Not all are like this. Some serious posters like Tonton or MI for example, actually contribute good posts. Unfortunately, those posts are hidden between spam "posts" like this.DominicDecoco said:
There not defamations of character. And there is such a think as freedom of speech. And if one takes freedom of speech at face value, then a person doesn't have the right to be offended.Sky'sthelimit said:She has every right to defend her husband. Those claims by sections of the French press are defamation of character. If it were not for Froome's grace and class off the bike those journalists would be in court. It's pure jealousy that a British team dare to win clean. Froome will have the last laugh.Melo said:Well, she's a nice woman. After she posted this she closed her twitter account.
Serious, Michelle Froome does have the right to defend her husbands character. Just as we would,if anyone in our,family would if these sorts of accusations were being thrown about. Froome has already said he is willing to undergo independent testing, beyond current regulation. All through sections of the French press disputing his ability to the point of saying he is somehow cheating. That is in every sense of the law defamation. Journalists are not doing the core of their role in reporting facts, but rather pilling on conjecture.Melo said:I'm not sure if you are trolling or being serious?!Sky'sthelimit said:She has every right to defend her husband. Those claims by sections of the French press are defamation of character. If it were not for Froome's grace and class off the bike those journalists would be in court. It's pure jealousy that a British team dare to win clean. Froome will have the last laugh.Melo said:Well, she's a nice woman. After she posted this she closed her twitter account.
I'm afraid that is where you are wrong, as a independent sports writer myself. I cannot publish an article where I in effect write false statements based on unsound foundations. Leading to anyone's character being tarnished without fact. There is a line a fine one in law and common decency between freedom of speech and defamation. Sections of the French press are skirting very close to that borderline.Afrank said:There not defamations of character. And there is such a think as freedom of speech. And if one takes freedom of speech at face value, then a person doesn't have the right to be offended.Sky'sthelimit said:She has every right to defend her husband. Those claims by sections of the French press are defamation of character. If it were not for Froome's grace and class off the bike those journalists would be in court. It's pure jealousy that a British team dare to win clean. Froome will have the last laugh.Melo said:Well, she's a nice woman. After she posted this she closed her twitter account.
@DominicDecoco, I think that ChewbaccaDefense's post might have been satire.
I'm ok with her defending him, that's normal. But why the French media can't make its own point believing that Froome is somehow cheating? This question is asked by many cycling fans, and you can see it with your eyes live on tv. Something is not normal, I didn't see this kind of unreal attacks since Armstrong era. And it's not only Froome, the whole Sky team is suspiciously strong. Froome and Sky can sue them... but they don't and I wonder why. They learned from Armstrong, don't be the bad guy because you're gonna end up in a pile of ***.Sky'sthelimit said:Serious, Michelle Froome does have the right to defend her husbands character. Just as we would,if anyone in our,family would if these sorts of accusations were being thrown about. Froome has already said he is willing to undergo independent testing, beyond current regulation. All through sections of the French press disputing his ability to the point of,saying he is,somehow cheating. That is in every sense of the law defamation. Journalists are not doing the core of their role in reporting facts, but rather pilling on conjecture.Melo said:I'm not sure if you are trolling or being serious?!Sky'sthelimit said:She has every right to defend her husband. Those claims by sections of the French press are defamation of character. If it were not for Froome's grace and class off the bike those journalists would be in court. It's pure jealousy that a British team dare to win clean. Froome will have the last laugh.Melo said:Well, she's a nice woman. After she posted this she closed her twitter account.
Two questions come up here for me.Sky'sthelimit said:I'm afraid that is where you are wrong, as a independent sports writer myself. I cannot publish an article where I in effect write false statements based on unsound foundations. Leading to anyone's character being tarnished without fact. There is a line a fine one in law and common decency between freedom of speech and defamation. Sections of the French press are skirting very close to that borderline.Afrank said:There not defamations of character. And there is such a think as freedom of speech. And if one takes freedom of speech at face value, then a person doesn't have the right to be offended.Sky'sthelimit said:She has every right to defend her husband. Those claims by sections of the French press are defamation of character. If it were not for Froome's grace and class off the bike those journalists would be in court. It's pure jealousy that a British team dare to win clean. Froome will have the last laugh.Melo said:Well, she's a nice woman. After she posted this she closed her twitter account.
@DominicDecoco, I think that ChewbaccaDefense's post might have been satire.
As a 'independent sports writer', you would know that Mr Cound is out of line.Sky'sthelimit said:I'm afraid that is where you are wrong, as a independent sports writer myself. I cannot publish an article where I in effect write false statements based on unsound foundations. Leading to anyone's character being tarnished without fact. There is a line a fine one in law and common decency between freedom of speech and defamation. Sections of the French press are skirting very close to that borderline.Afrank said:There not defamations of character. And there is such a think as freedom of speech. And if one takes freedom of speech at face value, then a person doesn't have the right to be offended.Sky'sthelimit said:She has every right to defend her husband. Those claims by sections of the French press are defamation of character. If it were not for Froome's grace and class off the bike those journalists would be in court. It's pure jealousy that a British team dare to win clean. Froome will have the last laugh.Melo said:Well, she's a nice woman. After she posted this she closed her twitter account.
@DominicDecoco, I think that ChewbaccaDefense's post might have been satire.
Melo said:I'm ok with her defending him, that's normal. But why the French media can't make its own point believing that Froome is somehow cheating? This question is asked by many cycling fans, and you can see it with your eyes live on tv. Something is not normal, I didn't see this kind of unreal attacks since Armstrong era. And it's not only Froome, the whole Sky team is suspiciously strong. Froome and Sky can sue them... but they don't and I wonder why. They learned from Armstrong, don't be the bad guy because you're gonna end up in a pile of ****.Sky'sthelimit said:Serious, Michelle Froome does have the right to defend her husbands character. Just as we would,if anyone in our,family would if these sorts of accusations were being thrown about. Froome has already said he is willing to undergo independent testing, beyond current regulation. All through sections of the French press disputing his ability to the point of,saying he is,somehow cheating. That is in every sense of the law defamation. Journalists are not doing the core of their role in reporting facts, but rather pilling on conjecture.Melo said:I'm not sure if you are trolling or being serious?!Sky'sthelimit said:She has every right to defend her husband. Those claims by sections of the French press are defamation of character. If it were not for Froome's grace and class off the bike those journalists would be in court. It's pure jealousy that a British team dare to win clean. Froome will have the last laugh.Melo said:Well, she's a nice woman. After she posted this she closed her twitter account.
Except there are very sound foundations. I'll name just one: Scientifcally he's over the edge of what is to be expected. There's absolutely no reason reporting this is in anyway off limits.Sky'sthelimit said:
It's a good thing you know nothing of the law as you are also displaying a clear lack of the grasp of the facts . :
I found it amusing too.Benotti69 said:For those who missed the brilliance of this, remove the word Urine and add PED and you have the skybot repsonse!ChewbaccaDefense said:
Froome never tested positive for thrown urine............
And the 13 seconds that cost him a Vuelta. POS? Get a grip of yourself you weaponTheSpud said:
Well, if you believe this, you are pretty naive in my opinion. And it seems right now that the cycling is getting more hate than ever and Sky is the reason. The fact that you clearly believe that Sky is riding like this just with tap water and great training is pretty shocking. But it's your opinion, anyone it's entitled to one.Sky'sthelimit said:
They didn't said he was cheating or criticized him. One of them, the always stupid Thierry Adam, asked the others to tell what they think about what Froome did and the 3 others awkwardly explaining that it was confusing to see Froome attacking that way while all the others were struggling.
Benotti69 said:As a 'independent sports writer', you would know that Mr Cound is out of line.Sky'sthelimit said:I'm afraid that is where you are wrong, as a independent sports writer myself. I cannot publish an article where I in effect write false statements based on unsound foundations. Leading to anyone's character being tarnished without fact. There is a line a fine one in law and common decency between freedom of speech and defamation. Sections of the French press are skirting very close to that borderline.Afrank said:There not defamations of character. And there is such a think as freedom of speech. And if one takes freedom of speech at face value, then a person doesn't have the right to be offended.Sky'sthelimit said:She has every right to defend her husband. Those claims by sections of the French press are defamation of character. If it were not for Froome's grace and class off the bike those journalists would be in court. It's pure jealousy that a British team dare to win clean. Froome will have the last laugh.Melo said:Well, she's a nice woman. After she posted this she closed her twitter account.
@DominicDecoco, I think that ChewbaccaDefense's post might have been satire.
That the Froome's lawyers have not been sent in shows that the Froome's are not standing on solid ground. The discussions are whether Froome is performing legitimately or with PEDs. Lots of discussion point to a doped rider.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram