Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

[Gung Ho Gun]

Re:

To answer why people dislike Sky and Froome or Wiggins
People do not like to feel as though they are being taken for a fool
It is fine to see a full peleton of doped riders battling to see who is the best
the classic battles of the past won or lost in seconds or on one stage where one person has a bad day and others are super strong. Lance, Bruyneel, Ullrich, Contador etc all had bad days and good days and all went about it in their own way

Why Sky is so different is that they are in it up to their necks and still insist on the holier than though, we are doing it all through science ******.

I dont care if the whole peleton dopes - I expect it.
I dont really care that there are favoured teams of the UCI and ASO - there are favoured teams in every sporting league in the world
I dont even care that they are probably paying to have **** hidden away and covered up - that is human nature and has been going on since money was invnted.

What i do hate is the whole team led by Brailsford and his monkeys insulting my intelligence by trying to tell me that everything I understand about a sport I have been involved in for 20+ years is completely wrong and that they are all super athletes doing stuff no one has ever thought of before and that I am a fool if I question them.

That is what people dislike so much about SKY and by default their riders, their hypocrisy and outright lying and deceit.

Don't forget this quote from 2012:
“If people want the entertainment value of riders attacking each other, stopping, attacking each other again and again, then go back to ‘old cycling’, which will give you the capability to do that. If you want clean sport and clean cycling, then it’s going to be different. You can’t have it both ways. There’s an element of reality about what we’re doing.”

 

[kwikki]

Where the hell was Froome in that sprint?

I'm disappointed.

 

[kwikki]

Just watching today's highlights on ITV.

Chris Boardman was pretty scathing about Froome's piss-stop neutralisation yesterday. He said Froome was "trying it on".

Also Boardman was not sympathetic to Froome's Ventoux plight. He didn't agree with the final neutralisation and said that if the rules need to be bent, then you need to change the rules.

 

[Saint Unix]

Uh-oh. Boardman's going to get blocked on Twitter, isn't he?

 

[gazr99]

Re:

It's time for that one moment each year I post in the Clinic.

I'm here to mention to you my friends, that had Froome not helped Wiggins, and not crashed out two years ago, he'd be on to his 5th straight Tour win, just two behind the record set by Armstrong.

And if I had a 6 pack and chiseled jaw line, I would be dating a super model :lol:

 

[gazr99]

Re:

Just watching today's highlights on ITV.

Chris Boardman was pretty scathing about Froome's piss-stop neutralisation yesterday. He said Froome was "trying it on".

Also Boardman was not sympathetic to Froome's Ventoux plight. He didn't agree with the final neutralisation and said that if the rules need to be bent, then you need to change the rules.

Don't you hate the biased media who only support Team Sky and Chris Froome

 

[samhocking]

Re:

Just watching today's highlights on ITV.

Chris Boardman was pretty scathing about Froome's piss-stop neutralisation yesterday. He said Froome was "trying it on".

Also Boardman was not sympathetic to Froome's Ventoux plight. He didn't agree with the final neutralisation and said that if the rules need to be bent, then you need to change the rules.

He was scathing at all the teams, ASO & UCI that after the decision, everyone was happy to go on as business as usual, rather than addressing the issue of what needs to be done with the rules to close all the gaps open to interpretation by the judges. He did say, that in this situation, at least those gaps in the rules 'allowed' the right decision to be made by the judges. He agreed with the decision, just not the apathy that nothing will change in the rules to prevent this situation even being an issue when it happens again unless changes are made. Basically he advised another km of barriers and the funding to pay the additional barrier labour each night.

 

[Benotti69]

Walsh admits Froome broke the rules. But the rules don't apply. Race jury "could not bring themselves to penalise a rider so desperate to win".

What a sackoshite the whole shebang is!

 

[BYOP88]

Re:

Walsh admits Froome broke the rules. But the rules don't apply. Race jury "could not bring themselves to penalise a rider so desperate to win".

What a sackoshite the whole shebang is!

I'm guessing in Walsh world, Millema isn't desperate enough to win.

 

[thehog]

Re:

Walsh admits Froome broke the rules. But the rules don't apply. Race jury "could not bring themselves to penalise a rider so desperate to win".
What a sackoshite the whole shebang is!

bike broken through no fault of one's own....

was any advantage even gained running forward?.......meanwhile nairo was pulled along by a moto

Mark L

Was any advantage gained? Yes, the distance he ran was gained.

Cadel Evans lost the Vuelta because of a puncture on the final climb, he didn't get a bonus.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Cadel just didnt want to win that Vuelta. Simples.

 

[PremierAndrew]

Re: Re:

Walsh admits Froome broke the rules. But the rules don't apply. Race jury "could not bring themselves to penalise a rider so desperate to win".
What a sackoshite the whole shebang is!

bike broken through no fault of one's own....

was any advantage even gained running forward?.......meanwhile nairo was pulled along by a moto

Mark L

Was any advantage gained? Yes, the distance he ran was gained.

Cadel Evans lost the Vuelta because of a puncture on the final climb, he didn't get a bonus.

Bit different to being taken out by the race organisers

 

[veganrob]

Re:

Walsh admits Froome broke the rules. But the rules don't apply. Race jury "could not bring themselves to penalise a rider so desperate to win".

What a sackoshite the whole shebang is!

What did Brailsford say, "cheat on Monday, cheat on Tuesday". Guess that doesn't apply to his team though. What a crock of ***.

 

[SeriousSam]

I've noticed that Froome's headless chicken run is being spun as a powerful drive to win to win in the British media. He just wants it more than those other riders, you see. Iron willpower is the source of his success, along with very hard training.

 

[SeriousSam]

If I’m honest, yeah, I am kind of surprised,” Froome said of the lack of aggression from his rivals. “Today was a day where I expected Movistar in particular. They had two strong guys in the breakaway so I thought they’d try to do more on the final climb. Valverde had a go but it was just to follow Aru. Apart from that, Romain Bardet gave it a try over the top but I just had the feeling that everyone was so on the limit that nobody really had the legs to make a big difference.

lol

 

[Saint Unix]

Here's Poels being "so on the limit".

 

[Walkman]

Re:

I've noticed that Froome's headless chicken run is being spun as a powerful drive to win to win in the British media. He just wants it more than those other riders, you see. Iron willpower is the source of his success, along with very hard training.

Willpower in the press and an obvious act of cheating on CN forums. The guy panicked, and he ran. Thought I think he ran partly because of the tension in the crowd. He did not want to be stuck there, and I don't blame him.

And to all the people who are hellbent of him cheating by running, the rules was implemented to stop people from taking the train (like Garin did). So yes, technically he did broke the rules, but the rules was never implemented to stop people from running hence it not surprisingly why he wasn't punished. In the same scenario, you really think any other rider would have been?

 

[Walkman]

Re:

Here's Poels being "so on the limit".

...


I get your point, SKY are freakish strong and it is boring as f*ck but that picture is clearly not a representation of Poels today. I did catch that precise footage during todays stage. He swept it and threw it away quickly. Lame attempt at stirring up Poels hate.

 

[simoni]

Re: Re:

I've noticed that Froome's headless chicken run is being spun as a powerful drive to win to win in the British media. He just wants it more than those other riders, you see. Iron willpower is the source of his success, along with very hard training.

Willpower in the press and an obvious act of cheating on CN forums. The guy panicked, and he ran. Thought I think he ran partly because of the tension in the crowd. He did not want to be stuck there, and I don't blame him.

And to all the people who are hellbent of him cheating by running, the rules was implemented to stop people from taking the train (like Garin did). So yes, technically he did broke the rules, but the rules was never implemented to stop people from running hence it not surprisingly why he wasn't punished. In the same scenario, you really think any other rider would have been?

I'm still struggling with how people can't decouple the idea of a normal racing incident (ie a puncture) from an accident caused, ultimately, by the organisers themselves.

How could they possibly penalise anyone who was delayed by that crash and maintain any form of credibility (credibility that it stretched fairly tight as it is)

 

[BYOP88]

Re: Re:

I've noticed that Froome's headless chicken run is being spun as a powerful drive to win to win in the British media. He just wants it more than those other riders, you see. Iron willpower is the source of his success, along with very hard training.

Willpower in the press and an obvious act of cheating on CN forums. The guy panicked, and he ran. Thought I think he ran partly because of the tension in the crowd. He did not want to be stuck there, and I don't blame him.

And to all the people who are hellbent of him cheating by running, the rules was implemented to stop people from taking the train (like Garin did). So yes, technically he did broke the rules, but the rules was never implemented to stop people from running hence it not surprisingly why he wasn't punished. In the same scenario, you really think any other rider would have been?

I'm still struggling with how people can't decouple the idea of a normal racing incident (ie a puncture) from an accident caused, ultimately, by the organisers themselves.

How could they possibly penalise anyone who was delayed by that crash and maintain any form of credibility (credibility that it stretched fairly tight as it is)

So when Sagan got wiped out(plus another 80 odd guys who get held up) in the Vuelta or that Danish guy who's bike got run over by a car/motorbike in RVV in the early 1990's(I think) or when Fuglsang got hit by a bike last year in tour did they neutralize the races then?

Stuff happens in races, be it the fault of the rider(s)/spectators/race orgainzers, so should what happened on Ventoux happen again they have to do what they did on Thursday. As Mollema said if it was just him or the guy in 123rd place or De Gendt and they guy he was with(name escapes me at the moment) would they have come up with the ruling they did?

This isn't Froome hate on my part. I believe he'd still be yellow today, even if they went real times on Thursday. It would just be a closer gap, which wouldn't matter to Froome, because one of his attacks will happen on one of the upcoming mountain stages and no one will be within 45 seconds of him.

 

[simoni]

Re: Re:

I've noticed that Froome's headless chicken run is being spun as a powerful drive to win to win in the British media. He just wants it more than those other riders, you see. Iron willpower is the source of his success, along with very hard training.

Willpower in the press and an obvious act of cheating on CN forums. The guy panicked, and he ran. Thought I think he ran partly because of the tension in the crowd. He did not want to be stuck there, and I don't blame him.

And to all the people who are hellbent of him cheating by running, the rules was implemented to stop people from taking the train (like Garin did). So yes, technically he did broke the rules, but the rules was never implemented to stop people from running hence it not surprisingly why he wasn't punished. In the same scenario, you really think any other rider would have been?

I'm still struggling with how people can't decouple the idea of a normal racing incident (ie a puncture) from an accident caused, ultimately, by the organisers themselves.

How could they possibly penalise anyone who was delayed by that crash and maintain any form of credibility (credibility that it stretched fairly tight as it is)

So when Sagan got wiped out(plus another 80 odd guys who get held up) in the Vuelta or that Danish guy who's bike got run over by a car/motorbike in RVV in the early 1990's(I think) or when Fuglsang got hit by a bike last year in tour did they neutralize the races then?

Stuff happens in races, be it the fault of the rider(s)/spectators/race orgainzers, so should what happened on Ventoux happen again they have to do what they did on Thursday. As Mollema said if it was just him or the guy in 123rd place or De Gendt and they guy he was with(name escapes me at the moment) would they have come up with the ruling they did?

This isn't Froome hate on my part. I believe he'd still be yellow today, even if they went real times on Thursday. It would just be a closer gap, which wouldn't matter to Froome, because one of his attacks will happen on one of the upcoming mountain stages and no one will be within 45 seconds of him.

I don't disagree those other incidents should have been dealt with in a way that didnt penalise affected riders. But two (or more) wrongs don't make a right.

 

[BullsFan22]

I am guessing if Froome's rivals won't try a real attack, then Froome will do one for them and he'll gain over a minute on just one of these next four stages in the Alps. Mollema is in good form right now, perhaps the form of his life, but I don't see him taking time out of Froome, certainly not 1:45 or however far back he is right now. Quintana isn't on his best form or he already threw in the towel before the real hard stages began. Can't see him all of a sudden reversing that trend, though I hope I am wrong. Who else? Valverde? Aru? Bardet? Van Garderen? Yates? Porte? Not sure anyone will overtake Froome at this point. Sky are USPS 2.0. They have the funding, they have the technology, they have the manpower (on the road and off of it), they have the tactics (whatever those are), and they have the backing of the UCI. Sound familiar?

 

[Walkman]

Re: Re:

I've noticed that Froome's headless chicken run is being spun as a powerful drive to win to win in the British media. He just wants it more than those other riders, you see. Iron willpower is the source of his success, along with very hard training.

Willpower in the press and an obvious act of cheating on CN forums. The guy panicked, and he ran. Thought I think he ran partly because of the tension in the crowd. He did not want to be stuck there, and I don't blame him.

And to all the people who are hellbent of him cheating by running, the rules was implemented to stop people from taking the train (like Garin did). So yes, technically he did broke the rules, but the rules was never implemented to stop people from running hence it not surprisingly why he wasn't punished. In the same scenario, you really think any other rider would have been?

I'm still struggling with how people can't decouple the idea of a normal racing incident (ie a puncture) from an accident caused, ultimately, by the organisers themselves.

How could they possibly penalise anyone who was delayed by that crash and maintain any form of credibility (credibility that it stretched fairly tight as it is)

So when Sagan got wiped out(plus another 80 odd guys who get held up) in the Vuelta or that Danish guy who's bike got run over by a car/motorbike in RVV in the early 1990's(I think) or when Fuglsang got hit by a bike last year in tour did they neutralize the races then?

Stuff happens in races, be it the fault of the rider(s)/spectators/race orgainzers, so should what happened on Ventoux happen again they have to do what they did on Thursday. As Mollema said if it was just him or the guy in 123rd place or De Gendt and they guy he was with(name escapes me at the moment) would they have come up with the ruling they did?

This isn't Froome hate on my part. I believe he'd still be yellow today, even if they went real times on Thursday. It would just be a closer gap, which wouldn't matter to Froome, because one of his attacks will happen on one of the upcoming mountain stages and no one will be within 45 seconds of him.

I was talking about the fact that he wasn't penalized for running. Which, in my humble opinion, would have been the case for every rider in a similar position.

 

[thehog]

Re: Re:

Here's Poels being "so on the limit".

...


I get your point, SKY are freakish strong and it is boring as f*ck but that picture is clearly not a representation of Poels today. I did catch that precise footage during todays stage. He swept it and threw it away quickly. Lame attempt at stirring up Poels hate.

Nah, he took the can, placed on his bars, then opened it with one hand, then drank.... all whilst banging out 450w.

It's absurd. It was an illegal feed as well, as within the last 20km.

 

[Microchip]

Re:

It's time for that one moment each year I post in the Clinic.

I'm here to mention to you my friends, that had Froome not helped Wiggins, and not crashed out two years ago, he'd be on to his 5th straight Tour win, just two behind the record set by Armstrong.

Memories of a blue team come to mind then...