UCI helped Froome with illegal(?) TUE at Romandie

[autologous]

I don't have the time to read this whole thread - so forgive me if this has been addressed: Does it really make sense that Froome would abuse a TUE in order to win Romandie? I know it's a significant spring stage race, but it's still a spring stage race. If he and/or Sky are abusing TUE's to win Romandie, I'd hate to think what they'll/d do to win the Tour.

why are you speaking in future tense? change "will/would" to "did".


also brings to mind this little nugget from the recent cyclingnews article :

The substance involved was Prednisone, a glucocorticosteroid, a derivative of cortisol. According the Sunday Times, Froome had used the substance in 2013 for a similar health issue.

Haven't heard a whole lot about the 2013 abuse.

Froome was catching flack for this year's use in light of last year's denial of ever needing a TUE, but this 2013 abuse is somewhat more contemporaneous with those denials.

 

[Granville57]

I'd hate to think what they'll/d do to win the Tour.

Don't we all!

 

[eleven]

why are you speaking in future tense? change "will/would" to "did".


also brings to mind this little nugget from the recent cyclingnews article :



Haven't heard a whole lot about the 2013 abuse.

Froome was catching flack for this year's use in light of last year's denial of ever needing a TUE, but this 2013 abuse is somewhat more contemporaneous with those denials.

Good point! This is the reward I get for trying to give riders the benefit of the doubt after so much skepticism.

It's just unreal that folks who are GC contenders feel the need to cheat to win a spring stage race. It must also say something about the likelihood of them getting caught, or lack thereof.

 

[red_flanders]

I don't have the time to read this whole thread - so forgive me if this has been addressed: Does it really make sense that Froome would abuse a TUE in order to win Romandie? I know it's a significant spring stage race, but it's still a spring stage race. If he and/or Sky are abusing TUE's to win Romandie, I'd hate to think what they'll/d do to win the Tour.

I think the assumption that riders use dope for particular races (or not) is worth some examination. From what I understand, riders dope as part of a year-long program. Romandie would be but a snapshot in a program. You don't just start doping in July to win the Tour. You dope all year long so you can train, recover, train harder, recover, train some more, recover and then go race your A race(s).

It's a good question but I don't think it's the right question in this situation.

 

[Race Radio]

Yet

“WADA is satisfied that the UCI’s decision to grant a Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE) to Chris Froome was conducted according to the rules of the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions (ISTUE), and therefore will not be reviewing this case any further,”

Clearly they weren't in possession of all your facts.

Nah, they are not satisfied

https://translate.googleusercontent...672786&usg=ALkJrhivVFEMGjPAGtHmzuI4x76cpRYKlA

David Howman, the director general of the agency, told us "I am concerned about the process of getting the TUE" and have "asked the UCI to quickly remedy the shortcomings identified in this case."

The UCI is hardly believable, does not have a committee of experts to provide TUE as required by WADA. It is the sole responsibility and Dr Mario Zorzoli, the coordinator of its medical committee, to grant these permissions may be - as in the case of Froome - aid to performance. WADA has asked the UCI to remedy this failure.

 

[thehog]

I think the assumption that riders use dope for particular races (or not) is worth some examination. From what I understand, riders dope as part of a year-long program. Romandie would be but a snapshot in a program. You don't just start doping in July to win the Tour. You dope all year long so you can train, recover, train harder, recover, train some more, recover and then go race your A race(s).

It's a good question but I don't think it's the right question in this situation.

Correct. If you're training like a racehorse all year round, then you're getting the benefits of the addtional power and strength when you race, even if you'r dropping the cortisone.

I'm with your theory that he was glowing way too bright come LBL and there was no time to arrange the TUE paper work. By Romandie they had put together the required documentation and had Zoroli issue the TUE with one phone call.

There appears flagrant disregard for the process. Froome/Sky requesting medication to enable Froome to "finish" the race decided rather than sit midfield and "recover" it would be a better idea to blow the entire field apart whist 'recovering" from his acute asthmatic condition which included a chest infection.

In fact Froome felt so good he attacked with 27km to go and even had enough time to sit up and wait for Spilak so he had someone to keep him company!

The UCI don't appear bothered by this outrageous performance whilst using an emergency TUE, nor do Sky, Froome or Cound & Walsh.

And all the Bots don't appear troubled to what amounts to clear and obvious performance enhancement from PEDs. They are caught up on "process" and "Cookson said".

Absurd.

 

[eleven]

I think the assumption that riders use dope for particular races (or not) is worth some examination. From what I understand, riders dope as part of a year-long program. Romandie would be but a snapshot in a program. You don't just start doping in July to win the Tour. You dope all year long so you can train, recover, train harder, recover, train some more, recover and then go race your A race(s).

It's a good question but I don't think it's the right question in this situation.

Thanks for that, red_flanders. Makes sense, sadly!

 

[JRanton]

A bit off topic but out of interest, what would Quintana have received for his illness during the Giro?

 

[JRanton]

Hence why it's important to ask questions of "favouritism" by the UCI towards Sky given the illegal provision of an illegal in-competing steroid.

Thus why the UCI is now setting up a committee as they've admitted they got it wrong by allowing the illegal drug to be used.

You were aware of this weren't you? That they didn't follow WADA guidelines?

Perhaps so they could provide favours? It's a worthy question.

Thing is Hog, if the UCI were trying to provide a favour to Sky then why has the story leaked?

 

[BYOP88]

Thing is Hog, if the UCI were trying to provide a favour to Sky then why has the story leaked?

Weren't the UCI trying to provide Dirty Bertie with a favor with his clen positive, but that still got out.

 

[Granville57]

A bit off topic but out of interest, what would Quintana have received for his illness during the Giro?

A win.
......

 

[Sciocco]

A bit off topic but out of interest, what would Quintana have received for his illness during the Giro?

"I couldn't breath well, it really affected me, and you notice that against your rivals who are in perfect condition," Quintana said. "I am taking some antibiotics at the moment, but I hope I get through it, and I can be at my best for the decisive days - the idea is to still fight for this Giro."

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/quintana-the-problem-was-with-my-breathing-not-with-my-legs

Can't find what he was being given anywhere.

 

[JRanton]

Weren't the UCI trying to provide Dirty Bertie with a favor with his clen positive, but that still got out.

Good point. They're not very good at it.

It would be interesting to know who leaked this TUE.

 

[BYOP88]

Good point. They're not very good at it.

It would be interesting to know who leaked this TUE.

Yeah it would be interesting to find out who leaked it and why.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Yeah it would be interesting to find out who leaked it and why.

Zorzoli .

 

[thehog]

Thing is Hog, if the UCI were trying to provide a favour to Sky then why has the story leaked?

Yeah my bad. Its not like there are members on the board and factions within the UCI who are uncomfortable with the continuation of nepotism and some that remained supportive of McQuaid (looking at you Asia, sick of the UK getting it all?).

That and the same guy who gave the codes to Armstrong's samples to l'equipe is at the centre of another free pass to the pelotons strongest team.

I mean the UCI have always been the beacon of truth, security and sound judgment

Can't imagine them not being 100% ethical and above board...

 

[Afrank]

Can't find what he was being given anywhere.

That's because him or Movistar never said the name of the specific medication he was being given. We just were told it was antibiotics.

 

[Tyre Byter]

What if the leaked TUE was an early gambit in the long con involving results of retro AICAR testing?

 

[Will Carter]

The bolded is not a fact, it is what has been claimed. A Sky doctor reported to the UCI doctor that Froome was sick enough to require an emergency TUE for the drug in question. WADA has confirmed this. This does not mean Froome was actually sick, it just means that's what the Sky doctor told the UCI doctor. Nothing like that has ever been underhanded before, right?

One can choose to believe that Sky took an acutely ill rider, their TdF leader and pumped him full of 'roids to compete and easily win Romandie. One could also choose to believe that's a load of codswallop and they got him a TUE for a drug he was using in training. One could also choose to believe he was "too sick" for LBL, or one could choose to believe they kept him out for other reasons.

There are no facts WRT Froome actually being sick other than that's what Sky has claimed. The claim is a fact, the actual sickness is a matter of belief one way or another.

Actually the bold bit is fact - it was taken after a TUE. Whether he was ill or not is as you say claimed by SKY and the UCI, I didnt comment on that though.

 

[Will Carter]

The drug is banned in completion per the WADA code and requires a UCI committee to approve in-completion use for reasons of exception.

A committee did not approval the therapeutic use for Froome therefore it's still remains an illegal use of the drug.

Froome and Sky requested the use of the drug so he could win the race.

Facts, don't you hate them?

IIRC the WADA code requires a TUE committee to be formed, however it doesnt require all decisions to be made by the whole committee, esp. in emergency cases.

 

[Will Carter]

Yeah my bad. Its not like there are members on the board and factions within the UCI who are uncomfortable with the continuation of nepotism and some that remained supportive of McQuaid (looking at you Asia, sick of the UK getting it all?).

That and the same guy who gave the codes to Armstrong's samples to l'equipe is at the centre of another free pass to the pelotons strongest team.

I mean the UCI have always been the beacon of truth, security and sound judgment

Can't imagine them not being 100% ethical and above board...

I thought the UCI published those codes as part of releasing the doping forms (ie name & code) and had Armstrongs approval to do so?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

I thought the UCI published those codes as part of releasing the doping forms (ie name & code) and had Armstrongs approval to do so?

Bahahahhahahahahahaaaa.

 

[Journey Man]

Unexpected side effects

One pleasantly unexpected side-effect of all this is that it seems @michellecound has finally imploded under the weight of her own indignance...


Personally, I've always felt uncomfortable with her self-declared position of authority with regards to Froome. I had the impression she is as interested, if not more so, in being in the media limelight than the athlete she manages. In doing so, at least in a quick straw poll of fellow fans, she seems to be doing more to single handedly damage the image of Froome.

Back on topic... I think the TUE use is acceptable out of competition. If an athlete picks up a minor injury due to a heavy training load, and a banned substance would prove beneficial, would that be grounds for a TUE? If an athlete is fatigued due to a higher training load and they are susceptible to picking up and illness, would that be grounds for a TUE? It seems that the circumstances surrounding the granting of an emergency TUE are solely for when the athlete's health is seriously in jeopardy and I agree with those who feel that if the athlete needs a TUE that urgently, they should be removed from racing.

This is an incredible own goal from Team Sky.

 

[noddy69]

I say Froome has shot his mouth off more than most...and in an extreme high profile position. Therefore the arrogance and taunting of "come prove I'm dirty" has once again come into play.

They all need to be held accountable but at the end of the day most are smart enough to stay under the radar re comments...

I agree but it should still be in the context of lets have a look at all the top riders not just one. I am fully behind calling people out, I just think we should be calling out all the riders.

 

[GJB123]

Actually the bold bit is fact - it was taken after a TUE. Whether he was ill or not is as you say claimed by SKY and the UCI, I didnt comment on that though.

Were you present when it was taken? Whose word do we have to believe that medication was actually administered after the the TUE was granted? Sky's word, Froome's word?