Teams & Riders Froome Talk Only

[rick james]

Re: Re:

Who's paying who here exactly for Froome to not AAF? Why not UCI just pay WADA to not AAF or Froome pay UCI to not ADRV him. If you want something protected, you don't first un-protect it, let everyone have a good look around it and then protect it back up again, you just protect it in the first place so nobody knows anything.

This is the clinic..
Most of the time the logic is out...hate is in.

logic is one of the first things left at the front door when you enter the clinic :lol:

 

[samhocking]

WADA, UCI & Sky don't care so much, they're happy for an AAF to be left in the open, slowly rotting all their credibility for 9 months and then ASO pop up one day asking where that AAF is at and WADA basically nulls the AAF for it to go away for themselves and UCI when nothing needed to be in the public anyway. Loony!

As for Cookson, Sky, Lappartient leaking it before his election is just crazy. Where's the great deal for any of them right now? I simply don't see anyone gaining anything other than reputational damage whoever scratches who's back in all this.

 

[Ariane]

UNBELIEVABLE decision: One set of rules for Teflon Sky and one set for the others. Time for another leak.

 

[rick james]

Re: Re:

It's hard to accept that the UCI would accept a bribe,seeing they leaked Froome's test results , while the final result has caused them embarrassment.

Any source for that or just guessing ?

Well someone in the UCI leaked it didn't they ? Or doesn't that fit the narrative now

Another guesser ?

most of this thread is guess work...now

 

[Angliru]

Re:

And to all those saying this should have been confidential, bla blah, yeah, just imagine how many times he may have escaped in the same way and we know nothing about it. Good that it's been leaked. Now we all know for sure that he's a fraud.
God I'm so salty :lol:

I can imagine that is the very reason it was leaked. Someone saw how often he was skating by, with cycling fans being completely unaware, and decided to at least let it be known that all is not as pure and pristine as it appears.

 

[rhubroma]

Re:

WADA, UCI & Sky don't care so much, they're happy for an AAF to be left in the open, slowly rotting all their credibility for 9 months and then ASO pop up one day asking where that AAF is at and WADA basically nulls the AAF for it to go away for themselves and UCI when nothing needed to be in the public anyway. Loony!

As for Cookson, Sky, Lappartient leaking it before his election is just crazy. Where's the great deal for any of them right now? I simply don't see anyone gaining anything other than reputational damage whoever scratches who's back in all this.

It's one set of rules for too big to fall, another for everyone else.

Poor Ulissi, had he been Froome, he never would have had to confess to broker a deal. If you are Froome and Sky you simply "change" the science with 10 million and voilà, no confession, no deal, no sanction. The French are gonna love monsieur Dawg on their roads this July.

 

[Merckx index]

Re: Re:

I can imagine that is the very reason it was leaked. Someone saw how often he was skating by, with cycling fans being completely unaware, and decided to at least let it be known that all is not as pure and pristine as it appears.

If that is not the case--if he was always well under the limit in all his other tests (79 of them in GTs by my count)--then it will be very interesting to see how they explain one value so much higher yet "within expected variation". The story seems to be in all those other stages he only took a few puffs, whereas in stage 18 he took the limit,and all of them within an hour or two before the finish. I'll be very interested to see how they prove all this, then deal with all the evidence that even 800 ug an hour or two before giving a sample does not result in levels that high. Particularly after Rabin said, after the Heuberger paper came out, that they were very familiar with these arguments and were very confident they could deal with them.

 

[rick james]

Re: Re:

And to all those saying this should have been confidential, bla blah, yeah, just imagine how many times he may have escaped in the same way and we know nothing about it. Good that it's been leaked. Now we all know for sure that he's a fraud.
God I'm so salty :lol:

I can imagine that is the very reason it was leaked. Someone saw how often he was skating by, with cycling fans being completely unaware, and decided to at least let it be known that all is not as pure and pristine as it appears.

And its been proved he's innocent...a great day for clean cycling

 

[rhubroma]

And of course Sky, without having any knowledge of the 1500 page legal report back in November, in their infinite purity allowed Froome to race sub iudice. That's because they knew they had the money and clout to beat the system and exonerate their man. Surely a win for clean cycling.

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

And to all those saying this should have been confidential, bla blah, yeah, just imagine how many times he may have escaped in the same way and we know nothing about it. Good that it's been leaked. Now we all know for sure that he's a fraud.
God I'm so salty :lol:

I can imagine that is the very reason it was leaked. Someone saw how often he was skating by, with cycling fans being completely unaware, and decided to at least let it be known that all is not as pure and pristine as it appears.

And its been proved he's innocent...a great day for clean cycling

Nothing has been proved.

The case will not proceed. That is all we are told.

Froome has not proved he is a clean cyclist.

 

[thehog]

Well said

The perfect day to remember Alessio Taliani, former rider of Androni Giocattoli. He was banned in 2017 for 4 YEARS (!!!) for using the nasal spray, Nasacort. 36 ng/ml triamcinolone, the WADA limit was 30 ng/ml. Now tell me more about that thing called justice... #Froome

 

[Angliru]

Re: Re:

And to all those saying this should have been confidential, bla blah, yeah, just imagine how many times he may have escaped in the same way and we know nothing about it. Good that it's been leaked. Now we all know for sure that he's a fraud.
God I'm so salty :lol:

I can imagine that is the very reason it was leaked. Someone saw how often he was skating by, with cycling fans being completely unaware, and decided to at least let it be known that all is not as pure and pristine as it appears.

And its been proved he's innocent...a great day for clean cycling

Do you honestly believe that he and Team Sky are clean?

Edit: ...or do you just enjoy being associated with the winning team and all the gloating that it entails?

 

[samhocking]

Re: Re:

I can imagine that is the very reason it was leaked. Someone saw how often he was skating by, with cycling fans being completely unaware, and decided to at least let it be known that all is not as pure and pristine as it appears.

If that is not the case--if he was always well under the limit in all his other tests (79 of them in GTs by my count)--then it will be very interesting to see how they explain one value so much higher yet "within expected variation". The story seems to be in all those other stages he only took a few puffs, whereas in stage 18 he took the limit,and all of them within an hour or two before the finish. I'll be very interested to see how they prove all this, then deal with all the evidence that even 800 ug an hour or two before giving a sample does not result in levels that high. Particularly after Rabin said, after the Heuberger paper came out, that they were very familiar with these arguments and were very confident they could deal with them.

My guess is a combination of all the things discussed here that could reduce his urine level. I haven't followed the salbutomol thread in great detail, so this might have been discussed (it was at some point) but one thing, that was said in that podcast interview on stage 5 of Giro this year was how bad Chris Froome's chest infection was leading into and during the last week, the anti-biotics he was taking to try and prevent the infection from triggering asthma attacks without resorting to TUE steroids, that would be the normal way for you and I to medically control asthma.

Essentially Froome's asthma was claimed to be medically out of control without using steroids due to the chest infection and so the only legal substance he could take more of was Salbutomol to relieve it. From what I gather, his typical inhaler use is actually relatively low most of the time, but during the last week of Vuelta it was significantly higher than in the past with a combination of chest infection triggering asthma, anti-biotics and the last week which hadn't really occurred in that combination before in his career and the last time it happened so badly he had a TUE obviously, so his asthma was medically under control then so not leaning so heavy on Salbutomol to deal with the asthma from the chest infection.

That was the gist of the podcast and a few comments here and there. You may laugh, but it seems as plausible as anything more exciting and controversial to me.

 

[spalco]

I don't think the hypothetical that there was a good non-performance-enhancing reason for using that amount of medication is a justification for using a potentially performance-enhancing dosage of medication during a race.

If it was that bad, he should have quit, got healthy and try again next year.

 

[bigcog]

Re: Re:

And to all those saying this should have been confidential, bla blah, yeah, just imagine how many times he may have escaped in the same way and we know nothing about it. Good that it's been leaked. Now we all know for sure that he's a fraud.
God I'm so salty :lol:

I can imagine that is the very reason it was leaked. Someone saw how often he was skating by, with cycling fans being completely unaware, and decided to at least let it be known that all is not as pure and pristine as it appears.

And its been proved he's innocent...a great day for clean cycling

Nothing has been proved.

The case will not proceed. That is all we are told.

Froome has not proved he is a clean cyclist.

The case was dropped because he didn't have a case to answer. If that isn't proving yourself 'clean' in this context I don't know what is.

 

[Pantani_lives]

This calls for an independent investigation into corruption at the UCI and WADA. The "scientific" explanation sounds like rubbish to me. He didn't even have to take a lab test. Basically they just decided to protect him. The UCI never minded about Sky doping, only about the leak. This is class justice. Forget those arguments about other sports. Only in cycling this level of corruption exists. Even bodybuilding is cleaner. Another giant triumph for the doping mafia. As soon as the UCI started postponing the case it was obvious they were going to protect him. The UCI has sunk lower now than in 2009 when they allowed Armstrong back in the Tour. Never before have they been so openly protecting a doping user.

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

The case was dropped because he didn't have a case to answer. If that isn't proving yourself 'clean' in this context I don't know what is.

Double the allowable limit is a case to answer, except in Frrome's case with the explanation given that they cannot reproduce the conditions. I look forward to dopers getting off left right and centre due to NADA's not being able to redo the test under the same conditions.

Anyone who thinks Froome is clean is trolling or a moron.

 

[Mayo from Mayo]

Re:

The bribery theory is just water on the sky mill.
I dont see why it is necessary to explain this outcome with bribes when it is glaringly clear almost every actor here wanted this case to go far far far away. They ended up choosing the nuclear option for WADA. Just goes to show that WADA battling worldwide doping with 4 people from a shed in canada (borrowed from hitch) with a budget smaller than a pro-tour team is toothless and will remain toothless.

WADA has an assured budget as long as they go after the real villains - the goddam Russkies!

 

[mrhender]

Awaiting froomes #asthmauk ftw tweet..

 

[GraftPunk]

Re:

I don't think the hypothetical that there was a good non-performance-enhancing reason for using that amount of medication is a justification for using a potentially performance-enhancing dosage of medication during a race.

If it was that bad, he should have quit, got healthy and try again next year.

This.

 

[bigcog]

Re: Re:

The case was dropped because he didn't have a case to answer. If that isn't proving yourself 'clean' in this context I don't know what is.

Double the allowable limit is a case to answer, except in Frrome's case with the explanation given that they cannot reproduce the conditions. I look forward to dopers getting off left right and centre due to NADA's not being able to redo the test under the same conditions.

Anyone who thinks Froome is clean is trolling or a moron.

:lol:

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

So basically, because Sky could not recreate Froome's positive, he has been cleared?

So, if I murder Benotti69's entire family, but my lawyers can't recreate the extreme cirumstances that led to that, I will be cleared? Great.

(no offense Benotti )

 

[Escarabajo]

Re:

So basically, because Sky could not recreate Froome's positive, he has been cleared?

So, if I murder Benotti69's entire family, but my lawyers can't recreate the extreme cirumstances that led to that, I will be cleared? Great.

(no offense Benotti )

LOL
When I watch forensic files I notice that the prosecutors, even when they have everything in their favor like DNA, fingerprints, etc, they still have to come up with a credible story. They have to recreate the story for some reason. Sometimes it is something that it doesn't make any sense.
At least everyone knows who did it and that he is guilty. LOL.

 

[Angliru]

Re: Re:

And to all those saying this should have been confidential, bla blah, yeah, just imagine how many times he may have escaped in the same way and we know nothing about it. Good that it's been leaked. Now we all know for sure that he's a fraud.
God I'm so salty :lol:

I can imagine that is the very reason it was leaked. Someone saw how often he was skating by, with cycling fans being completely unaware, and decided to at least let it be known that all is not as pure and pristine as it appears.

And its been proved he's innocent...a great day for clean cycling

Nothing has been proved.

The case will not proceed. That is all we are told.

Froome has not proved he is a clean cyclist.

The case was dropped because he didn't have a case to answer. If that isn't proving yourself 'clean' in this context I don't know what is.

...and it took them that long to come to that conclusion? Doesn't that sound a bit odd to you?

 

[brownbobby]

Re:

And of course Sky, without having any knowledge of the 1500 page legal report back in November, in their infinite purity allowed Froome to race sub iudice. That's because they knew they had the money and clout to beat the system and exonerate their man. Surely a win for clean cycling.

One thing they and Froome could have known for certain back in November is his complete innocence.

Knowledge of that simple fact would be enough to inspire them to invest so heavily in providing the necessary proof, and continuing to race whilst doing soo. No?