Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

[53*11]

i go away for a few hours and now we seem to be spiralling into a debate about the effects of doping scandals on team/the sports sponsorship! oh well

 

[TourOfSardinia]

Re:

If the Giro are worried about doping scaring away sponsors (aside: they aren't) they probably shouldn't have proclaimed the 2014 route as a tribute to Pantani. They'll probably celebrate the 20th anniversary of his Giro win this year too..

Must be uncomfortable with Mosad on their backs though.

 

[gillan1969]

Re: Re:

The income from sponsors of the top ranked teams - TT1/PT/WT - is greater today than it was in 2012, greater today than it was in 2005, greater today than it was in 1998. Doping really is destroying cycling's reputation.

(Cue the magic of the imaginative might and the impossible to prove claim that today's income might be higher without doping. Then again, without doping keeping the sport in the news, it might be worse. Cling to whichever article of faith keeps you afloat, if that is the level of your 'debate'.)

So are my wages, but I'm still under paid.

No, think you are overpaid. You over value your contributions and under value others'.

If your only response is a personal attack, prepare yourself for more. I could care less if I were perma banned from this place.

I'm thinking fmk is having a bad day...or needs a pint

 

[yaco]

Re: Re:

Pointless debate btw. because you will refuse (intentionally?) look at the matter from the organizer pow. I admit the situation is difficult for Froome as well, resolution to the case has to be seeked before these decision we talk about comes to table.

I can look at it perfectly well from the organizer's point of view. And from their legal point of view - not as a proxy. To exclude Froome they would need to have strong justification - and they just don't have that. Looking at it from their point of view, it will be unwise to get into a legal battle that they almost certainly won't win. Seeking to exclude him and failing will do more damage than him riding without obstruction.

I'm not as sure as you are about their legal stance. If they can proove there is a fair chance of ruined reputation, their decision to ban will stand on solid ground. And if no-one can guarantee (including Froome's layers) that the reputation will not be ruined, they have solid case. That is why Vegni is screaming for guarantee. And there is precedent for organizers right to decline participation as long as the written rules are adhered and the ban is not seen as punishment. Reputation of the sport and race is key here.

This can't be taken seriously when RCS invited Bardiani to the 2018 Giro, after their two AAF's before the 2017 Giro - This won't wash morally.

Which Bardiani riders that raced the 2018 Giro had ongoing doping investigations? Who is claiming Sky as a team won't be invited.

There is a big difference between a WT team who receives an automatic invitation, compared to a wildcard team which pitches for an invitation - The RCS is responsible for their own morality - It's up to you if you support this morality.

 

[fmk_RoI]

Re: Re:

As mentioned above, 4 years of German TV revenue were lost specifically because of doping scandals. That is specific, measurable, and damaging––to the original claim.

You don't appear to understand - or is it care? - about the role played by State Plan 14.25 in the Germany pull out.

As for your belief that my pointing out a deficiency in the evidence supporting one claim is a coded - or whatever - argument in favour of something entirely different ... dream on.

 

[fmk_RoI]

Re:

If the Giro are worried about doping scaring away sponsors (aside: they aren't) they probably shouldn't have proclaimed the 2014 route as a tribute to Pantani. They'll probably celebrate the 20th anniversary of his Giro win this year too..

Hush now child, LA fanboys like you are just trying to derail unintelligible debate.

 

[fmk_RoI]

Re:

i go away for a few hours and now we seem to be spiralling into a debate about the effects of doping scandals on team/the sports sponsorship! oh well

That is rather at the heart of the argument being made by some that Froome's intended Giro participation risks bringing disrepute upon the race. Before we throw away the rule book coming up with ways to stop this happening we really need to know whethere it can actually hapen. Is it possible, today, to tarnish the Giro's reputation?

 

[samhocking]

To be fair, it would never be an issue with Bardiani riders riding Giro anyway, because their AAFs have all been for non-specified substances, not theraputic ones, so the rider is suspended imediatly on the AAF anyway, not the decision.
Legally, Giro won't have a leg to stand on. The only way they would prevent Froome riding would be remove itself from under UCI sanction and operate anti-doping with Italian NADO I assume so they could apply the rules they want.
I think the case is nearly over anyway, sounds like Froome is very confident no rules have been broken from his latest interview with Moore and even Moore himself was shocked at the level of confidence from within Team Sky. Could all be a big bluff of course, but I think he will be cleared by then anyway.

 

[spetsa]

Yaco, you are correct on one thing for sure. It is up to RCS to decide if Froome is allowed to race or not. Thanks for finally ending that debate for us.

 

[gillan1969]

Re: Re:

i go away for a few hours and now we seem to be spiralling into a debate about the effects of doping scandals on team/the sports sponsorship! oh well

That is rather at the heart of the argument being made by some that Froome's intended Giro participation risks bringing disrepute upon the race. Before we throw away the rule book coming up with ways to stop this happening we really need to know whethere it can actually hapen. Is it possible, today, to tarnish the Giro's reputation?

surely the self proclaimed saviours of cycling would therefore be boycotting the Giro then on that basis...not...eh...taking the money

 

[spetsa]

Re: Re:

i go away for a few hours and now we seem to be spiralling into a debate about the effects of doping scandals on team/the sports sponsorship! oh well

That is rather at the heart of the argument being made by some that Froome's intended Giro participation risks bringing disrepute upon the race. Before we throw away the rule book coming up with ways to stop this happening we really need to know whethere it can actually hapen. Is it possible, today, to tarnish the Giro's reputation?

You are the one wanting to throw away the rule book. The answer to your question is YES.

 

[53*11]

To be fair, it would never be an issue with Bardiani riders riding Giro anyway, because their AAFs have all been for non-specified substances, not theraputic ones, so the rider is suspended imediatly on the AAF anyway, not the decision.
Legally, Giro won't have a leg to stand on. The only way they would prevent Froome riding would be remove itself from under UCI sanction and operate anti-doping with Italian NADO I assume so they could apply the rules they want.
I think the case is nearly over anyway, sounds like Froome is very confident no rules have been broken from his latest interview with Moore and even Moore himself was shocked at the level of confidence from within Team Sky. Could all be a big bluff of course, but I think he will be cleared by then anyway.

give that man a prize, thats the most daft, laughable, inane comment of the day for me (and there was stiff competition!) thanks sam :razz:

 

[yaco]

To be fair, it would never be an issue with Bardiani riders riding Giro anyway, because their AAFs have all been for non-specified substances, not theraputic ones, so the rider is suspended imediatly on the AAF anyway, not the decision.
Legally, Giro won't have a leg to stand on. The only way they would prevent Froome riding would be remove itself from under UCI sanction and operate anti-doping with Italian NADO I assume so they could apply the rules they want.
I think the case is nearly over anyway, sounds like Froome is very confident no rules have been broken from his latest interview with Moore and even Moore himself was shocked at the level of confidence from within Team Sky. Could all be a big bluff of course, but I think he will be cleared by then anyway.

Decision by RCS to give a wildcard team an invitation to the Giro in 2018, after the events of 2017 is staggering - RCS should not have given Bardiani a wildcard for the next three editions.

 

[samhocking]

He didn't sound like any banned rider i've ever heard interviewed before who thinks he's innocent 53*11. Moore was even suggesting the case isn't going to UCI Anti-doping Tribunal, but couldn't say more. Froome confirmed the story in La Gazetta about the case is at UCI Tribunal was incorrect too. Make of that what you will.

 

[fmk_RoI]

Re: Re:

i go away for a few hours and now we seem to be spiralling into a debate about the effects of doping scandals on team/the sports sponsorship! oh well

That is rather at the heart of the argument being made by some that Froome's intended Giro participation risks bringing disrepute upon the race. Before we throw away the rule book coming up with ways to stop this happening we really need to know whethere it can actually hapen. Is it possible, today, to tarnish the Giro's reputation?

surely the self proclaimed saviours of cycling would therefore be boycotting the Giro then on that basis...not...eh...taking the money

I don't think The Clinic does boycotts...

 

[fmk_RoI]

Re: Re:

i go away for a few hours and now we seem to be spiralling into a debate about the effects of doping scandals on team/the sports sponsorship! oh well

That is rather at the heart of the argument being made by some that Froome's intended Giro participation risks bringing disrepute upon the race. Before we throw away the rule book coming up with ways to stop this happening we really need to know whethere it can actually hapen. Is it possible, today, to tarnish the Giro's reputation?

You are the one wanting to throw away the rule book. The answer to your question is YES.

Ok, let's get circular: what rule am I seeking to throw away? Chapter and verse, please...

 

[spetsa]

To be fair, it would never be an issue with Bardiani riders riding Giro anyway, because their AAFs have all been for non-specified substances, not theraputic ones, so the rider is suspended imediatly on the AAF anyway, not the decision.
Legally, Giro won't have a leg to stand on. The only way they would prevent Froome riding would be remove itself from under UCI sanction and operate anti-doping with Italian NADO I assume so they could apply the rules they want.
I think the case is nearly over anyway, sounds like Froome is very confident no rules have been broken from his latest interview with Moore and even Moore himself was shocked at the level of confidence from within Team Sky. Could all be a big bluff of course, but I think he will be cleared by then anyway.

Decision by RCS to give a wildcard team an invitation to the Giro in 2018, after the events of 2017 is staggering - RCS should not have given Bardiani a wildcard for the next three editions.

What does this have to do with Froome? Please explain. Your argument about Bardiani, standing alone from Froome is pretty solid. The two just aren't connected.

 

[spetsa]

Re: Re:

i go away for a few hours and now we seem to be spiralling into a debate about the effects of doping scandals on team/the sports sponsorship! oh well

That is rather at the heart of the argument being made by some that Froome's intended Giro participation risks bringing disrepute upon the race. Before we throw away the rule book coming up with ways to stop this happening we really need to know whethere it can actually hapen. Is it possible, today, to tarnish the Giro's reputation?

You are the one wanting to throw away the rule book. The answer to your question is YES.

Ok, let's get circular: what rule am I seeking to throw away? Chapter and verse, please...

At least you admit the objective of your "arguing". Mods, can you please declare Fmk's interpretation of the rules correct and close the thread. It is becoming a complete joke.

 

[fmk_RoI]

Re: Re:

i go away for a few hours and now we seem to be spiralling into a debate about the effects of doping scandals on team/the sports sponsorship! oh well

That is rather at the heart of the argument being made by some that Froome's intended Giro participation risks bringing disrepute upon the race. Before we throw away the rule book coming up with ways to stop this happening we really need to know whethere it can actually hapen. Is it possible, today, to tarnish the Giro's reputation?

You are the one wanting to throw away the rule book. The answer to your question is YES.

Ok, let's get circular: what rule am I seeking to throw away? Chapter and verse, please...

At least you admit the objective of your "arguing". Mods, can you please declare Fmk's interpretation of the rules correct and close the thread. It is becoming a complete joke.

Is that you withdrawing your baseless and frankly insulting claim that I seek to throw the rule book away Spetsa?

 

[spetsa]

fmk, if you find someone disagreeing with you insulting, good luck with life. Go get one.

 

[Escarabajo]

To be fair, it would never be an issue with Bardiani riders riding Giro anyway, because their AAFs have all been for non-specified substances, not theraputic ones, so the rider is suspended imediatly on the AAF anyway, not the decision.
Legally, Giro won't have a leg to stand on. The only way they would prevent Froome riding would be remove itself from under UCI sanction and operate anti-doping with Italian NADO I assume so they could apply the rules they want.
I think the case is nearly over anyway, sounds like Froome is very confident no rules have been broken from his latest interview with Moore and even Moore himself was shocked at the level of confidence from within Team Sky. Could all be a big bluff of course, but I think he will be cleared by then anyway.

I'll be completely shocked if that happens. I don't believe it for 1 second.

 

[fmk_RoI]

Re:

fmk, if you find someone disagreeing with you insulting, good luck with life. Go get one.

Disagree with me, by all means. But accusing me of the polar opposite of what I have been saying, that is not disagreeing, that is denigrating.

Now. Do you have any evidence to support your disagreement with me or do you just have insults?

 

[TourOfSardinia]

CF in yesterday's friendly fire podcast https://thecyclingpodcast.com/podcast/the-ruta-del-sol
(skip to 13m15s and dodge the Rapha ads)

It's not the first time that I have had issues like that [at the Vuelta]
come towards the end of a Grand Tour: my body on the limit
my immune system a little low - that's my Achilles heal.

I never heard that line before.
Is this a bit of a confession?
Did the previous excesses get a Cookson white card?

 

[TourOfSardinia]

Tom Dumoulin restates his opinion prior to Abu Dhabi Tour
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/tom-dumoulin-its-not-good-for-cycling-that-chris-froome-case-is-lingering-on/

"It would be very, very bad if he starts the Giro without still knowing something and they maybe have to say after the Giro or the Tour that he's suspended. That would be the worst scenario ever ...

 

[bambino]

Re: Re:

fmk, if you find someone disagreeing with you insulting, good luck with life. Go get one.

Disagree with me, by all means. But accusing me of the polar opposite of what I have been saying, that is not disagreeing, that is denigrating.

Now. Do you have any evidence to support your disagreement with me or do you just have insults?

Bit lame from you being the one who started the insults against spetsa.

Calm down.

I did read the rule and explained how I read the rules for possibility to ban rider. Spetsa agreed on my reading. You said it is wishful thinking, but no explanation why.

Could you instead of spetsa explain why you think my reading of rulebook is wrong? And don't go to your funny anckles of using the word might. Just quote (all of it, not just the part that suits you best) my message and explain where I read the rules incorrectly.

And I won't link my message to you. Go and find it. I don't like helping people that starts the spiral of insults.