TALUS Posted July 2, 2018 Posted July 2, 2018 If they had Sky resources I reckon they would have won as well.If the answer is in Froomes physiology then no go on Uli/Peta. If it's the test at fault I see a huge pile of smelly poo in WADA/UCI's future..I warned of this a while ago. Test is not designed for this. Poef sal spat...
Gen Posted July 2, 2018 Posted July 2, 2018 If they had Sky resources I reckon they would have won as well. If the answer is in Froomes physiology then no go on Uli/Peta. If it's the test at fault I see a huge pile of smelly poo in WADA/UCI's future..Yep... Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
Popit Posted July 2, 2018 Posted July 2, 2018 Maybe , just maybe CF produced the proof required to clear his name .I am gonna give him credit for that .Remember that this should never have been made public until it had been finalized . I am not a Froome supporter but am glad this is resolved .I just hope someone else wins Le Tour !!!!
Shebeen Posted July 2, 2018 Posted July 2, 2018 Players are regularly banned in MLB for positive drug tests. Cano was recently banned for 80 games (1/2 a season = $25mil). Alex Rodriguez was banned for a season, costing him $40mil you have got to be kidding me? Baseball still got a looooong way to go before anyone takes their attempts at anti doping seriously. even the catchers are on EPO, just this last month - CHICAGO -- White Sox catcher Welington Castillo received an 80-game suspension without pay after testing positive for Erythropoietin (EPO), a performance-enhancing substance, in violation of Major League Baseball's Joint Drug Prevention and Treatment Program. The Office of the Commissioner of Baseball made the announcement Thursday morning.Castillo, 31, issued the following statement through the Major League Baseball Players Association in regard to the suspension."I was recently notified by Major League Baseball that I had tested positive for EPO, a substance that is prohibited under MLB's Joint Drug Agreement. The positive test resulted from an extremely poor decision that I, and I alone, made. I take full responsibility for my conduct. I have let many people down, including my family, my teammates, the White Sox organization and its fans, and from my heart, I apologize. Following my suspension, I look forward to rejoining my teammates and doing whatever I can to help the White Sox win."
Gen Posted July 2, 2018 Posted July 2, 2018 Maybe , just maybe CF produced the proof required to clear his name .Or even all athletes names. Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
Underachiever Posted July 2, 2018 Posted July 2, 2018 And it is now official... he has been cleared...let's get on with it then. http://www.uci.org/pressreleases/uci-statement-anti-doping-proceedings-involving-christopher-froome/ "The UCI has considered all the relevant evidence in detail (in consultation with its own experts and experts from WADA). On 28 June 2018, WADA informed the UCI that it would accept, based on the specific facts of the case, that Mr Froome’s sample results do not constitute an AAF. In light of WADA’s unparalleled access to information and authorship of the salbutamol regime, the UCI has decided, based on WADA’s position, to close the proceedings against Mr Froome." Sent from my SM-G950F using TapatalkWell if it wasn't for the last minute.... Methink this was a very hasty decision. WADA/UCI struggle for MONTHS on the case and then when ASO puts on the pressure big time, a decision is reached in one day!! Seriaaaasssly???? Would love to read the full report on this.
thisismyotherbike Posted July 2, 2018 Posted July 2, 2018 Well if it wasn't for the last minute.... Methink this was a very hasty decision. WADA/UCI struggle for MONTHS on the case and then when ASO puts on the pressure big time, a decision is reached in one day!! Seriaaaasssly???? Would love to read the full report on this. Kudos to ASO for forcing the UCI to make a swift decision and handing us a Tour without an overhang! NOT that I think this is the particular outcome ASO were hoping for.
Nakoota Posted July 2, 2018 Posted July 2, 2018 YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! VaVaFroome! Now lets go get Merckx' record
Vetplant Posted July 2, 2018 Posted July 2, 2018 Well if it wasn't for the last minute.... Methink this was a very hasty decision. WADA/UCI struggle for MONTHS on the case and then when ASO puts on the pressure big time, a decision is reached in one day!! Seriaaaasssly???? Would love to read the full report on this. Kudos to ASO for forcing the UCI to make a swift decision and handing us a Tour without an overhang! NOT that I think this is the particular outcome ASO were hoping for.Yep, ASO forced their hand, and rightly so!
Jase619 Posted July 2, 2018 Posted July 2, 2018 Well if it wasn't for the last minute.... Methink this was a very hasty decision. WADA/UCI struggle for MONTHS on the case and then when ASO puts on the pressure big time, a decision is reached in one day!! Seriaaaasssly???? Would love to read the full report on this. It says that the decision was received from WADA on Saturday, so don't think that they should have waited much longer. I think it's probably a coincidence, but who knows. As has been said, we shouldn't have even known about this case in the first place. . .
davem Posted July 2, 2018 Posted July 2, 2018 Any Clicks or Dischem. Ask for Venteze. Costs less than R40. No prescription required. And therein is the point. It has so little (no) value to an athlete unless you are suffering from an asthma attack. You can take the whole inhaler and you won't get any faster than you were before the asthma attack. If you take more than the recommended dose, you just get dizzy from the alcohol propellant. where are the cheapest inhalers for sale? *asking for a friend
Grogs Posted July 2, 2018 Posted July 2, 2018 Methink this was a very hasty decision. WADA/UCI struggle for MONTHS on the case and then when ASO puts on the pressure big time, a decision is reached in one day!! Seriaaaasssly???? My view on this (although I am a Sky fanboy, so take it from whence it comes) is that if Froome had "acted honourably" (as per suggestions from Bardet, Hinault, et al) and simply suspended himself until he was cleared, the matter would have just sat on a desk and we'd have waited until at least after the end of this year's Vuelta for a decision. So it was Sky and Froome who (quite correctly) put pressure on the process to be concluded by insisting on competing.
WhuYu Posted July 2, 2018 Posted July 2, 2018 My view on this (although I am a Sky fanboy, so take it from whence it comes) is that if Froome had "acted honourably" (as per suggestions from Bardet, Hinault, et al) and simply suspended himself until he was cleared, the matter would have just sat on a desk and we'd have waited until at least after the end of this year's Vuelta for a decision. So it was Sky and Froome who (quite correctly) put pressure on the process to be concluded by insisting on competing.I hear you.....but if you know you are innocent........why suspend yourself..........................?
TALUS Posted July 2, 2018 Posted July 2, 2018 Yep, ASO forced their hand, and rightly so!I think the reality (read lawyer's letter) explaining the consequences if Chris was prevented from starting the race and THEN cleared later on helped a lot. The science was on the table a while ago.
Grogs Posted July 2, 2018 Posted July 2, 2018 thread be dead? Yes, but the debate continues in the thread "Chris Froome cleared by UCI in anti-doping investigation" ...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.