Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

[TheSpud]

Re:

It obviously isn't non performance enhancing.

Riders dont need medication unless they are unwell and if they do they dont race. Simples.

Sporting federations are not interested in preventing doping. They just want the circus to continue so they can continue to cash on it.

Proper limits? Yeah sure.

Well the medication is a different point - and actually one I agree with - too ill to race, no meds or TUE.

But in this situation, he has had a puff on salbutamol (or similar) - I think he then won the stage (or came close - apologies but I have had a mind blank and cant even seem to google the right thing). So if he won (or maybe top 3) he would have been tested, yes? And no AAF? Therefore ok. I'm not saying its right, just that its within the rules - and there in lies a big debate that I have mentioned before.

 

[Benotti69]

Tested? Yeah sure that really works in the sport.

Froomey newly crowned 'mosted tested athlete' in peloton...........

Froome = doper. That he is taking 'stuff'* during the race is rubbing everyone's nose in it!

* we only have Sky and Froome's word that it is Salbutamol. Someone somewhere could be refilling these inhalers with stronger stuff.

 

[TheSpud]

Re:

Tested? Yeah sure that really works in the sport.

Froomey newly crowned 'mosted tested athlete' in peloton...........

Froome = doper. That he is taking 'stuff'* during the race is rubbing everyone's nose in it!

* we only have Sky and Froome's word that it is Salbutamol. Someone somewhere could be refilling these inhalers with stronger stuff.

And there you go again - claiming that he probably wasn't tested (yes you were when you type "Tested?").

I'm not claiming he is the most tested, etc. I'm not even saying it was Salbutamol (or even claiming Sky said it was) - its a 'puffer' so it is most likely something like that. Most of the variants in there are covered in the same category.

I'm saying that as a stage winner (I seem to remember he was, please correct me if wrong) he would have been tested. And if he had 'puffed' too much he would be called out (assuming you believe in the testing process) - and if he wasn't called out then it wasn't performance enhancing within the rule book.

What I am asking you is - is it against the rules? If not then, according to the rules, he is clean.

I never said I agreed that was right. I know (or think I know) your position - any drugs = doping. That's fair enough, that's your position. At the moment I happen to disagree with (what I think is) your position.

 

[Benotti69]

The rules, these would be the rules the UCI chooses to apply when it pleases. that argument really washes. Big talking point of CIRC report is the failure of UCI to apply its own rules.

Going off on a pedantic little trip as to whether Froome took a puff and it had an effect is a waste of time. of course it had an effect, why take it? Why carry it?

I am Vickered out on this one.

 

[TheSpud]

Re:

The rules, these would be the rules the UCI chooses to apply when it pleases. that argument really washes. Big talking point of CIRC report is the failure of UCI to apply its own rules.

Going off on a pedantic little trip as to whether Froome took a puff and it had an effect is a waste of time. of course it had an effect, why take it? Why carry it?

I am Vickered out on this one.

I never talked about UCI rules, but since you bring it up. You refer to the rules that weren't applied years ago under the previous (and the one before that) president (according to CIRC)? The era that was the subject of the CIRC report was up until 2013 was it not, so NOT that race. So (like a Hog post) its completely irrelevant.

Call me pedantic if you want - but answer the question. Was that puff against the rules?

 

[ChewbaccaDefense]

Re: Re:

"I'ma tell ya' cyclingnews, sumbody gotta' do sumpthin' 'bout that TUE abuse man, that sh!t is getting out of hand...man, it's bad"--Chris Froome

TrollKraft Level Expert

So a quick squirt on a 'puffer' - salbutamol or similar. Illegal? No - not within limits. If he was within limits he isn't deemed to be getting a performance enhancement, therefore he also wasn't illegal. And I'd say that for any rider - its a non story (still - despite being pulled out yet again).

The context of my post is that Froomedog was asked about *** TUE's, and he made some grumbling response that something should be done. Let me ask you a question: If he needed it for sport induced asthma problems, what is he doing at the head of the race? Don't know if you've ever had a sports induced asthma attack (I have), but I certainly didn't have the ability to do anything but sit there and gasp when it happened. Froomedog wasn't taking a shot to stop asthma, he was using a *** TUE to enhance his performance...which is what makes his answer to cyclingnews so transparently ridiculous. But carry on with your hero worship, doesn't bother me.

 

[ChewbaccaDefense]

Re: Re:

It obviously isn't non performance enhancing.

Riders dont need medication unless they are unwell and if they do they dont race. Simples.

Sporting federations are not interested in preventing doping. They just want the circus to continue so they can continue to cash on it.

Proper limits? Yeah sure.

Well the medication is a different point - and actually one I agree with - too ill to race, no meds or TUE.

But in this situation, he has had a puff on salbutamol (or similar) - I think he then won the stage (or came close - apologies but I have had a mind blank and cant even seem to google the right thing). So if he won (or maybe top 3) he would have been tested, yes? And no AAF? Therefore ok. I'm not saying its right, just that its within the rules - and there in lies a big debate that I have mentioned before.

It's like you have a degree in missing the point. The CIRC report indicated that there is currently a major problem with *** TUE"s. Froomedog is a poster child for this issue, as one can clearly see form this picture. As I said, he didn't use it for an asthma attack, he was gassing up for a climb. Now, he may have a TUE for that, but as the CIRC pointed out, things like that really are sketchy, and anyone can see that if Froomedog is anything, it's sketchy.

 

[TheSpud]

Re: Re:

"I'ma tell ya' cyclingnews, sumbody gotta' do sumpthin' 'bout that TUE abuse man, that sh!t is getting out of hand...man, it's bad"--Chris Froome

TrollKraft Level Expert

So a quick squirt on a 'puffer' - salbutamol or similar. Illegal? No - not within limits. If he was within limits he isn't deemed to be getting a performance enhancement, therefore he also wasn't illegal. And I'd say that for any rider - its a non story (still - despite being pulled out yet again).

The context of my post is that Froomedog was asked about *** TUE's, and he made some grumbling response that something should be done. Let me ask you a question: If he needed it for sport induced asthma problems, what is he doing at the head of the race? Don't know if you've ever had a sports induced asthma attack (I have), but I certainly didn't have the ability to do anything but sit there and gasp when it happened. Froomedog wasn't taking a shot to stop asthma, he was using a *** TUE to enhance his performance...which is what makes his answer to cyclingnews so transparently ridiculous. But carry on with your hero worship, doesn't bother me.

Since when was a TUE needed for an inhaler?

 

[bobbins]

It's needed for what the inhaler contains rather than the actual device itself.

 

[samhocking]

No athlete requires a TUE for Salbutamol unless they need to be taking more than 1600mg per day.

 

[webvan]

Right, Froome's mind is so fuzzy from all the stuff he's taken over the years that he doesn't realize he should have quit at Romandie instead of drugging up. That's really the telling point of that whole story.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re: Re:

Look at Contadors face-not impressed

Lost the stage at that exact moment

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

"I'ma tell ya' cyclingnews, sumbody gotta' do sumpthin' 'bout that TUE abuse man, that sh!t is getting out of hand...man, it's bad"--Chris Froome

TrollKraft Level Expert

So a quick squirt on a 'puffer' - salbutamol or similar. Illegal? No - not within limits. If he was within limits he isn't deemed to be getting a performance enhancement, therefore he also wasn't illegal. And I'd say that for any rider - its a non story (still - despite being pulled out yet again).

The context of my post is that Froomedog was asked about *** TUE's, and he made some grumbling response that something should be done. Let me ask you a question: If he needed it for sport induced asthma problems, what is he doing at the head of the race? Don't know if you've ever had a sports induced asthma attack (I have), but I certainly didn't have the ability to do anything but sit there and gasp when it happened. Froomedog wasn't taking a shot to stop asthma, he was using a *** TUE to enhance his performance...which is what makes his answer to cyclingnews so transparently ridiculous. But carry on with your hero worship, doesn't bother me.

good stuff Chewbaccad

a disturbing pitcture I assume for parents who want their kids to go and ride bikes without having to suck the life out of an inhaler.
Cookson/UCI, who care so dearly about cycling's image, remain toothless in the face of the TDF winner grinding on an inhaler...inexplicable. Another day Cookson was all over twitter to incriminate a rather harmless female team kit, yet he remains silent on this issue, allowing for all kinds of speculation about drug abuse in the peloton. (It would be crazy not to speculate about it)
Spud, help me out here.

 

[old.edu]

I have just watched the Paris Nice stage 5 and at around 19.6km to go the camera bike at the back of the peloton shows Michael Matthews taking something out of his back pocket and putting up to his mouth.

The Eurosport commentator says that he is having a gel but when Matthews notices the camera he quickly puts it back in his pocket and looks as guilty as hell?

It didn’t look like a gel to me and why would he put it back in his pocket?

Did anyone else see this incident and if so what do you think it was if not a gel?

I apologise for posting this here but I could not find a thread for Michael Matthews and it appears to me that it is similar to what has been discussed here for the past 24 hours?

 

[Beech Mtn]

Photos of the Michael Matthews thing are in this twitter feed:

https://twitter.com/velocast

 

[TheSpud]

I have just watched the Paris Nice stage 5 and at around 19.6km to go the camera bike at the back of the peloton shows Michael Matthews taking something out of his back pocket and putting up to his mouth.

The Eurosport commentator says that he is having a gel but when Matthews notices the camera he quickly puts it back in his pocket and looks as guilty as hell?

It didn’t look like a gel to me and why would he put it back in his pocket?

Did anyone else see this incident and if so what do you think it was if not a gel?

I apologise for posting this here but I could not find a thread for Michael Matthews and it appears to me that it is similar to what has been discussed here for the past 24 hours?

I look forward to the extensive thread on Matthews being a doper, etc.

 

[TheSpud]

Re: Re:

a disturbing pitcture I assume for parents who want their kids to go and ride bikes without having to suck the life out of an inhaler.
Cookson/UCI, who care so dearly about cycling's image, remain toothless in the face of the TDF winner grinding on an inhaler...inexplicable. Another day Cookson was all over twitter to incriminate a rather harmless female team kit, yet he remains silent on this issue, allowing for all kinds of speculation about drug abuse in the peloton. (It would be crazy not to speculate about it)
Spud, help me out here.

I'm not saying its right. I'm pointing out that people are quick to jump up and down and say it is doping when in fact it is not based on the current rules (i accept that the rules should be looked at). He says he has asthma and the inhaler is used to treat it - all perfectly within the rules below 16 puffs a day. What do want next - to ban paracetamol when someone has a headache? What about icing a stiff joint - that provides performance enhancement as it reduces swelling, would you ban that?

As for the female kit, i don't think it should be banned but i can understand why some people would find it odd / a bit close to the mark as it made them look like they were cycling bottomless.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

I look forward to the extensive thread on Matthews being a doper, etc.

Has he won races in Spain?

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

a disturbing pitcture I assume for parents who want their kids to go and ride bikes without having to suck the life out of an inhaler.
Cookson/UCI, who care so dearly about cycling's image, remain toothless in the face of the TDF winner grinding on an inhaler...inexplicable. Another day Cookson was all over twitter to incriminate a rather harmless female team kit, yet he remains silent on this issue, allowing for all kinds of speculation about drug abuse in the peloton. (It would be crazy not to speculate about it)
Spud, help me out here.

I'm not saying its right. I'm pointing out that people are quick to jump up and down and say it is doping when in fact it is not based on the current rules (i accept that the rules should be looked at). He says he has asthma and the inhaler is used to treat it - all perfectly within the rules below 16 puffs a day. What do want next - to ban paracetamol when someone has a headache? What about icing a stiff joint - that provides performance enhancement as it reduces swelling, would you ban that?

As for the female kit, i don't think it should be banned but i can understand why some people would find it odd / a bit close to the mark as it made them look like they were cycling bottomless.

"quick to jump up and down"?
I'd say you're rather slow.

Although it's not proof of anything, you can't deny, you just can't, that it points towards cheating, especially in light of other facts (TUE from Zorzoli, no mention of asthma in his biography).

 

[TheSpud]

Re: Re:

"quick to jump up and down"?
I'd say you're rather slow.

Although it's not proof of anything, you can't deny, you just can't, that it points towards cheating, especially in light of other facts (TUE from Zorzoli, no mention of asthma in his biography).

I dont agree that it only points towards cheating. It could point towards a rider who has asthma. But equally it could point towards a rider / team that are pushing all legal limits in search of performance. It could be a combination of all of those. AGAIN - its not illegal to use an inhaler assuming normal contents and normal / legal intake - it might be unethical, but thats a different conversation.

And what has Zorzoli to do with this - Froome has had 1 in competition TUE. That was the TUE that was allowed under the rules (dont take my word for it, ask WADA). Also, given that was leaked, do you think any others woukd have stayed secret after he said what he said? I doubt it. So the Zorzoli link is 1 approved TUE.

 

[42x16ss]

I have just watched the Paris Nice stage 5 and at around 19.6km to go the camera bike at the back of the peloton shows Michael Matthews taking something out of his back pocket and putting up to his mouth.

The Eurosport commentator says that he is having a gel but when Matthews notices the camera he quickly puts it back in his pocket and looks as guilty as hell?

It didn’t look like a gel to me and why would he put it back in his pocket?

Did anyone else see this incident and if so what do you think it was if not a gel?

I apologise for posting this here but I could not find a thread for Michael Matthews and it appears to me that it is similar to what has been discussed here for the past 24 hours?

I look forward to the extensive thread on Matthews being a doper, etc.

I look forward to Matthews going from hanging on to motorbikes to getting on the Vuelta podium in 4 months

 

[Digger]

I look forward to spud etc defending Matthews to the same extent

 

[TheSpud]

Re:

I look forward to spud etc defending Matthews to the same extent

Wheres the thread?

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

I look forward to spud etc defending Matthews to the same extent

Wheres the thread?

where's the transformation?

 

[DA_Man]

Re: Re:

Let me ask you a question: If he needed it for sport induced asthma problems, what is he doing at the head of the race? Don't know if you've ever had a sports induced asthma attack (I have), but I certainly didn't have the ability to do anything but sit there and gasp when it happened. Froomedog wasn't taking a shot to stop asthma, he was using a *** TUE to enhance his performance...which is what makes his answer to cyclingnews so transparently ridiculous. But carry on with your hero worship, doesn't bother me.

Two thumbs up. My brother has sports-induced asthma and whenever we ride and he gets what he calls "a squeeze" he has to stop, puff up, catch his breath, rest for two minutes or so, and then go.

How Froome is able to puff up and then accelerate like he does is a mystery to my brother and I. And we've been cycling 50+ miles every two days (more or less) for about 20 years now.