-
The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
thehog
BANNED
I don't know if Froome did anything illegal. If WADA withdrew from the case I guess there is a good chance Froome indeed didn't do anything illegal. I simply don't know and let's face it, most of you don't know either. The problem isn't that any rider didn't get banned after producing a positive doping test, it's who that rider is and what he means to cycling.
The majority of the cycling world is sick of team sky and everything it stands for. They can buy the best riders to be almost invincible in grand tours, they somehow have the power to transform track riders or complete nobodies into tour de france winner as long as they have a british passport and whenever you think, now is the point where they finally fail, when the 90%, who watch Froome high speed pedalling away from everyone annoyed, finally think they get their redemption, Sky punches them in the face while laughing at them. Froome finally cracks at the Vuelta? Nope, it was only a bad day, he takes all the time he lost on Nibali back just one day later. Froome was tested positive on the day of his sudden resurrection and gets a doping ban? Nope, Sky manages to delay the procedures so Froome can ride the whole 2017 season pretending nothing ever happened and claiming IT'S ALL THE MEDIA'S FAULT. Froome cracks under the immense media pressure at the Giro? Nope, he was just saving his legs so he can win the tour and gained back the time he lost over three weeks on one single day. But then finally, the ASO bans Froome from the tour ensuring that cycling's biggest race gets its first good edition since freakin 2011? Nope, one day later Froome gets cleared from all allegations, because Sky had enough money to get him out of a case although Petacchi and Ulissi got banned for doing exactly the same. At some point even sky fans have to understand why everyone else is angry. Watching cycling as someone who doesn't like sky has become nonsensical. You are basically watching just to get punched in the gut at the end and it feels like these punches are only getting harder and harder.
Just think about it, Ulissi and Petacchi (if he was still riding) would never be signed by sky because sky has a no tolerance policy, but at the same time the whole team is still dedicated to a rider who did the same. It just all feels so wrong.
The majority of the cycling world is sick of team sky and everything it stands for. They can buy the best riders to be almost invincible in grand tours, they somehow have the power to transform track riders or complete nobodies into tour de france winner as long as they have a british passport and whenever you think, now is the point where they finally fail, when the 90%, who watch Froome high speed pedalling away from everyone annoyed, finally think they get their redemption, Sky punches them in the face while laughing at them. Froome finally cracks at the Vuelta? Nope, it was only a bad day, he takes all the time he lost on Nibali back just one day later. Froome was tested positive on the day of his sudden resurrection and gets a doping ban? Nope, Sky manages to delay the procedures so Froome can ride the whole 2017 season pretending nothing ever happened and claiming IT'S ALL THE MEDIA'S FAULT. Froome cracks under the immense media pressure at the Giro? Nope, he was just saving his legs so he can win the tour and gained back the time he lost over three weeks on one single day. But then finally, the ASO bans Froome from the tour ensuring that cycling's biggest race gets its first good edition since freakin 2011? Nope, one day later Froome gets cleared from all allegations, because Sky had enough money to get him out of a case although Petacchi and Ulissi got banned for doing exactly the same. At some point even sky fans have to understand why everyone else is angry. Watching cycling as someone who doesn't like sky has become nonsensical. You are basically watching just to get punched in the gut at the end and it feels like these punches are only getting harder and harder.
Just think about it, Ulissi and Petacchi (if he was still riding) would never be signed by sky because sky has a no tolerance policy, but at the same time the whole team is still dedicated to a rider who did the same. It just all feels so wrong.
rick james
BANNED
Craig lives not far from me, I can confirm I paid him a late night visit, had a word, case closed...you are welcome clinicthehog said:
Gigs_98 said:
I couldnt agree more... I love cycling. And to see this bafoon win every race that I get excited about while getting covered by everyone and everybody... it is just plain wrong.
Re: Re:
[/quote]Buggeration take the nation. Prudhomme has just told Reuters that the disrepute case is dropped. We'll have no clarity on it. This is like cancelling Lost right before the final episode: you can live without seeing it, might even be happier not seeing it, but some morbid fascination makes you want to be there for it.
For ASO, I'd call this a moral victory. They get to look like they tried. No one will remember that they didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of winning at French CAS, all that will be remembered is they tried.[/quote]
The timing of ASO's move, a day before the decision is announced cannot be coincedental? They must have known an announcement was about to be made?
Why not wait another day, If they cared even a tiny little bit about the sport in general? Whatever the decision was going to be, they still could have held the moral high ground.
[/quote]Buggeration take the nation. Prudhomme has just told Reuters that the disrepute case is dropped. We'll have no clarity on it. This is like cancelling Lost right before the final episode: you can live without seeing it, might even be happier not seeing it, but some morbid fascination makes you want to be there for it.
For ASO, I'd call this a moral victory. They get to look like they tried. No one will remember that they didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of winning at French CAS, all that will be remembered is they tried.[/quote]
The timing of ASO's move, a day before the decision is announced cannot be coincedental? They must have known an announcement was about to be made?
Why not wait another day, If they cared even a tiny little bit about the sport in general? Whatever the decision was going to be, they still could have held the moral high ground.
I am glad cycling is a clean sport these days. This shows that the governing bodies and teams work in perfect harmony. This whole situation raises zero concerns with me on how clean cycling is these days... ;-)
thehog said:
Is it a pre-requisite to be a corrupt liar to obtain a Knighthood?
Sir Dave, Sir Brad, Sir Craig.......
And to all those saying this should have been confidential, bla blah, yeah, just imagine how many times he may have escaped in the same way and we know nothing about it. Good that it's been leaked. Now we all know for sure that he's a fraud.
God I'm so salty :lol:
God I'm so salty :lol:
Re:
But does it...it was an AAF. Despite all of the bickering over terminology on here, it was never, as i understand it, formally called a doping violation.
An AAF, the nature of the specified substance, and the policies and procedures in place relative to both have been run through to a conclusion here, and as could always happen an outcome of no case to answer has been returned.
The big spanner in the works has been the fact that due to the leak all of these prodedures have been under the spotlight. The wider public, with no inside knowledge on the case have been invited to wreak havoc and rip to pieces, add to and inflate every single aspect of the case.
If you take this element of the case out, then Wada will probably contest that there regulations and procedures have been proven to be sound by the methodical way they've come to this conclusion.
But of course that logic is completely swamped by all of the non facts which have been given much more airtime than the actual facts.
Yingge said:
But does it...it was an AAF. Despite all of the bickering over terminology on here, it was never, as i understand it, formally called a doping violation.
An AAF, the nature of the specified substance, and the policies and procedures in place relative to both have been run through to a conclusion here, and as could always happen an outcome of no case to answer has been returned.
The big spanner in the works has been the fact that due to the leak all of these prodedures have been under the spotlight. The wider public, with no inside knowledge on the case have been invited to wreak havoc and rip to pieces, add to and inflate every single aspect of the case.
If you take this element of the case out, then Wada will probably contest that there regulations and procedures have been proven to be sound by the methodical way they've come to this conclusion.
But of course that logic is completely swamped by all of the non facts which have been given much more airtime than the actual facts.
thehog
BANNED
Re:
Agreed. This actually looks a lot worse than if it concluded itself with Froome let off or with a short ban
Kernel said:
Agreed. This actually looks a lot worse than if it concluded itself with Froome let off or with a short ban
Well today's the day pro-cycling officially give up any remaining pretense of trying to clean up.
rick james
BANNED
Sky fans having a field day gloating - it'll come back to haunt them - they don't care about the future of this sport
Has anyone checked Bikeretard forum
Has anyone checked Bikeretard forum
Epo is not a ped. Salbutomol metabolises strangely in dogs. Froome walks. Money talks and *** walks.
rick james
BANNED
Re:
if you cared for the future of the sport you wouldn't have welcomed Bertie back....after all a convicted doper getting to ride again? what's that all about?LaFlorecita said:
rick james
BANNED
Something else that doesn't add up. One day we hear how Sky is all about marginal gains, in fact, posting all of their people up and down the road on the Giro to make sure Froomie is properly hydrated, fed etc. But when convenient, he is dehydrated to the point that it completely throws off his urine / kidney function. Anyone function at their best in a GT when completely dehydrated? Not buying what they are selling.
In essence: how much does it cost to turn 2,000mgs into >1,000 and/or uncertainty?
That was the legal brief, that was the legal bill, that was the legal outcome.
That was the legal brief, that was the legal bill, that was the legal outcome.
rick james
BANNED
Re:
Properly hydrated lol... that’s the same bulls—t Landis used during his 2006 raid. Remember Allen Lim following him in car with a case of bottles and rice cakes? Hardly revolutionary stuff there.
attila said:
Properly hydrated lol... that’s the same bulls—t Landis used during his 2006 raid. Remember Allen Lim following him in car with a case of bottles and rice cakes? Hardly revolutionary stuff there.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread- Started by DNP-Old
- Replies: 29K
-
Teams & Riders The Great Big Cycling Transfers, Extensions, and Rumours Thread- Started by RedheadDane
- Replies: 11K
-
Teams & Riders Tadej Pogačar discussion thread- Started by Lequack
- Replies: 23K
-
-
-
Teams & Riders Everybody needs a little bit of Roglstomp in their lives- Started by johnymax
- Replies: 19K
-
Teams & Riders Jonas Vingegaard thread: Love in Iberia- Started by Samu Cuenca
- Replies: 7K
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram