Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

Page 1338 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
“Some bad luck”, come on, man’s career is probably over, and cheat or not (I consider him one as per my post in the Cobo thread), being indifferent or even happy (A friend of mine was gleeful to my disgust) is taking it to the limit, if not crossing it. You don’t need to weep for the cheat or weep for the cyclist, but weep for him as a fellow human being - I for one, do!
 
Re: Re:

nayr497 said:
spalco said:
Bolder said:
But to be honest, if this cheers up Froome, I'm all for it. Poor guy, and I mean that sincerely.
Getting beaten by Cobo I think was a great thing for his career; lighting a fire in him that made him go even one step further or two.
That is what I was thinking. A guy who is very clearly cheating...sorry, I don't really care what happens to him. Call me evil. Call me soulless. But if you are out there making millions and lying directly to everyone, um....so what if you have some bad luck?

You didn't exactly instill a reason to care about you. My feeling is that plenty of decent people have awful things happen to them. So when something bad happens to someone choosing to do illegal things, sorry, I don't have much energy to sympathize. I didn't wish him ill. But I don't really care that he had some bad luck. He didn't really care about lying to everyone, did he?
This. Good post, I agree.
 
rick james said:
macbindle said:
thehog said:
Cobo has said he plans to appeal the decision using Froome’s Ventoux performance in 2013 as evidence he wasn’t the only one cheating :lol:
Surely all Cobo has to do is use any of Froome's performances pre-2011 Vuelta to demonstrate that he wasnt the only cheat in that race :confused:
Yip, that’s clearly how the legal system work
If your name is: Wonderboy/Froome/Astana it is.
 
86TDFWinner said:
rick james said:
macbindle said:
thehog said:
Cobo has said he plans to appeal the decision using Froome’s Ventoux performance in 2013 as evidence he wasn’t the only one cheating :lol:
Surely all Cobo has to do is use any of Froome's performances pre-2011 Vuelta to demonstrate that he wasnt the only cheat in that race :confused:
Yip, that’s clearly how the legal system work
If your name is: Wonderboy/Froome/Astana it is.
You're making progress, ateysicks ... you'll soon have them. :lol:
 
Re: Re:

Red Rick said:
dacooley said:
yea, guys, yesterday's indulgence attack didn't last for too long. froome is once again a villain because of cobo getiing stripped the vuelta off. )
Is that how this is supposed to work? Froome crashing yesterday does not affect him being an insult to the viewerships intelligence in the slightest.

No ... you're right ... no more or no less than your insensitivity being an insult to the intelligence of this thread's viewership. :geek:
 
Re: Re:

86TDFWinner said:
Red Rick said:
Legit wonder if they had this up their sleeve all this time and are only doing it now because of the circumstances.
Good point. Froome seems to have nearly the same power in this sport as Wonderboy did, which is sad.
So you are implying that Froome has got the UCI to hand this ban out to cobo?


Show us proof of that one please
 
Re: Re:

rick james said:
86TDFWinner said:
Red Rick said:
Legit wonder if they had this up their sleeve all this time and are only doing it now because of the circumstances.
Good point. Froome seems to have nearly the same power in this sport as Wonderboy did, which is sad.
So you are implying that Froome has got the UCI to hand this ban out to cobo?


Show us proof of that one please
the proof is Armstrong......or at least in these matters you are unlikely to get 'proof'...Armstrong is however evidence...that evidence being the only time a case has been forensically examined that was the what the evidence pointed to.....the question would be why would it have changed...where's your 'proof' it has changed?

I don't agree with 86TDFwinner in this instance, but you can't ignore that there has been demonstrable evidence of collusion (or at the least a symbiotic relationship) between the sport's governing body and its most successful riders?
 
Re: Re:

gillan1969 said:
rick james said:
86TDFWinner said:
Red Rick said:
Legit wonder if they had this up their sleeve all this time and are only doing it now because of the circumstances.
Good point. Froome seems to have nearly the same power in this sport as Wonderboy did, which is sad.
So you are implying that Froome has got the UCI to hand this ban out to cobo?


Show us proof of that one please
the proof is Armstrong......or at least in these matters you are unlikely to get 'proof'...Armstrong is however evidence...that evidence being the only time a case has been forensically examined that was the what the evidence pointed to.....the question would be why would it have changed...where's your 'proof' it has changed?

I don't agree with 86TDFwinner in this instance, but you can't ignore that there has been demonstrable evidence of collusion (or at the least a symbiotic relationship) between the sport's governing body and its most successful riders?
Just supposing that's so, wasn't the kicking out of Cookson (who was untrusted by all non-British critics in particular) and his replacement with that nice Monsieur Lappartient supposed to knock anything like that on the head?
 
Re: Re:

gillan1969 said:
rick james said:
86TDFWinner said:
Red Rick said:
Legit wonder if they had this up their sleeve all this time and are only doing it now because of the circumstances.
Good point. Froome seems to have nearly the same power in this sport as Wonderboy did, which is sad.
So you are implying that Froome has got the UCI to hand this ban out to cobo?


Show us proof of that one please
the proof is Armstrong......or at least in these matters you are unlikely to get 'proof'...Armstrong is however evidence...that evidence being the only time a case has been forensically examined that was the what the evidence pointed to.....the question would be why would it have changed...where's your 'proof' it has changed?

I don't agree with 86TDFwinner in this instance, but you can't ignore that there has been demonstrable evidence of collusion (or at the least a symbiotic relationship) between the sport's governing body and its most successful riders?

the proof is Armstrong????


this is all about Chris Froome


I don't need to prove anything, I'm not the one making up lies on a forum
 
Re: Re:

gillan1969 said:
rick james said:
86TDFWinner said:
Red Rick said:
Legit wonder if they had this up their sleeve all this time and are only doing it now because of the circumstances.
Good point. Froome seems to have nearly the same power in this sport as Wonderboy did, which is sad.
So you are implying that Froome has got the UCI to hand this ban out to cobo?


Show us proof of that one please
the proof is Armstrong......or at least in these matters you are unlikely to get 'proof'...Armstrong is however evidence...that evidence being the only time a case has been forensically examined that was the what the evidence pointed to.....the question would be why would it have changed...where's your 'proof' it has changed?

I don't agree with 86TDFwinner in this instance, but you can't ignore that there has been demonstrable evidence of collusion (or at the least a symbiotic relationship) between the sport's governing body and its most successful riders?
The examples of UCI collusion to protect riders goes beyond Armstrong. Contador's positive which was being covered up leaps to mind. There is Brochard's backdated TUE in '99, the Landis fiasco, Basso, DiLuca, and on and on. Prudhomme said at one point,

“...I trust nobody — least of all the UCI. We were ready to work with the UCI to fight doping and have supported them financially. But when you have made an alliance, looked the other person right in the eyes, then you expect to be told the truth. But that didn’t happen… …You can’t make the Tour de France responsible for everything… We also have an international federation, but they are worth nothing. The UCI never wanted a clean Tour.”

The CIRC report cited riders saying,
"that they believed Therapeutic Use Exemptions were and are “systematically used” as part of doping. Moreover, one rider who spoke to CIRC claimed that 90 per cent of all TUEs were used for performance enhancement."

Anyone who imagines what happened with Froome is anything but a pure whitewash is ignorant of the history of the UCI, or in the case of anyone actually following the sport, delusional.
 
Re: Re:

rick james said:
86TDFWinner said:
Red Rick said:
Legit wonder if they had this up their sleeve all this time and are only doing it now because of the circumstances.
Good point. Froome seems to have nearly the same power in this sport as Wonderboy did, which is sad.
So you are implying that Froome has got the UCI to hand this ban out to cobo?


Show us proof of that one please
No, where did i "imply" that? I was saying that Froome wields enough power similar to Wonderboy, in that he can pretty much have positives swept under the rug and nothing happens to him(at least not yet anyways).

No proof to show he did this to Cobo. But what i said about him having A LOT of power, is spot on.

You honestly believe Froome wasnt doping then either? Lol.
 
Re: Re:

rick james said:
gillan1969 said:
rick james said:
86TDFWinner said:
Red Rick said:
Legit wonder if they had this up their sleeve all this time and are only doing it now because of the circumstances.
Good point. Froome seems to have nearly the same power in this sport as Wonderboy did, which is sad.
So you are implying that Froome has got the UCI to hand this ban out to cobo?


Show us proof of that one please
the proof is Armstrong......or at least in these matters you are unlikely to get 'proof'...Armstrong is however evidence...that evidence being the only time a case has been forensically examined that was the what the evidence pointed to.....the question would be why would it have changed...where's your 'proof' it has changed?

I don't agree with 86TDFwinner in this instance, but you can't ignore that there has been demonstrable evidence of collusion (or at the least a symbiotic relationship) between the sport's governing body and its most successful riders?

the proof is Armstrong????


this is all about Chris Froome


I don't need to prove anything, I'm not the one making up lies on a forum
What "lies" have i made up?

I related Froomes doping cover ups, and such to Armstrong, as it appears he's gaining A LOT of power, similar to that of Wonderboy.

I'm sorry you're favorite rider is most likely a doper too, but don't have a meltdown when someone tries pointing it out, ala Wonderboy, and his fan club doesn't believe it.
 
Re: Re:

red_flanders said:
gillan1969 said:
rick james said:
86TDFWinner said:
Red Rick said:
Legit wonder if they had this up their sleeve all this time and are only doing it now because of the circumstances.
Good point. Froome seems to have nearly the same power in this sport as Wonderboy did, which is sad.
So you are implying that Froome has got the UCI to hand this ban out to cobo?


Show us proof of that one please
the proof is Armstrong......or at least in these matters you are unlikely to get 'proof'...Armstrong is however evidence...that evidence being the only time a case has been forensically examined that was the what the evidence pointed to.....the question would be why would it have changed...where's your 'proof' it has changed?

I don't agree with 86TDFwinner in this instance, but you can't ignore that there has been demonstrable evidence of collusion (or at the least a symbiotic relationship) between the sport's governing body and its most successful riders?
The examples of UCI collusion to protect riders goes beyond Armstrong. Contador's positive which was being covered up leaps to mind. There is Brochard's backdated TUE in '99, the Landis fiasco, Basso, DiLuca, and on and on. Prudhomme said at one point,

“...I trust nobody — least of all the UCI. We were ready to work with the UCI to fight doping and have supported them financially. But when you have made an alliance, looked the other person right in the eyes, then you expect to be told the truth. But that didn’t happen… …You can’t make the Tour de France responsible for everything… We also have an international federation, but they are worth nothing. The UCI never wanted a clean Tour.”

The CIRC report cited riders saying,
"that they believed Therapeutic Use Exemptions were and are “systematically used” as part of doping. Moreover, one rider who spoke to CIRC claimed that 90 per cent of all TUEs were used for performance enhancement."

Anyone who imagines what happened with Froome is anything but a pure whitewash is ignorant of the history of the UCI, or in the case of anyone actually following the sport, delusional.
Thank you
 
Re: Re:

wrinklyvet said:
gillan1969 said:
rick james said:
86TDFWinner said:
Red Rick said:
Legit wonder if they had this up their sleeve all this time and are only doing it now because of the circumstances.
Good point. Froome seems to have nearly the same power in this sport as Wonderboy did, which is sad.
So you are implying that Froome has got the UCI to hand this ban out to cobo?


Show us proof of that one please
the proof is Armstrong......or at least in these matters you are unlikely to get 'proof'...Armstrong is however evidence...that evidence being the only time a case has been forensically examined that was the what the evidence pointed to.....the question would be why would it have changed...where's your 'proof' it has changed?

I don't agree with 86TDFwinner in this instance, but you can't ignore that there has been demonstrable evidence of collusion (or at the least a symbiotic relationship) between the sport's governing body and its most successful riders?
Just supposing that's so, wasn't the kicking out of Cookson (who was untrusted by all non-British critics in particular) and his replacement with that nice Monsieur Lappartient supposed to knock anything like that on the head?
....only if you take a narrow and partisan view of the UCI (and world)...the king is dead...long live the king
 
Apr 23, 2016
267
5
2,845
I witnessed Froome 2.0 while watching the Dauphine today. When I saw Wout Poels attack to win the stage, I couldn't help but notice the similarities between the two riders.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY