What about the Froome case?

[Huertecilla]

Went to the Boquete de Zafarraya on the bicycle to see the Vuelta a Andalucia pass by.

The GC does not interest me very much as Sky is the only team with a proper turn out; Movistar and Astana are very much second line. Landa may be up to the task but his back up is not as strong as that of Froome.

Froome is looking very much subdued, low profile.
Took some photos and he looks... well, lackluster.

The public mood is rather down about it all.
Nobody wants another scandal and just about all I talk with feel dejected with yet another let down of their sport in the eyes of the general public.

To mé it seems almost surreal.
For one I am flabbergasted about of all teams Sky being involved and secondly I cannot fathom that this is allowed to linger on.

I mean, how long can it take to establish whether the test result is valid?!
If valid then swift application of the rule book should be automatic.
What is the hold up??

It is doing the sport no good at all.
Such a high profile case is bad enough but not taking action is making it way worse still.

Take this andalucian round?? How can Froome be competing, how can his competitors take his participation serious with the case in the air?!

Íf the result is upheld, then Froome múst be disqualified, suspended for at least 9 months. As Sky has a transparent zero tolerance high in the flag pole Froome would then be sacked unless théy take the blame themsleves which would be rather a pop of the marketing balloon.

Anyway, it looked weird and wrong to see Froome in the peloton.
The matter shoud have been cleared.

[Huertecilla]

Hmmmm.
His interview yesterday was rather a mistake.
It met with a wave of indignation over here.
I too am now off the fence and on the negative side.
Bad show Sky and Froome!

Still going to see the Tour a Andalucia pass with my son tomorrow. They will be at half an hour and am not letting the downer spoil his fun.

But man what a bummer.
Yes, he is innocent till proven guilty so should now be able to compete.
Suppose however that he wins a stage or the race and the appeals by Sky are not upheld. The clock cannot be turned back.
Now if he decides to not go full out and use it as a training the whole event is a farce too.
It should have been resolved either way.

[MakeColdplayHistory]

Sky are confident he is innocent so why shouldn't he race?

And your attitude to this is completely predictable.

One thing we can both agree on is that this should be resolved sooner rather than later.

[Meesterbond]

It's not quite as black and white as a 'normal' doping case either.

Firstly, it's an adverse reading to a controlled substance. Salbutamol isn't banned and it's down to Froome to explain why the reading was is high.

Secondly, the story was leaked. The UCI / WADA etc did not announce the adverse finding, The Guardian did. The UCI are following their own rules pretty well here - they can't ban Froome from competing until they've had the hearing.

Also, according to Richard Moore on the Cycling Podcast any suspension would most likely not be backdated so any results Froome gets in the meantime would stand.

Salbutamol provides no proven performance benefit and would always be detected in a drugs test so there is no sensible reason why Froome would take so much deliberately.

I agree it would be good to get it all cleared up quickly but on this one, Sky can move as fast or slow as they like and every day it puts a little more pressure on the governing bodies to do something about it, preferably making it go away.

[MrSmith]

Hmmmm.

It met with a wave of indignation over here.

much like Bertie and his Steak over here....

[Huertecilla]

I agree it would be good to get it all cleared up quickly but on this one, Sky can move as fast or slow as they like and every day it puts a little more pressure on the governing bodies to do something about it, preferably making it go away.

Sounds like blackmailing to sweep it under the carpet which is what cycling should want NOT.

There is also the matter of the two poor sods from less powerful teams who received a ban for a less high level.

About not backdating ufffff. It stands to reason as he is currently perfectly allowed to compete thus win but I can imagine that not going down well with the rest of the field.

All in all a bad, sad show for cycling.

[anz3001]

It matters not, cycling has be rife with drugs for decades and will continue to be so. Much like most professional sports.

[MakeColdplayHistory]

It matters not, he's not from Continental Europe so will get accusations (and cups of urine) thrown at him regardless.

[Saint-Just]

It matters not, he's not from Continental Europe so will get accusations (and cups of urine) thrown at him regardless.

Greg Lemond never had a problem ( he was shot but in the US). Then again he was considered clean.

[Andyg]

Competing under the Union Flag, therefore must be guilty by association.

Personally I await the findings of those with the necessary knowledge and qualifications before rushing to judgement, however perhaps we should not lose sight of his remarkable achievements given that he is the most tested rider in pro-cycling.

If he is cheating then he is very good at it.

[Saint-Just]

If he is cheating then he is very good at it.

As was Lance?

[Andyg]

As was Lance?

he was excellent at it, however as the testing improved, along with the technology, he became less good and was found out.

Now if you have any evidence that Froome is cheating the current system, paying off officials, providing false samples, etc, then I suggest you inform the authorities.

If not then I suggest we follow the old mantra - innocent until PROVEN guilty. Just as we do with all other exceptional athletes including Usain Bolt.

[Omegamanic]

given that he is the most tested rider in pro-cycling.

[is he???]

So was Lance

[Omegamanic]

he was excellent at it, however as the testing improved, along with the technology, he became less good and was found out.

Now if you have any evidence that Froome is cheating the current system, paying off officials, providing false samples, etc, then I suggest you inform the authorities.

If not then I suggest we follow the old mantra - innocent until PROVEN guilty. Just as we do with all other exceptional athletes including Usain Bolt.

Well, if we believe the news and the facts presented; and as I understand these have not been contested, then he is guilty of having sample outside the levels alllowed in the sport. So yes, under the current system/rules he is deemed to have “cheated” so no need for anyone else to inform the authorities, as they are already very well aware.

[Andyg]

[is he???]

So was Lance

According to The Sky Team boss during the Grio, yes he was.

Not idea about Lance, nor do I know the rigger of the testing performed on him, but something clearly wasn't right. But why are we comparing Lance with Froome? Different times, different technology.

[Andyg]

Well, if we believe the news and the facts presented; and as I understand these have not been contested, then he is guilty of having sample outside the levels alllowed in the sport. So yes, under the current system/rules he is deemed to have “cheated” so no need for anyone else to inform the authorities, as they are already very well aware.

In which case he will be sanctioned, disqualified, banned, fined, imprisioned, Crucified. Any of these things happened yet?

No, and why do you think this might be?

[Omegamanic]

In which case he will be sanctioned, disqualified, banned, fined, imprisioned, Crucified. Any of these things happened yet?

No, and why do you think this might be?

I know why it has t happened. They have an amount of time to appeal, to try and prove there is a valid reason why they may be so exceptional that their results were affected, or to prove that a normal/allowed dose could possibly give the same or similar results.

Oh, and Wiggins and Cavendish also use/used the same medication. Just didn’t reach such a high level in tests apparently.

[Huertecilla]

Oh, and Wiggins and Cavendish also use/used the same medication. Just didn’t reach such a high level in tests apparently.

A ´surprisingly´ large chuck of the peloton uses inhalers.
Between brackets as it stands to reason of them breathing in that much air thus more alergenics.

Comparisons with other riders than those with too high level of salbutamol are irrelevant.

The issue with Froome is twofold:
- surpassing the maximum
- it leaking

It should not have been leaked but it was.
That puts pressure on the sorting of the possible infraction.

Froome complaining about the leak, asking for being treated like anyone else, asking for justice and observing that salbutamol is not prohibited does not shine positive light on his now publicly pending case.
The understandable public response is;
- that the winner is not anyone else,
- that if he was treated as anyone else, he would have been banned for a year already,
- that claiming it is not prohibited is just not on; neither is doubling the limit,

Meanwhile fellow competitors have been speaking out about it. They are quite understandably not happy with a rider with a pending ´doping´ case in the peloton.

The issue should not have been leaked but it was. This created a special situation.
As such imo the procedure should be sped up or other special temporary measures taken.
As it is, it is véry bad for cycling. This all over what in the public eye is a very simple matter. Véry bad for the image indeed. I blame Sky. As was pointed out, they are at best not making the max effort to speed up the process. Transparency my a$$

[Huertecilla]

It matters not, he's not from Continental Europe so will get accusations (and cups of urine) thrown at him regardless.

You are aware that it was first publihed by the Guardian?


Brits moaning about them being victimised is not a good strategy. You could just leave. There is only one Brit in the Vuelta de Andalucia. See if they need you more than you them. I wager it would solve the issue rather effectively.
Remember Astana walking out of the Vuelta a España? Victimised for nót being Brits? It solved the issue.

[Saint-Just]

I am in 2 minds about the leak. As both samples were tested, and both found as twice over the limit the infraction is established and there is no reason to keep it secret. Now he may have a reasonable explanation that will mitigate it, but it doesn’t change the fact that he was twice over the limit.
I therefore find acceptable, although immensely damaging, that he competes and scandalous that his hearing hasn’t happened yet, regardless of who’s to blame for the delay.
But I have no problem in riders being outed if both samples are positive.
I believe Sky should have removed him from the team pending the hearing: it does their image no good at all, and the peloton is quite hostile not because he is a Brit but because he is bringing the sport in disrepute (as if it needed that). Then Andy will whine again next time he is targeted by the public.

[Saint-Just]

As an aside, I have said it before and I’ll say it again, I believe salbutamol and most other drugs should be banned completely. I accept the likelihood that as cyclists absorb more air they will be more susceptible to asthma but it will just mean they have to change the way they train, or accept that they are not cut for that sport. And if they are not fit to race without medications maybe they shouldn’t race.

[Omegamanic]

As an aside, I have said it before and I’ll say it again, I believe salbutamol and most other drugs should be banned completely. I accept the likelihood that as cyclists absorb more air they will be more susceptible to asthma but it will just mean they have to change the way they train, or accept that they are not cut for that sport. And if they are not fit to race without medications maybe they shouldn’t race.

Agreed.

Just because a drug had not been tested specifically to establish whether or not it could enhance performance, does not mean that it does not. From speaking to two former circuit cyclists in just this last month I understand that "it helps".

[josep]

As an aside, I have said it before and I’ll say it again, I believe salbutamol and most other drugs should be banned completely. I accept the likelihood that as cyclists absorb more air they will be more susceptible to asthma but it will just mean they have to change the way they train, or accept that they are not cut for that sport. And if they are not fit to race without medications maybe they shouldn’t race.

I’d agree with this. I don’t accept the “level playing field” argument.

[Huertecilla]

I am with you SJ on both counts.

With the case at hand however there ís a permitted level of sambutanol and there ís an UCI procedure to follow and as long as that has not reached the end of its course there should be no leak.

Unfortunately the situation is not as sucht; there hás been a leak and yes, imo too, Sky should have kept Froome at the sidelines and meanwhile do everything to speed it up instead of playing it out to the max. Especially Sky. The perspective of their marketing blurp about transparency and zero tolerance makes the team a bunch of hypocrites.

[Omegamanic]

In which case he will be sanctioned, disqualified, banned, fined, imprisioned, Crucified. Any of these things happened yet?

No, and why do you think this might be?

It’s a lot easier to say something along the lines of you were suffering particularly badly (yes of course whilst still managing to compete at the front), and as such had to take more meds to overcome that, than to say yup I miss-timed my tes, hgh, etc. etc. doses, so they were detected :)

Any way, it is was it is. It many Pros are speaking out with such outrage, as they all know the situation only too well, some are very colors to it personally too. It’s some of the other team managers, and old retired racers/team managers that are so vocal, because their career and earnings are no longer invested.

[Meesterbond]

Agreed.

Just because a drug had not been tested specifically to establish whether or not it could enhance performance, does not mean that it does not. From speaking to two former circuit cyclists in just this last month I understand that "it helps".

It has been tested and there has been no proof that it enhances performance.

It was on the banned list along with all beta2-agonists until some research in 2010 when it was downgraded to a controlled substance.

I've taken ventolin for nigh on 35 years and when you need it, damn right it helps but when I don't need it, it makes no difference whatsoever.

As for banning it completely, why stop there. There's an entire team of diabetics who race under TUEs, we'd have to kick them out. Dowsett and his haemophilia, he'd have to go too. Where do you draw the line? Aspirin, Paracetamol, vitamin supplements?

The problem with asthma in this instance is that it's exercised-induced for most athlete-sufferers. They're asthmatic because they cycle rather than being asthmatics who's taken up cycling.

I'm no Froome apologist but this is actually one occasion where the UCI are actually playing it by the book. They (literally) can't afford to get it wrong... when they banned Tyler Hamilton (I think) he sued and it nearly bankrupted them. Sky have way, more money than Hamilton did.
If they ban Froome and he has any room to take it to CAS it'll go on for ages and cost a bomb. I don't disagree that it's a mess but the rules allow for the accused to take as long as they need to work out a reason for the adverse reading.

[Meesterbond]

It’s a lot easier to say something along the lines of you were suffering particularly badly (yes of course whilst still managing to compete at the front), and as such had to take more meds to overcome that, than to say yup I miss-timed my tes, hgh, etc. etc. doses, so they were detected :)

His defence seems to be something along the lines of his kidneys not filtering out the previous few days salbutamol so the output reading was an accumulation of several days rather than taking too much in one day. That said, Sky's history on accurate medical record taking isn't particularly bulletproof so we'll see.

[Saint-Just]

If it’s induced by cycling then they need to change their routine, use air filters or change sport.
He had twice the allowed dose. Even if it has no objective performance enhancement effect, it may have a placebo one. His defence is surprising since it hasn’t happened before despite numerous tests. Did they go on strike on that day? Surely with non working kidneys your performance will be affected negatively ! Oh wait...

[Omegamanic]

Some research carried out in 2010. Whatever. I'm not going into it on an open forum. Suffice to say, overall use provides a benefit to both asthmstic and non-asthmatic athletes whether you believe it or not. I could select research to show other PEDS have no benefit, but that research is flawed or looking to produce a different/specific result rather than show how it could be used.

There is enough research to show that it might produce a positive benefit when used by an endurance athlete, or indeed any athlete also looking to reduce body fat.

I'm out on the discussion.

He should be banned imho, and anyone found using medical exemptions for performance gains should be kicked out of their respective sports, unless the rules are changed.

They need a centralised specialist medical team set up, so that no doctor other than one in a position on behalf of the sport's governing body can make the call on a case by case basis, and only after carrying out fully screened/supervised/repeatable medical assessments of each individual athlete.

[Huertecilla]

Suffice to say, overall use provides a benefit to both asthmstic and non-asthmatic athletes whether you believe it or not.
---
There is enough research to show that it might produce a positive benefit when used by an endurance athlete, or indeed any athlete also looking to reduce body fat.

That is what two lady friends say; one a head nurse the other a surgeon. Both are rather anti road cycling competition sport because of these practices. Their vehement discarding responses shocked me.

The way this is not-managed is very bad for the sport as it confirms any negative outlook.
Whereas volunteering to keep Froome at the sidelines till a verdict has been reached would have provided a positive argument in favour of the sport getting to grips with it.

For Froome personally it is bad anywhichway. Imo keeping out of it would have been the least negative.
Now he is an easy target ánd is just making matters worse, as are Sky with strange excuses and legal delays.

About all sorts of medication and where to draw the line.
Imo defining a level for salbutamol as has been done now is a good a compromise as can de reached. Ok, maybe it should be banned but up to a certain level it does compensate and not enhance. It is only nów, with Sky-Froome, that dealing with it has become an issue. I blame the Sky team entirely.

[Omegamanic]

I don't see the Froome thing as an issue. Most of the cyclists don't either.

The clarification will be good though

[Meesterbond]

Just for the record, he didn't have twice the allowed dose. The amount measured in his urine was twice the allowed output... only he and his doctor knows how much he actually inhaled, hence the kidney defence... WADA provide guidance on how much you should be able to take in order to stay within the acceptable levels so if his kidneys weren't metabolising the salbutamol away properly then it could have built up. I'm sure people with vastly more knowledge than me will decide if that's plausible.

For me, the biggest thing that works in his favour is that Froome and Team Sky would have to be monumentally stupid to cheat using a substance which has (at best) minimal benefit and is guaranteed to show up on a drugs test which he, as then leader of the Vuelta would be guaranteed to have.

[Daddelvirks]

Shame this happens though, even if taken to improve his performance. The quality is there, he wouldn’t need it is my guess.

[Saint-Just]

Stop press
Froome kidneys start discriminatory 24 hours industrial action, then in a show of good will process all the backlog in one go.

[Huertecilla]

Just for the record, he didn't have twice the allowed dose. The amount measured in his urine was twice the allowed output... only he and his doctor knows how much he actually inhaled, hence the kidney defence... WADA provide guidance on how much you should be able to take in order to stay within the acceptable levels so if his kidneys weren't metabolising the salbutamol away properly then it could have built up.

Imo that is not an argument unless accompanied with hard proof and even then I´d say tant pis as the rule is a level in the urine. You pass that, your problem.

Just like with a speeding offence it is totally irrelevant whether the speedometer in your car worked. You want over the limit. Ditto Froome. Doubled the limit.

[Huertecilla]

Stop press
Froome kidneys start discriminatory 24 hours industrial action, then in a show of good will process all the backlog in one go.

Mal intent from Sky legal department is way more likely.
It is a bad show made way worse by Sky ánd Froome.

[SimonK]

As American comedian Bill Burr said about Lance Armstrong - our drug-taking guy just went faster than their drug-taking guys.

[Saint-Just]

As American comedian Bill Burr said about Lance Armstrong - our drug-taking guy just went faster than their drug-taking guys.

This^
It has been true ever since performance enhancing drugs were banned (not so long ago, and following the death of a British rider, Tom Simpson, in 1967).
The spirt has tried recently to clean up its act but it is almost MI.
I am reasonably convinced that the leak happened to make sure it was out in the open rather than brushed under the carpet.
The only responsible thing for Sky would have been to sideline their rider. It would certainly have been much better for CF as his image within the peloton has not exactly improved. It would have been better for the sport as it would show a willingness to clean up their act.
It would have been better for Sky in terms of image.

[vadiro]

I am not blaming anybody and I have so much sympathy for all this guys being so ill (I think all of them suffering of asthma) competing at such I high level , especially when the cyclists I know are all healthy, but they can't get good enough to a professional level.

[MrSmith]

I am not blaming anybody and I have so much sympathy for all this guys being so ill (I think all of them suffering of asthma) competing at such I high level , especially when the cyclists I know are all healthy, but they can't get good enough to a professional level.

That's because they (cyclists you know) do not 'put out the numbers'. Put a kid on a WattBike and you can instantly tell if they have a chance or not. It's down to genetics and freaks of nature who become great athletes.

Froome managed it even with Bilharzia for which he has my sympathy..

[Saint-Just]

Put a kid on a WattBike and you can instantly tell if they have a chance or not. It's down to genetics and freaks of nature who become great athletes.

Should those whose genetics deprive of a chance to be competitive take performance enhancing substances to allow them to compete on a level playing field?

[MrSmith]

Should those whose genetics deprive of a chance to be competitive take performance enhancing substances to allow them to compete on a level playing field?

I think that's for the individual concerned to decide.

[Saint-Just]

I think that's for the individual concerned to decide.

Really?? So the sporting authorities don’t have a say and everyone does as he pleases?

[MrSmith]

Really?? So the sporting authorities don’t have a say and everyone does as he pleases?

Plenty of Individual sportspeople have done as they please (in most sports), governing bodies either turn a blind eye or serve bans/void results.
I'm sure you were well aware of this already

[Saint-Just]

They have but by doing so flouted the rules, thus enabling sports authorities to sanction.
This is what Froome is accused of.

[Andyg]

They have but by doing so flouted the rules, thus enabling sports authorities to sanction.
This is what Froome is accused of.

We get it. You don't like Froome and believe he "flouted the rules". So what you going to do about it other that continue to moan like a sissy. Perhaps a wrong worded tweet ?

Failing that why not wait and let the proper authorities take whatever action they believe is necessary.

[Saint-Just]

I have started filling bottles of piss for the next TdF


Little fan boy is getting his knickers in a twist because his little hero is criticised. Pathetic!

[Saint-Just]

Double post

[Andyg]

I have started filling bottles of piss for the next TdF


Little fan boy is getting his knickers in a twist because his little hero is criticised. Pathetic!

Bottles of piss is about all you can manage.

[Huertecilla]

Why not vote Frexit Andy? He can then ride where he wants and take what he thinks he should without those horrible bureaucrats imposing their rules! The world will be his oyster don´t you think?!