A little bird told me...Froome content

[oldpotatoe]

In the shop last night(an 'insider')...that the UCI will clear Froome to ride the TdF..today..we'll see...a 'cycling tip'..as it were...

[Black Dog]

Of course they will.

I get that they are doping. Cycling is like WWE wrestling, however, since it is sports entertainment business, they should not be presenting such a crappy storyline. The whole Froome thing sucks. Didn't team Sky fire a bunch of past dopers like Micheal Barry et al and then go on about how any rider under suspicion would be sidelined until things were settled....blah blah blah. Hinault is right, the riders should strike at the TDF. Sky has spit int he soup one too many times and ultimately other riders will pay when sponsors go packing over this. The problem is that there are only black hats (UCI, Sky, ASO....) in this story and without some white hats for people to cheer it is not as good.

[fignon's barber]

Originally Posted by oldpotatoe

In the shop last night(an 'insider')...that the UCI will clear Froome to ride the TdF..today..we'll see...a 'cycling tip'..as it were...

I figured such. No problem. Enjoy the show.

[Tickdoc]

$

[oldpotatoe]

Originally Posted by Tickdoc

$

bing, bing, bing, we have a winner!!!

[bobswire]

Originally Posted by oldpotatoe

bing, bing, bing, we have a winner!!!

Why should it be any different than politics?

[saab2000]

Until his case is adjudicated and a ruling given, he is free to race in accordance with the rules. I am not sure why anyone thought he wouldn't be competing.

Why a test from last September is still in limbo is another question. But he has been competing all year.

It would be nice if this case were settled though, because it's a terrible look for cycling.

[velofinds]

Originally Posted by saab2000

Until his case is adjudicated and a ruling given, he is free to race in accordance with the rules. I am not sure why anyone thought he wouldn't be competing.

Why a test from last September is still in limbo is another question. But he has been competing all year.

It would be nice if this case were settled though, because it's a terrible look for cycling.

That's the impression I was under as well. So, he already had de facto clearance.

[benb]

Originally Posted by saab2000

Until his case is adjudicated and a ruling given, he is free to race in accordance with the rules. I am not sure why anyone thought he wouldn't be competing.

Why a test from last September is still in limbo is another question. But he has been competing all year.

It would be nice if this case were settled though, because it's a terrible look for cycling.

It sure doesn't seem like the same treatment riders with less clout have received, at least in the post-LA era.

[saab2000]

Originally Posted by benb

It sure doesn't seem like the same treatment riders with less clout have received, at least in the post-LA era.

I’m inclined to agree. There may be some gray areas in the case but you’re right; if this were a case involving a no-name rider it would have already been completed.

[shoota]

Originally Posted by saab2000

I’m inclined to agree. There may be some gray areas in the case but you’re right; if this were a case involving a no-name rider it would have already been completed.

Ditto.

But seriously "Oh, well." I can't wait for the drama at the tour this year. Hopefully it will actually be more exciting than the last few years.

[MattTuck]

It would take a principled leader with a new vision for cycling to sacrifice a cash cow like Froome to send a message to Sky and others.

Not going to happen, unfortunately. Atleast not publicly. There is probably some backroom deal involving double secret probation.

[saab2000]

I’m hopeful he is fatigued from the Giro and not a factor in the race. It’s been a while since there has been a Giro-Tour double. I don’t hate Chris Froome but this case is just a bad, bad look for cycling, which already stands somewhere between roller derby or pro wrestling and NASCAR in terms of its legitimacy.

[hoonjr]

Maybe he/Sky made a donation to their anti-doping fund?

[weiwentg]

Originally Posted by benb

It sure doesn't seem like the same treatment riders with less clout have received, at least in the post-LA era.

It may not seem like it, but factually, the following is correct:

Originally Posted by saab2000

Until his case is adjudicated and a ruling given, he is free to race in accordance with the rules. I am not sure why anyone thought he wouldn't be competing.

...

The MPCC is a voluntary compact between teams, and their internal rules would (I believe) have forbidden Froome from racing. Chris Horner, who may be of a lower stature than Froome but who did win the 2013 Vuelta, was forbidden from starting the 2014 Vuelta on account of low cortisol (i.e. he was using systemic corticosteroids to cut weight pre-race, which drove his cortisol levels down, basically like Wiggins except done out of competition where it didn't require a TUE).

I haven't been here in a bit, but surely people have already mentioned that even though the ASO could invoke its internal rules to bar Froome, there is a considerable legal case that they haven't done so fairly and consistently, and that in fact Froome has not been convicted of anything yet. I think that the UCI has similar rules but would face much the same barrier (can't find source).

Back to saab, if it were a no-name rider, then sure, a DS might just withdraw the person and not bother with the controversy. They might be legally able to start that rider, but it would probably not be worth the legal battle. The issue with the whole situation is that salbutamol really is a drug that is normally used therapeutically. I think that beta agonists (of which salbutamol, aka albuterol, is a short-acting one) only take effect in really high doses. Due to side effects, you should not normally be on 10 or more puffs of salbutamol per day if your asthma symptoms are worsening. Froome should have already been on inhaled corticosteroids (they are a mainstay asthma treatment in therapeutic doses). His team should arguably have increased the dosage of those, and I would think the medical staff would have considered adding a long acting beta agonist also (like salbutamol, they're unrestricted up to a specified dosage).

All of this is consistent with Sky pushing the limits of otherwise legal medication right up to the point where it's arguably within the letter of the law, but clearly against the spirit of the sport. Just as they did with Wiggins.