Excuse my dumbness, but isnt seen as a failed test is it? Just an abnormal finding? Given the above, is it upto Froome now to tell /prove to the UCI why it was so high?
The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. 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!
Yingge said:Kept quiet for almost 3 months too...hmmmm.
Brian Butterfield said:So, if Froome is out of contention for the meantime - does that mean he can now make it along to the BBC sports personality of the year awards?
TourOfSardinia said:Brian Butterfield said:So, if Froome is out of contention for the meantime - does that mean he can now make it along to the BBC sports personality of the year awards?
Still there: http://www.bbc.com/sport/sports-personality/42100015
TourOfSardinia said:Brian Butterfield said:So, if Froome is out of contention for the meantime - does that mean he can now make it along to the BBC sports personality of the year awards?
Still there: http://www.bbc.com/sport/sports-personality/42100015
TourOfSardinia said:Yingge said:Kept quiet for almost 3 months too...hmmmm.
He was notified of the "adverse analytical finding" on 20 September 2017.
the BBC reports
stage 18 was the day after Froome blew up on the Los MachucosThe test took place September 7 following stage 18 of the Vuelta
The ol' extra Weetabix after a bad day ...nothing new!After his problems yesterday, Froome fought back with help from Poels and Team Sky.
Poursuivant said:If you're taking twice as many puffs; how did they think this wouldn't happen? How did they expect to hear no more about it?
Then maybe he should've stayed within the rules and done his best. Winning a grand tour is not a human right.brownbobby said:Unless his asthma was genuinely becoming so bad that he risked having to withdraw from the race. In which case would he not have been allowed to apply for a TUE for the increased doseage/other medication to treat the condition?
Maybe Brailsfraud can come up with another story about how some fan threw piss at froome at the vuelta (off camera conveniently and only witnessed by Sky) and the piss was laced with sambutamol to make him test positive.Poursuivant said:If you're taking twice as many puffs; how did they think this wouldn't happen? How did they expect to hear no more about it?
kosmonaut said:Then maybe he should've stayed within the rules and done his best. Winning a grand tour is not a human right.brownbobby said:Unless his asthma was genuinely becoming so bad that he risked having to withdraw from the race. In which case would he not have been allowed to apply for a TUE for the increased doseage/other medication to treat the condition?
The Hitch said:Maybe Brailsfraud can come up with another story about how some fan through piss at froome at the vuelta (off camera conveniently and only witnessed by Sky) and the piss was laced with sambutamol to make him test positive.Poursuivant said:If you're taking twice as many puffs; how did they think this wouldn't happen? How did they expect to hear no more about it?
Yes, and this will be their spin. However, I'm sure there could be many reasons we are not aware of. I simply do not believe that inhaling the allowed amount suddenly can produce a doubled effect to the body due to some random factors made up by Brailsford.brownbobby said:kosmonaut said:Then maybe he should've stayed within the rules and done his best. Winning a grand tour is not a human right.brownbobby said:Unless his asthma was genuinely becoming so bad that he risked having to withdraw from the race. In which case would he not have been allowed to apply for a TUE for the increased doseage/other medication to treat the condition?
I dont disagree, and this kind of illustrates my point.....could he not have stayed within the rules by applying for a TUE (yes i know we can all debate about the ethics of the TUE system) rather than taking this increased doseage in the almost certain knowledge that it would show up in the test?
kosmonaut said:Yes, and this will be their spin. However, I'm sure there could be many reasons we are not aware of. I simply do not believe that inhaling the allowed amount suddenly can produce a doubled effect to the body due to some random factors made up by Brailsford.brownbobby said:kosmonaut said:Then maybe he should've stayed within the rules and done his best. Winning a grand tour is not a human right.brownbobby said:Unless his asthma was genuinely becoming so bad that he risked having to withdraw from the race. In which case would he not have been allowed to apply for a TUE for the increased doseage/other medication to treat the condition?
I dont disagree, and this kind of illustrates my point.....could he not have stayed within the rules by applying for a TUE (yes i know we can all debate about the ethics of the TUE system) rather than taking this increased doseage in the almost certain knowledge that it would show up in the test?
Craigee said:We didn't see him take 32 puffs during the stage so he must've done it before the stage. No excuse for getting it wrong.
It comes as pills too.MartinGT said:Craigee said:We didn't see him take 32 puffs during the stage so he must've done it before the stage. No excuse for getting it wrong.
Did anyone see him take 1?
Surly if you need to take 32 puffs you're doing so because you're blowing out of your ring and not winning the stage by 1'+