Well, ASO is "entitled" to do what it takes to protect their race from another scandal-within the rules too-and they're simply exercising the right to prevent him from starting Le Tour, according to Article 29 below:wrinklyvet said:There is nothing more political than this ASO decision and those who distrust lawyers and money will be disappointed to note that again it will be beneficial to be a sports lawyer! I think the idea that lawyers manipulate the length or complexity of cases to feather their own nests is attractive and occasionally true, but do you have to be a lawyer to take a more dispassionate view and particularly that someone in Froome's position is entitled to do what it takes to achieve what seems best, within the rules?hfer07 said:I'm glad with the ASO stand on Froome- too late & controversial to be well understood, but certainly they have the right to prevent him from racing Le Tour, mostly because the UCI forced their hand to act in such way due to the long decision on his case. We simply cannot have in Pro-Cycling cases like Froome's to be dragged for months due to money & politics, putting races results in limbo, just because lawyers & sponsors have powers to maneuver doping cases to make the most of it in favor of their clients, as the situation fits in.......
Froome should have never been allowed to start Il Giro to begin with, Let alone Win it and now go to Le Tour with impunity ready to win it as well.
Article 29 (ASO)
(in compliance with UCI),
“ASO expressly reserves the right to refuse the participation in
– or disqualify from – the event, a team or one of its members whose presence is liable to damage the image or reputation of ASO or those of the event.”