Jump to content
Complete France Forum

Tour de France and Chris Froome


Recommended Posts

The organising committee have said that they will not allow Chris Froome to compete in the Tour de France this year as he has a drug allegation hanging over him.

This, they say, would bring the race into dispute.

Is this fair, should he be allowed to compete?

Or is is an administrative and skulduggerous means of tryting to eliminate him as favourite so that they can engineer a French winner?

Thoughts welcome guys and gels?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All I can say is that asthma seems to afflict a lot of cyclists!

In my time, I have done a fair bit of cycling, including cycling on Turkish roads and I have lived to tell the tale and I am still asthmatic and still takes Salbutamol like Froome.  I suppose they have to be extra vigilant since Armstrong.

FRENCH winner, Wooly?  I was going to say that that was about as likely as Russia beating Spain in the World Cup ......but, wait a minute, hasn't that just happened?[:-))] 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here you go, mint: a top-line explanation. As I don't expect you've cycled up Mont Ventoux or done the Paris-Roubaix (which this year claimed the life of a 23-year old pro cyclist from a heart attack), you might not have reached the point of suffering from exercise-induced asthma.

http://www.cyclist.co.uk/in-depth/4275/talking-point-why-do-so-many-pros-have-asthma

If the French are hoping for a win, they might be lucky....but on the other hand, they've reckoned without a couple of Yateses and a Thomas, all of whom, IMVHO, are GC contenders in the absence (if it happens) of Froome. He obviously believes in his own innocence, as I can't imagine why he'd want to put himself through the abuse and threats to his personal safety that he's going to have to endure from "fans" on the route.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting read that, Betty.  Also explains why I am not a top cyclist......clearly not taking enough of the drug!

On a more serious vein, I overdosed repeatedly during the months of my bronchitis and it had no apparent effects on my asthma or energy levels or anything else.  So, I don't know where that leaves Froome.  The tests need to be vigorous and made as transparent as possible to the public, not that any but the most dedicated would really look closely at the results

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...an era where he was banned for refusing to submit to doping control. Which begs the question as to how clear his own conscience can really be.

I still might wear a pacamac to the team time trial next week, though.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every stage of the Vuelta, for starters. The UCI /Sky statement makes reference to the other 18 tests being completely normal, and the AAF being 19% over, allowing for dehydration (i.e. not double as previously widely reported)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The result of the original test was supposed to have been confidential until examined properly but another whistleblower managed to make a buck by blabbing it.

If Froome was using one of those asthma inhaler thingummies, how the devil could the doses be accurate in the stress of a race. 19% seems such a small margin for error. One extra puff and the rider is up that place without a paddle.

Should the doses be given by the race doctor from the medical car?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not only that, but it was an AAF, not a black and white "you're doped up to the eyeballs" situation. But hey, for some, he's guilty despite his innocence. Trial by media, etc.

Rumours are rife on social media now about how Team Sky have bribed everyone from the UCI, WADAand goodness knows who else. If WADA (who are responsible for actually developing the tests) can accept he's clean, then I'm surprised the cycling "cognoscenti" are having such trouble.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...