|
News in December
|
| Guido Mukk |
Posted on 13-12-2017 09:28
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 15830
Joined: 08-02-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
There!
Someone made mistake. |
| |
|
|
| FreitasPCM |
Posted on 13-12-2017 09:37
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 8389
Joined: 08-09-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Sorry, I just had to let this out even if it turns out to be nothing. One more time:
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA |
| |
|
|
| TheManxMissile |
Posted on 13-12-2017 09:45
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 18187
Joined: 12-05-2012
PCM$: 0.00
|
jandal7 wrote:
Can you get a TUE for having twice the amount you're allowed?
Sort of, yes. Sky can put forward evidence to show normal TUE usage, but an amount of the drug built up unintentionally in Froome's system. Good enough evidence, this all goes away as a mistake. Ok-ish evidence, the ban gets reduced.
Remember, Salbutamol doesn't require a TUE at all upto a certain amount (figure escapes me right now).
|
| |
|
|
| gotlandrules |
Posted on 13-12-2017 09:50
|
Protected Rider
Posts: 1358
Joined: 07-05-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
The most obvious doper in the "post EPO" era of cycling is finally caught?! Hope it sticks. |
| |
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 21-11-2024 16:47
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| jandal7 |
Posted on 13-12-2017 10:10
|
World Champion
Posts: 11392
Joined: 17-12-2014
PCM$: 1020.00
|
gotlandrules wrote:
The most obvious doper in the "post EPO" era of cycling is finally caught?! Hope it sticks.
You sir need to be familiarised with the Tabriz Petrochemical Team.
24/02/21 - kandesbunzler said “I don't drink famous people."
15/08/22 - SotD said "Your [jandal's] humour is overrated"
11/06/24 - knockout said "Winning is fine I guess. Truth be told this felt completely unimportant."
[ICL] Santos-Euskadi | [PT]  Xero Racing
5x  x5
2x  x2
2x  x2 |
| |
|
|
| TheManxMissile |
Posted on 13-12-2017 10:15
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 18187
Joined: 12-05-2012
PCM$: 0.00
|
jandal7 wrote:
gotlandrules wrote:
The most obvious doper in the "post EPO" era of cycling is finally caught?! Hope it sticks.
You sir need to be familiarised with the Tabriz Petrochemical Team.
You both might want to check how many riders are still being busted for EPO, that era is still alive and strong 
|
| |
|
|
| gotlandrules |
Posted on 13-12-2017 10:18
|
Protected Rider
Posts: 1358
Joined: 07-05-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Well, i did put it in "" 
And to clarify i meant at the top level of cycling. |
| |
|
|
| jandal7 |
Posted on 13-12-2017 10:23
|
World Champion
Posts: 11392
Joined: 17-12-2014
PCM$: 1020.00
|
TheManxMissile wrote:
jandal7 wrote:
gotlandrules wrote:
The most obvious doper in the "post EPO" era of cycling is finally caught?! Hope it sticks.
You sir need to be familiarised with the Tabriz Petrochemical Team.
You both might want to check how many riders are still being busted for EPO, that era is still alive and strong
Just... just... okay?
24/02/21 - kandesbunzler said “I don't drink famous people."
15/08/22 - SotD said "Your [jandal's] humour is overrated"
11/06/24 - knockout said "Winning is fine I guess. Truth be told this felt completely unimportant."
[ICL] Santos-Euskadi | [PT] Xero Racing
5x x5
2x x2
2x x2 |
| |
|
|
| ringo182 |
Posted on 13-12-2017 10:36
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3472
Joined: 03-01-2008
PCM$: 1348.00
|
Obviously it's disappointing. But I think judgement should be saved until the investigation is complete. There are enough grey areas around TUE's and the substance found etc to mean that nothing is definite at this stage.
This isn't the first time Sky/Froome have faced strong accusations. Some of them founded, some of them completely made up. I seem to remember Sky were apparently banged to rights a few months ago during "packagegate", but that investigation was closed with no evidence found.
I am slightly concerned by the timings. If UCI had any power to suspend Froome/Sky would they not have done so in the 3 months since the positive result was detected and the rider and team were notified? It seems to me that UCI know there is no real evidence to ban Froome so they are instead releasing the statement as a bit of a smack on the wrists. What have they been doing for the last 3 months? Most likely discussing the issue with their legal team to find there are no grounds to suspend Froome.
I'll get my tin hat for the usual barrage of "Fanboy" comments
"Ringo is exactly right", Shonak - 8 September 2016
|
| |
|
|
| matt17br |
Posted on 13-12-2017 10:46
|
Directeur Sportif
Posts: 10525
Joined: 28-09-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
Aw, right when Froome was about to take part to the Giro :/
|
| |
|
|
| TheManxMissile |
Posted on 13-12-2017 10:51
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 18187
Joined: 12-05-2012
PCM$: 0.00
|
ringo182 wrote:
This isn't the first time Sky/Froome have faced strong accusations. Some of them founded, some of them completely made up. I seem to remember Sky were apparently banged to rights a few months ago during "packagegate", but that investigation was closed with no evidence found.
Confirmed A and B samples with 2000ng/ml, double the WADA set limit, is more than any other accusation faced before.
Packagegate was all circumstantial and witness testimony, this is a scientific fact. Very different scenarios. One very hard to prove wrongdoing, the other a full confirmed AAF in A and B samples.
I am slightly concerned by the timings. If UCI had any power to suspend Froome/Sky would they not have done so in the 3 months since the positive result was detected and the rider and team were notified? It seems to me that UCI know there is no real evidence to ban Froome so they are instead releasing the statement as a bit of a smack on the wrists. What have they been doing for the last 3 months? Most likely discussing the issue with their legal team to find there are no grounds to suspend Froome.
Whilst it is an AAF, it's on Salbutamol which is a Specified Substance. So WADA ban it over a certain amount, but it doesn't result in an automatic sanction. Sky/Froome get given the opportunity to submit evidence shwoing no wrong-doing, that they used a TUE within its set limits and that an accumulation of the drug was accidental. That proccess is not fast, and the UCI have to wait for them to give said evidence before making a decision on a ban.
So the timing is because the UCI has to wait on Sky/Froome, the release today is probably an effort to hurry them up or because that deadline for submission is close.
|
| |
|
|
| deek12345 |
Posted on 13-12-2017 10:58
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 2761
Joined: 13-06-2009
PCM$: 360.00
|
Yep well we all new it was coming just took longer than expected .
Wonder what Cookson covered up in his 4 years ,took new guy 3 weeks to bust him |
| |
|
|
| Ian Butler |
Posted on 13-12-2017 11:38
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 21854
Joined: 01-05-2012
PCM$: 400.00
|
Where is Arberg now? |
| |
|
|
| deek12345 |
Posted on 13-12-2017 11:46
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 2761
Joined: 13-06-2009
PCM$: 360.00
|
Any word from Carlton Kirby or David Walsh on thereMessiah getting busted ? |
| |
|
|
| Forever the Best |
Posted on 13-12-2017 13:19
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3803
Joined: 27-06-2014
PCM$: 400.00
|
Where is Arberg? Hahahahahahaha.
Excellent news. Hope Froome and Sky don't get away with it.
The user formerly known as 'The Schleck Fan'
Gracias Alberto.
|
| |
|
|
| ianrussell |
Posted on 13-12-2017 13:33
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3440
Joined: 09-10-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
As much clarity as I have found from the usual source:
https://inrng.com/...amol-case/
PCMDaily Velogames Has Been 2016 & 2017
|
| |
|
|
| boork |
Posted on 13-12-2017 14:20
|
Neo-Pro
Posts: 336
Joined: 10-06-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
I know in mostly any other sport the suspension is issued on a national level, so if Froome is not suspended now, that is because of decisions made by british cycling? Or is this different in cycling?
Governing bodies can also add suspensions but that is very rare, and the only case I can really think of is the deal with Russia now, where IOC have banned them, while many other governing bodies like FIS have not dared to do so yet. |
| |
|
|
| baseballlover312 |
Posted on 13-12-2017 14:25
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 16429
Joined: 27-07-2011
PCM$: 10438.70
|
I feel like I've been waiting for this day for so long that I can hardly believe it's come. It's so crazy. Even if he gets away with it this time, this will be a scar that eventually surfaces the full wound. This might be the beginning of the end. I couldn't be happier currently, but we'll wait to see what happens.
RIP Exxon Duke, David Veilleux, Double Feature, and Monster Energy |
| |
|
|
| TheManxMissile |
Posted on 13-12-2017 14:37
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 18187
Joined: 12-05-2012
PCM$: 0.00
|
boork wrote:
I know in mostly any other sport the suspension is issued on a national level, so if Froome is not suspended now, that is because of decisions made by british cycling? Or is this different in cycling?
Governing bodies can also add suspensions but that is very rare, and the only case I can really think of is the deal with Russia now, where IOC have banned them, while many other governing bodies like FIS have not dared to do so yet.
UK Cycling can ban Froome, like any National federation can ban one of its own riders/staff/etc. But the UCI trumps the national federations and it's almost always them who issue the ban.
Slightly different to Russia, where then IOC has banned from Olympics but individual sports havn't banned as that would mean no Russians in any of their events.
In cycling it would be like the IOC banning Russia from the summer games, so no Russians on the track or road or mtb or bmx, but they would still be able to race UCI events.
|
| |
|
|
| hillis91 |
Posted on 13-12-2017 17:21
|
Team Leader
Posts: 5895
Joined: 30-11-2006
PCM$: 1500.00
|
So if the B sample is positive aswell. What will be the punishment? And, who else is on the juice? Roglic i do belive is on the good stuff.
|
| |
|
![imgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpg](https://imgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpg)
