Pre Tour de France-thread

[HelloDolly]

Valverde is a completely different case ...If he were to win the Tour there is no indication that his result could be stripped ...

 

[Robert5091]

Wait 'til Wednesday first people - Sky are taking this to court. Boonen's case might be brought up -
https://www.independent.co.uk/sport...m-sky-tour-de-france-tom-boonen-a8269411.html

 

[DNP-Old]

Re:

Valverde is a completely different case ...If he were to win the Tour there is no indication that his result could be stripped ...

Neither would Froome's.

 

[Broccolidwarf]

Re:

Wait 'til Wednesday first people - Sky are taking this to court. Boonen's case might be brought up -
https://www.independent.co.uk/sport...m-sky-tour-de-france-tom-boonen-a8269411.html

Imagine Sky winning and Froome starting anyway.

It is going to be a security nightmare, to keep crazy spectators from taking matters into their own hands, throughout the 3 weeks :redface:

 

[HelloDolly]

People are reporting they dont think ASO will defend the case brought by SKY to include Froome as they will have been seen to do the right thing and he may race

But would have thought a Tour sans Froome would be a good thing not least for G Thomas and would give freedom to Bernal

 

[HelloDolly]

Re: Re:

Valverde is a completely different case ...If he were to win the Tour there is no indication that his result could be stripped ...

Neither would Froome's.

Yes he would if found guilty
He can be stripped of any result if ban backdated by UCI ...its up to the UCI

 

[DNP-Old]

Re: Re:

Valverde is a completely different case ...If he were to win the Tour there is no indication that his result could be stripped ...

Neither would Froome's.

Yes he would if found guilty
He can be stripped of any result if ban backdated by UCI ...its up to the UCI

That won't happen, per Lappartient. His Vuelta win would be a goner, his Giro win for instance, would still stand.

 

[46&twoWheels]

I'd like to understand..

let's suppose the Tour is a "private strip club" managed by ASO. What power does the court have to force Froome to enter this "private strip club"? pardon my ignorance. Which legal ground are we talking about: a contract between SKY and the organizers? I'm completely out of the loop on the matter...

 

[Broccolidwarf]

I'd like to understand..

let's suppose the Tour is a "private strip club" managed by ASO. What power does the court have to force Froome to enter this "private strip club"? pardon my ignorance. Which legal ground are we talking about: a contract between SKY and the organizers? I'm completely out of the loop on the matter...

The first example that sprang to mind for you, was a "private strip club"?

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re: Re:

Valverde is a completely different case ...If he were to win the Tour there is no indication that his result could be stripped ...

Neither would Froome's.

Yes he would if found guilty
He can be stripped of any result if ban backdated by UCI ...its up to the UCI

That won't happen, per Lappartient. His Vuelta win would be a goner, his Giro win for instance, would still stand.

That was denied by the UCI later

 

[46&twoWheels]

I'd like to understand..

let's suppose the Tour is a "private strip club" managed by ASO. What power does the court have to force Froome to enter this "private strip club"? pardon my ignorance. Which legal ground are we talking about: a contract between SKY and the organizers? I'm completely out of the loop on the matter...

The first example that sprang to mind for you, was a "private strip club"?

sorry :lol: let's say it was an embellishment. Anyway,the dynamics between: Teams-Organizers-UCI-Cas, are not easy to understand. Unfortunately newspapers are superficial on the matter

 

[Singer01]

On the premise it's better that 10 guilty men go free than 1 innocent man goes to jail, he should be allowed to race. If he isn't and is then exonerated the winner has the biggest asterisk ever next to their name.

 

[Broccolidwarf]

I'd like to understand..

let's suppose the Tour is a "private strip club" managed by ASO. What power does the court have to force Froome to enter this "private strip club"? pardon my ignorance. Which legal ground are we talking about: a contract between SKY and the organizers? I'm completely out of the loop on the matter...

The first example that sprang to mind for you, was a "private strip club"?

sorry :lol: let's say it was an embellishment. Anyway,the dynamics between: Teams-Organizers-UCI-Cas, are not easy to understand. Unfortunately newspapers are superficial on the matter

ASO is a private corporation, that owns and organises several races, incl. Tdf.
UCI is the cycling federation
CAS is an independent arbitration court for sports, under the IOC umbrella

What exactly is your confusion?

 

[46&twoWheels]

I'd like to understand..

let's suppose the Tour is a "private strip club" managed by ASO. What power does the court have to force Froome to enter this "private strip club"? pardon my ignorance. Which legal ground are we talking about: a contract between SKY and the organizers? I'm completely out of the loop on the matter...

The first example that sprang to mind for you, was a "private strip club"?

sorry :lol: let's say it was an embellishment. Anyway,the dynamics between: Teams-Organizers-UCI-Cas, are not easy to understand. Unfortunately newspapers are superficial on the matter

ASO is a private corporation, that owns and organises several races, incl. Tdf.
UCI is the cycling federation
CAS is an independent arbitration court for sports, under the IOC umbrella

What exactly is your confusion?

basically, in short..
what right does ASO have to ban Froome?
what right does Froome have to appeal?
and How does the decision by the Court limit ASO's powers?
:redface:

 

[King Of The Wolds]

Of course, ironically, if the ASO get their way on this one, their 2018 edition will forever have the asterisk they say they want to avoid.

 

[Summoned]

Re:

Of course, ironically, if the ASO get their way on this one, their 2018 edition will forever have the asterisk they say they want to avoid.

I don't think it will, actually. The 2008 Tour excluded Astana, despite the fact that the guilty riders and personnel were no longer part of the set-up (theoretically) and Astana had already left the Tour the previous year as a result of their doping violations. I don't think the 2008 Tour has an asterisk. In fact, I think it is widely considered to be one of the cleaner Tours in recent memory (Ed. Kohl and Schumacher notwithstanding. But in a way that actually furthers the point - the winner and podium are not tarred by that association.) Even if the clear best GT rider was not allowed to start, it was a good Tour and is not generally considered to have suffered from his absence to the extent that people discount it.

That being said, I fully anticipate that Froome will ride the Tour this year.

 

[movingtarget]

The ASO have tried this before and failed and the UCI also tried to have Astana kicked off the Pro Tour and failed. Froome's appeal will most likely be upheld and he will race and then face the music after the Tour. The entire situation from the Vuelta test till now is a shambles and an embarrassment to the the way the sport is administered. Major changes have to happen and quickly so this situation can't be repeated. Froome is just making use of the avenues he is allowed, he didn't make these ridiculous rules.

 

[dercuforever]

I don't like that tentative to ban Froome just a week before.

At least state the fact one month before so the rider can adapt his schedule ...

Now it just seems schemy.

 

[HelloDolly]

I don't like that tentative to ban Froome just a week before.

At least state the fact one month before so the rider can adapt his schedule ...

Now it just seems schemy.

Hadto wait untilSKY named team as otherwise 'banning' a rider not racing

 

[dercuforever]

I don't like that tentative to ban Froome just a week before.

At least state the fact one month before so the rider can adapt his schedule ...

Now it just seems schemy.

Hadto wait untilSKY named team as otherwise 'banning' a rider not racing

Had not thought of that. Still a strange move.

 

[Zinoviev Letter]

My guess is that he will ride and that the main effect of the attempt to exclude him will be to increase public hostility to him.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re:

My guess is that he will ride and that the main effect of the attempt to exclude him will be to increase public hostility to him.

I also expect him to be allowed to start, but it would be terribly funny if he was truly excluded.

 

[Arked]

I don't like that tentative to ban Froome just a week before.

At least state the fact one month before so the rider can adapt his schedule ...

Now it just seems schemy.

Hadto wait untilSKY named team as otherwise 'banning' a rider not racing

They did it this way because CAS, after imminent Sky appeal, will not have enough time to overrule the ban. Sneaky... Personally I don't really appreciate that.

 

[jaylew]

Re: Re:

Valverde is a completely different case ...If he were to win the Tour there is no indication that his result could be stripped ...

Neither would Froome's.

Yes he would if found guilty
He can be stripped of any result if ban backdated by UCI ...its up to the UCI

That won't happen, per Lappartient. His Vuelta win would be a goner, his Giro win for instance, would still stand.

That's simply not true. He could still lose his Giro, Tour (if he raced) and Vuelta. Lappartient has denied those reports that said otherwise.

 

[Salvarani]

Hope he is not allowed to start.

And if he starts I pray someone else win this one.