling...


Such a lack of bias.


That's real journalism right there, kids.


FFS, what an absurd piece.

I'm still laughing, it's just that bad.

OMG

 

[Ripper]

Nah, me neither. Think I'll go dust the cobwebs off my bike and go for a ride. Something us Sky hating, badzilla loving, unicorn killers don't ever do.

You people are such f**king evil haterz and have no life and don't love bikes or racing and ...

Oh wait, that's me too

 

[momomomo]

And so I started reading the article and my mind read the first part as: If he wins the Tour de France, Froome's expected new contract with Team Sky will make him one of the highest earns in the peloton with probable earnings of at least four million EPO.

I guess I should be sad I don't belive in miracles...

 

[armchairclimber]

For those able to get it, cycling's weekly airing on BBC Radio. The last hour or so features Rob Hayles (a clinic fave I'm sure) and Alex Dowsett talking about the tour. There's even a lovely interview with Froome where he explains how he'll deal with the question of doping. Enjoy.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b02ykzmq

Froome is in the last half hour.

 

[bobbins]

If it's not detectable, it's not doping.

That seems to be the current thinking.

 

[armchairclimber]

It gets trickier when there are products which do much the same thing as AICAR that aren't on the WADA banned list. If it's not banned, it's not doping?

 

[del1962]

It gets trickier when there are products which do much the same thing as AICAR that aren't on the WADA banned list. If it's not banned, it's not doping?

Which products are you alluding towards?

 

[horsinabout]

Woops...reached saturation scepticism point, beyond the point of no return! And depending on your world view constructs, this is where you start to calculate by how much you are being cheated

None of the articles or interviews with Sky and Froome have they actually stated they are not doping. And it might be because of all the above and this...

"He wisely hired a serious agent to manage his interests and secure his role as Team leader for Team Sky at the 2013 Tour de France". [url=http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/chris-froome-from-cycling-slum-dog-to-monte-carlo-millionaire]http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/chr ... illionaire[/url]

All the stuff I read on these threads about current confessions by past dopers, and are they bad guys or nice guys arguments rattle on.

One thing is all past and present dopers have one similarity in common...they sell their souls to the devil, reluctantly or otherwise.

 

[blackcat]

Woops...reached saturation scepticism point, beyond the point of no return! And depending on your world view constructs, this is where you start to calculate by how much you are being cheated

None of the articles or interviews with Sky and Froome have they actually stated they are not doping. And it might be because of all the above and this...

"He wisely hired a serious agent to manage his interests and secure his role as Team leader for Team Sky at the 2013 Tour de France". [url=http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/chris-froome-from-cycling-slum-dog-to-monte-carlo-millionaire]http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/chr ... illionaire[/url]

All the stuff I read on these threads about current confessions by past dopers, and are they bad guys or nice guys arguments rattle on.

One thing is all past and present dopers have one similarity in common...they sell their souls to the devil, reluctantly or otherwise.

i have speculated complete transparency, truth/honesty.

but i know what went on. i have to ask myself, do i wish for the mea culpa and self flagellation to sate my motive?

even with the old vanguard coming to the party, i still cannot see a fundamental change.

i reckon JV and others have ushered in a new era of tempered doping, and acceptable limits. but it is a slippery slope, and sky want to take all the chocolates.

is there a difference between a garmin tempered doping, and a sky nigh usps doping? there is a difference on the road. i know. i am asking, is there a philosophical difference?

is some doping, or a tempered doping, like being part pregnant. you p!ss on the coloured cardboard, and instead of getting pink or sepia, you get purple.

 

[JimmyFingers]

One thing is all past and present dopers have one similarity in common...they sell their souls to the devil, reluctantly or otherwise.

The devil? Doping is a pretty sordid affair, but there are far more evil things afoot in this world

 

[rainman]

The cycling media is still very much omerta. Everyone is printing that ridiculous badzilla story like its gospel and a perfectly reasonable explanation for why Froome is the new Riis.

That way they ride the glory story- slumdog makes good -all the way to the top. Then suddenly a kid shouts out 'the king is a naked oaf!' and its another gravy train all the way back down to a Lance type ground zero.

Or call it The Tragic Tale of the Man with Bilge-arsia. Everones a winner, except for the cycling fans who hoped they could believe their eyes this time.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Bilge-arsia, good work

 

[The Hitch]

Es had a piece on froome yesterday's. Apparently since his time as a neopro froome has improved "steadily", but his goal was always to win the tour de France.

Yep just like Wiggins who's goal was always to win the tour de France even back when he said he didn't know if he would even ride it again.