2018 PRO thread

[zirxo]

Haha, that rule will probably dissapear if that's the case.

[Kjetil]

Yes, any ban would be backdated to the point where he gave the sample. They can string it along, but ultimately it won't matter if the powers-that-be get their heads out of the sand and issue an honest ruling. We can look back to Contador's suspension as proof.

No. Salbutamol is a Controlled Substance.

If there is a ban then Froome will lose the Vuelta title and the accompanying ranking points but as it’s a specified substance – that catchphrase again – the rules say all subsequent results can stand, whether the bronze in Bergen or the Shanghai “criterium”.

http://inrng.com/2017/12/friday-shorts-16/

[IchDien]

MS-R sure stopped that doping chat for a nice few pages.

[tymon_tm]

doping chat this doping chat that. it's not about doping, it's more about the fact some parties get to f-around with the sport without any consequences. moreover it is very possible the winner of next two GTs is going to get stripped of said victories shortly after. THIS IS pro cycling - at it's very core I'm affraid, there's no escape from that, at least for now, and pretending "it's just unrelated banter, go somewhere else" (so often posted by rather new members) is getting really annoying.

post whatever you want, contribute to those posts and topics you're interested in, and all will be fine IMHO

[maquisard]

THIS IS pro cycling - at it's very core I'm affraid, there's no escape from that, at least for now, and pretending "it's just unrelated banter, go somewhere else" (so often posted by rather new members) is getting really annoying.

Agree 100%

[boysa]

Unfortunately, you speak the truth. There is no way around it, is there? Hell, I'm of the belief they ARE ALL doping in one way or another, but regardless, I still cannot get myself to ignore it completely.

I recognize the difference between the substances (Froome v. Contador), but if he garners a suspension from last year's Vuelta, and he is then "suspended" for a period of 12 months, if he enters and wins the Giro or the Tour within those twelve months, won't his results be stripped on the basis he wasn't "allowed" to be there in the first place?

[Calnago]

The races are pretty much in the big sponsors pockets these days. They need the sponsors more than the sponsors need them. Lose a team like Sky being properly represented and so goes a bunch of $$$$, be it directly or indirectly.

I think you underestimate the power of the ASO. The ASO is by far the strongest party in the cycling world and could decide what they want. I think Sky and all their sponsors need the ASO more than the other way around. Because the TDF is the biggest race of the season with worldwide viewers, you don't want to miss that as a sponsor.

It’s a bit of a chicken and egg scenario isn’t it. Of course no sponsor wants to miss out on Le Tour. It’s the reason they are there. They both need each other for sure. But pro cycling is extremely sponsor dependent. Much more so than other professional sports. Take away the sponsors and there is no pro cycling. If the sponsors can’t show their wares in the biggest races for all those watching on tv to see, they have no reason to sponsor and will leave entirely. Major international corporations want their logos up front and center. Major bike manufacturers want their brands and products they sell being ridden to glory, on tv, for all the world to see. It’s a delicate balance for the major organizers trying to on the one hand, enforce the “rules”, while not crippling the appeal of a race by excluding certain “stars”. SKY and Froome are in a sticky situation having to explain some rather bizarre tests. But it makes no sense to me that a ruling on it cannot be made before the Grand Tours for 2018 even begin. I’m sure if the powers that be wanted a ruling to happen before the Grand Tours start, it could be achieved.

[BdaGhisallo]

Exactly. This is why the race organizers are so against him riding. Unfortunately, it is more of the same, usual garbage and there is no telling when we'll have resolution. Seriously, what could possibly take so long?

The one game Sky and Co. may be playing at is hoping Froome wins another GT (or two) and then no one will have the balls to issue a suspension that would strip him of two or possibly even three titles.

The race organizers should be pissed at the UCI for not sorting out their regulations that allow riders in Froome's situation to keep competing while their cases are adjudicated. Six years passed between Contador's racing and winning under the cloud of a potential, and eventual, ban rendering those wins moot and Froome's AAF in last year's Vuelta. Why didn't the UCI act to prevent a situation like this happening again?

I would feel a lot more inflamed about the athletes transgressing if the authorities charged with administering and policing the rules had their own affairs sorted and we're above reproach. But the authorities are most certainly not and it only contributes to the farcical nature of it all.

[spdntrxi]

Froome is a joke... he ought to be trying to clear his name asap... maybe he is but seems him and Sky are stonewalling instead. Cant respect that one bit.

[bilwit]

What a job Quintana is doing for Valverde, didn't think he had it in him to go full on super domestique (as opposed to someone like Wiggins half assing it for Froome or Porte). Also, like everyone else, can't say enough about Bernal.. I knew the hype going into the season but I didn't think he'd be contesting results this early

[Rondje]

The races are pretty much in the big sponsors pockets these days. They need the sponsors more than the sponsors need them. Lose a team like Sky being properly represented and so goes a bunch of $$$$, be it directly or indirectly.

I think you underestimate the power of the ASO. The ASO is by far the strongest party in the cycling world and could decide what they want. I think Sky and all their sponsors need the ASO more than the other way around. Because the TDF is the biggest race of the season with worldwide viewers, you don't want to miss that as a sponsor.

It’s a bit of a chicken and egg scenario isn’t it. Of course no sponsor wants to miss out on Le Tour. It’s the reason they are there. They both need each other for sure. But pro cycling is extremely sponsor dependent. Much more so than other professional sports. Take away the sponsors and there is no pro cycling. If the sponsors can’t show their wares in the biggest races for all those watching on tv to see, they have no reason to sponsor and will leave entirely. Major international corporations want their logos up front and center. Major bike manufacturers want their brands and products they sell being ridden to glory, on tv, for all the world to see. It’s a delicate balance for the major organizers trying to on the one hand, enforce the “rules”, while not crippling the appeal of a race by excluding certain “stars”. SKY and Froome are in a sticky situation having to explain some rather bizarre tests. But it makes no sense to me that a ruling on it cannot be made before the Grand Tours for 2018 even begin. I’m sure if the powers that be wanted a ruling to happen before the Grand Tours start, it could be achieved.

The ASO really does stand above them all. They don't mind if one team misses out, they just replace them with a wildcard for another team. If too many teams drop out it's a problem of course but one team, no matter the budget isn't a problem for them. Also, remember that most teams don't want Froome in the peloton as long as his case is still going on, so the ASO got the support of the teams I think.
Now for the reason why the ruling can't be made before a Grand tour starts, that's UCI's fault. If I read correctly they haven't set a deadline in the rules of the amount of time a defending team has to make up their case. So Sky can stall it for as long as they want, which also seems to be their tactic in order to let Froome start in both GT's. Now I don't think RCS sports has the power that the ASO has to ban a team like Sky, so maybe Froome can still start at the Giro, but the ASO definitely has the power and money to ban them.

[Haydn]

You have to admire Valverde

[Daniel1975]

If SKY really could prove Froome is clean and have a good explanation for the high amount of salbutamol, they would tell it to everybody.
Nobody wants to have this kind of publicity if you didn’t do anything wrong. But given the fact they don’t have a good reason yet.......

[themidge]

^ I'm not so sure about that.
Total conjecture here, but it seems to me that Froome and co. must be confident that they didn't do anything wrong, or at least can get away with whatever they did because if they couldn't, surely the best thing to have done would have been to say "Alright lads, I messed up, sorry", taken the ban right there and then and come back for the Giro .

[Kjetil]

De Panne. I still don't get that they (that'll be the UCI. For Froome it's still WADA) allow a race route with tram tracks along the road.