Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

[rick james]

Re: Re:

I don't go along with the last couple of posts.

If everyone said flat No to Doping, it is not acceptable in any way, we wouldn't have today's Doping culture and I include the UCI and Wada. They let it happen. There should be no TUE's. If you're crook you're crook and you definitely shouldn't be capable of winning any bike race even with medication if you're really crook. I've been crook and taken medication and never made a miraculous recovery good enough to win any athletic event. It still takes time to heal or recover, if you're actually sick.

Also all doctor's records related to an athlete's athletic abilities should be open to the public. Not hidden away under a stupid privacy policy.

Do they want to clear up doping or not? Well of course not which is why they have the TUE system and the secret so called privacy medical records policies.

It's crooked from top to bottom.

There is no way a person's medical records should be made available to the public in any endeavour of life - This is one of the more bizarre posts in The Clinic.

Why? You're a public figure. Who cares?

just because they are in the public eye doesn't mean we should know everything private about them..

 

[aphronesis]

Re: Re:

I don't go along with the last couple of posts.

If everyone said flat No to Doping, it is not acceptable in any way, we wouldn't have today's Doping culture and I include the UCI and Wada. They let it happen. There should be no TUE's. If you're crook you're crook and you definitely shouldn't be capable of winning any bike race even with medication if you're really crook. I've been crook and taken medication and never made a miraculous recovery good enough to win any athletic event. It still takes time to heal or recover, if you're actually sick.

Also all doctor's records related to an athlete's athletic abilities should be open to the public. Not hidden away under a stupid privacy policy.

Do they want to clear up doping or not? Well of course not which is why they have the TUE system and the secret so called privacy medical records policies.

It's crooked from top to bottom.

There is no way a person's medical records should be made available to the public in any endeavour of life - This is one of the more bizarre posts in The Clinic.

Why? You're a public figure. Who cares?

just because they are in the public eye doesn't mean we should know everything private about them..

who said everything? medical records are institutional; i.e. not private. you get that yes?

 

[rick james]

Medical records should remain private

 

[aphronesis]

Re:

Medical records should remain private

Why?

 

[Elagabalus]

Re: Re:

...What lofty battles are a decent percentage of those anti-Armstrong warriors out there waging now? I'll guess few to none...

Resting on our laurels after having been bestowed the highest accolade that the internet can give:

TOTAL. INTERNET. WIN! (2013)

It still sends a chill down my spine ...

viewtopic.php?p=1114872#p1114872

 

[aphronesis]

Re: Re:

...What lofty battles are a decent percentage of those anti-Armstrong warriors out there waging now? I'll guess few to none...

Resting on our laurels after having been bestowed the highest accolade that the internet can give:

TOTAL. INTERNET. WIN! (2013)

It still sends a chill down my spine ...

viewtopic.php?p=1114872#p1114872

Oh right. Always good to see you.

 

[zalacain]

Re: Re:

Putting the two axioms together, check the math to see if it's right
(Froome + Wiggins = Armstong/Landis)

 

[ruamruam]

Re: Re:

Medical records should remain private

Why?

Because it might be embarrasing for Sky

 

[yaco]

Re: Re:

I don't go along with the last couple of posts.

If everyone said flat No to Doping, it is not acceptable in any way, we wouldn't have today's Doping culture and I include the UCI and Wada. They let it happen. There should be no TUE's. If you're crook you're crook and you definitely shouldn't be capable of winning any bike race even with medication if you're really crook. I've been crook and taken medication and never made a miraculous recovery good enough to win any athletic event. It still takes time to heal or recover, if you're actually sick.

Also all doctor's records related to an athlete's athletic abilities should be open to the public. Not hidden away under a stupid privacy policy.

Do they want to clear up doping or not? Well of course not which is why they have the TUE system and the secret so called privacy medical records policies.

It's crooked from top to bottom.

There is no way a person's medical records should be made available to the public in any endeavour of life - This is one of the more bizarre posts in The Clinic.

Why? You're a public figure. Who cares?

And the silliness of The Clinic has no bounds.

 

[bigcog]

Re: Re:

Medical records should remain private

Why?

I thought it was a basic human right, to a private life and privacy or words to that effect.

 

[aphronesis]

Re: Re:

Medical records should remain private

Why?

I thought it was a basic human right, to a private life and privacy or words to that effect.

If you’re a professional , I would think arguments could be mad against that. Re. the above, permanent clinic residents calling other posts silly is always rich.

 

[GraftPunk]

Re: Re:

Medical records should remain private

Why?

I thought it was a basic human right, to a private life and privacy or words to that effect.

Does anyone really expect privacy these days? Besides privacy in general (legal contracts dictate otherwise in specific circumstances) is not a right, it's merely considerate.

 

[MarkvW]

Re: Re:

Medical records should remain private

Why?

I thought it was a basic human right, to a private life and privacy or words to that effect.

Does anyone really expect privacy these days? Besides privacy in general (legal contracts dictate otherwise in specific circumstances) is not a right, it's merely considerate.

These athletes exist solely for our entertainment. Any rights they might have are subordinated to our gratification!

Union now! F*ck the pigs!

 

[miguelindurain111]

"David Lappartient fears Froome case won’t be solved before Giro."

Funny :lol:

https://twitter.com/TourDeJose/status/975989789416738816?s=20

 

[TourOfSardinia]

Re:

"David Lappartient fears Froome case won’t be solved before Giro."

Funny :lol:

https://twitter.com/TourDeJose/status/975989789416738816?s=20

That's okay of CF still treats the Giro
like a training ride.


PS: Lappartient Nibali is a beautiful ambassador for cycling

 

[Wiggo's Package]

Re:

"David Lappartient fears Froome case won’t be solved before Giro."

Funny :lol:

https://twitter.com/TourDeJose/status/975989789416738816?s=20

Saw this on Twitter earlier

IIRC Lappartient said Froome's case is still with LADS and the hold up is due to Froome's legal team raising lots of procedural queries

Mike Morgan is doing his thang

 

[Merckx index]

This is provocative:

“il caso e molto piu complicato di uno normale”

Really? Perche, signore? Are they laying out a theory of blocked excretion of salbutamol?

Not clear to me whether the case is before the Tribunal or not. At one point he seems to say the case is at LADS, but he also answers yes to the question of whether the Tribunal is involved. My interpretation of this is that the Tribunal did convene in February, as reported, and a judge was appointed, but there hasn't been a hearing yet. I think they're still at the stage of sending documents to the judge. Normally this phase would be over by now, but if Froome's lawyers ask for more time to respond, no doubt they will get it. And if Lappartient is to be believed, the complications of this case make this process longer.

So it sounds as though Froome may be trying to delay the case past the Giro, banking that any ban will be proactive. And if there hasn't been a hearing yet, I guess Froome and LADS could still try to work out a deal. In that case, I start to take more seriously my theory that Froome might try to get a ban of a certain length on the condition that it’s proactive and begins after the Giro.

Edit: Lappartient's interview, which is in English, can be found here:

http://video.gazzetta.it/lappartient-caso-froome-chiuso-prima-giro-non-credo/b301403a-2c29-11e8-b57c-23ad2a0c8951?vclk=ciclismo_AperturaStandard|lappartient-caso-froome-chiuso-prima-giro-non-credo

Just two minutes long. Still can't tell from what he says whether there is a judge and they're getting ready for a hearing. Again, he says it's at LADS, but again, he also says the Tribunal is involved.

 

[pastronef]

Re: Re:

"David Lappartient fears Froome case won’t be solved before Giro."

Funny :lol:

https://twitter.com/TourDeJose/status/975989789416738816?s=20

That's okay of CF still treats the Giro
like a training ride.


PS: Lappartient Nibali is a beautiful ambassador for cycling

p/b those jolly lads of Bahrain

 

[fmk_RoI]

With no resolution before the Giro in sight ... anyone still hoping against hope for the Disrepute card to be played? Anyone? Don't be shy...

 

[Merckx index]

Re:

With no resolution before the Giro in sight ... anyone still hoping against hope for the Disrepute card to be played? Anyone? Don't be shy...

If it were played, I wonder if the judge would speak out, assuring everyone that any potential ban would be proactive, beginning after the Giro. I doubt that could be done without compromising the rules, but it would certainly be tempting to provide that kind of guarantee that any results would stand. Given the stakes, i could see Vegni, for example, who has already been trying to get assurances of some kind or another, asking the judge to promise that any ban would not be backdated. As the Giro approaches, pressure is going to mount.

 

[fmk_RoI]

Re: Re:

With no resolution before the Giro in sight ... anyone still hoping against hope for the Disrepute card to be played? Anyone? Don't be shy...

If it were played, I wonder if the judge would speak out, assuring everyone that any potential ban would be proactive, beginning after the Giro. I doubt that could be done without compromising the rules, but it would certainly be tempting to provide that kind of guarantee that any results would stand. Given the stakes, i could see Vegni, for example, who has already been trying to get assurances of some kind or another, asking the judge to promise that any ban would not be backdated. As the Giro approaches, pressure is going to mount.

Oh we've been through all the reasons why it won't work (it didn't work for Astana, for Boonen, for Valverde). I just want to know if there's anyone out there still hoping against hope that RCS will throw money down the drain on legal fees just for the PR value...

 

[thehog]

Re: Re:

With no resolution before the Giro in sight ... anyone still hoping against hope for the Disrepute card to be played? Anyone? Don't be shy...

If it were played, I wonder if the judge would speak out, assuring everyone that any potential ban would be proactive, beginning after the Giro. I doubt that could be done without compromising the rules, but it would certainly be tempting to provide that kind of guarantee that any results would stand. Given the stakes, i could see Vegni, for example, who has already been trying to get assurances of some kind or another, asking the judge to promise that any ban would not be backdated. As the Giro approaches, pressure is going to mount.

If it was going to occur, it would be done at the eleventh hour whereby it would be inconsequential if it was by the rules or not. Reference Sagan’s dismal from the Tour. It’s not like Froome could partition for an injunction for the race to not be run to account for his inclusion.

 

[Wiggo's Package]

This is provocative:

“il caso e molto piu complicato di uno normale”

Really? Perche, signore? Are they laying out a theory of blocked excretion of salbutamol?

Not clear to me whether the case is before the Tribunal or not. At one point he seems to say the case is at LADS, but he also answers yes to the question of whether the Tribunal is involved. My interpretation of this is that the Tribunal did convene in February, as reported, and a judge was appointed, but there hasn't been a hearing yet. I think they're still at the stage of sending documents to the judge. Normally this phase would be over by now, but if Froome's lawyers ask for more time to respond, no doubt they will get it. And if Lappartient is to be believed, the complications of this case make this process longer.

So it sounds as though Froome may be trying to delay the case past the Giro, banking that any ban will be proactive. And if there hasn't been a hearing yet, I guess Froome and LADS could still try to work out a deal. In that case, I start to take more seriously my theory that Froome might try to get a ban of a certain length on the condition that it’s proactive and begins after the Giro.

Edit: Lappartient's interview, which is in English, can be found here:

http://video.gazzetta.it/lappartient-caso-froome-chiuso-prima-giro-non-credo/b301403a-2c29-11e8-b57c-23ad2a0c8951?vclk=ciclismo_AperturaStandard|lappartient-caso-froome-chiuso-prima-giro-non-credo

Just two minutes long. Still can't tell from what he says whether there is a judge and they're getting ready for a hearing. Again, he says it's at LADS, but again, he also says the Tribunal is involved.

From CN's report on Lappartient' s comments - case still at LADS:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/lappartient-chris-froomes-case-unlikely-to-be-resolved-before-giro-ditalia/

' “The procedure is long, questions have to be answered, documents have to be studied. Both sides have powerful lawyers and the case is far more complicated than usual,” Lappartient said. “I’m not authorised to say that much out of respect for the WADA code. The case is at the LADS (Legal Anti-Doping Services) and our lawyers and the rider’s lawyers are in discussion.”

However Lappartient confirmed that the UCI Anti-Doping Tribunal had been consulted but only on procedural matters. “Before passing to the next phase, we’ve got to be sure to have responded to every question. Nobody wants to risk going forward without having closed every detail. For that reason, LADS has asked some questions to the Anti-Doping Tribunal, to be sure to have followed the correct procedure,” Lappartient said.'

 

[fmk_RoI]

Re: Re:

With no resolution before the Giro in sight ... anyone still hoping against hope for the Disrepute card to be played? Anyone? Don't be shy...

If it were played, I wonder if the judge would speak out, assuring everyone that any potential ban would be proactive, beginning after the Giro. I doubt that could be done without compromising the rules, but it would certainly be tempting to provide that kind of guarantee that any results would stand. Given the stakes, i could see Vegni, for example, who has already been trying to get assurances of some kind or another, asking the judge to promise that any ban would not be backdated. As the Giro approaches, pressure is going to mount.

If it was going to occur, it would be done at the eleventh hour whereby it would be inconsequential if it was by the rules or not. Reference Sagan’s dismal from the Tour. It’s not like Froome could partition for an injunction for the race to not be run to account for his inclusion.

The eleventh hour is actually several days before the race starts, when RCS accepts the submitted team lists. So, actually, nothing at all like Sagan and more than enough time for a ruling from CAS (who are often quite nimble on their feet, when justice requires it)...

 

[Bolder]

I really wonder what Sky (the television network, not the team) thinks about all this. I imagine as has been stated before that there are some legal "outs" in their sponsorship deal.

Right now when cycling fans (casual or otherwise) see a Sky jersey they don't think "Tour de France winner/cool TV shows," they think "Froome unresolved doping case." That's gotta translate into a seriously negative Q score.