2018 PRO thread

[TonyM]

Greg Lemond interview on Froome and the SKY team:

“That is the most ridiculous excuse I have ever heard,” LeMond said in an interview with The Times. “If this is what he claims, then it’s simple, he broke the rules and should be punished accordingly."

“You have to look at Froome’s AAF in context of everything around Team Sky. The comments from Shane Sutton, the lost records, the Jiffy bag.”

“The peloton relies on the equal application of the rules. If these are not followed, it undermines the sport.”

“I don’t believe in Dave Brailsford,” LeMond continued. “He’s secretive, he skirts around questions, and from what I read and hear, the team is not as scientific and as knowledgeable as they claim to be.

“It pains me to hear Brailsford and the team dismiss real science as pseudoscience, always a red flag as far as I am concerned. As history has shown, when things are too good to be true, they usually are.”

[Imaking20]

Am I the only person constantly concerned about Lemond's blood pressure?

[Jenmoss]

On Froome and Sky:
- I think Team Sky put themselves in a fragile position, and they loose credibility IMHO.
Usually, teams will suspend their athlete immediatly after A and B samples are declared positive. We saw all the similar cases the last few years... Athletes's contracts are usually clear on that subject: You brake the doping rules, you're out. It would be interesting to see the progress of events on this: Does Froome have to prove his "innocence" to the Team owners to stay in the Team... ? That would make sense...

Now Team Sky is affirming along with Froome that "their" protocol, or whatever Ventolin ingestion method, is correct. So that implies an "organised" substance use protocol by the Team and Team doctors. Looks and feels very similar to Motorola/US Postal team from a few years back to me...

Louis

Your are correct IMO. Brailsford’s lies and inability to produce a satisfactory response concerning the Wiggo issue and his complete backing of Froome without hesitation reeks of a cover up.
The marginal gains cr”’ does not explain having 5 of their riders going full gas up climbs and dropping some of the best climbers in the world ,that’s called doping and they are the best at it and they had Leinders on the books who was a master doper of riders. Just because he was let go ,he’s only a phone or Skype call away and Yates as well or whoever else they deal with. I will be surprised if Froome gets banned I reckon the chances are that he will get off on some kind of technical nonsense. It’s just a big white wash with sky. I’ve watched a few Froome interviews of denial and he reminds me of every other athlete who has doped and eventually got caught. Just a bit to intense in his denial. Not as bad as Radcliffe though, her eyeballs nearly popped out of her head

[Kjetil]

Froome will get a ban unless he can show that he can puff inside allowed limits and pee outside them, which is rather unlikely.

[nathanong87]

subbed

[AJS914]

I guess Greg Lemond is going into a pure carbon fiber business so he can no longer be blackballed by the bicycle industry for having a big mouth. The problem with comments like his is that Froome/Sky are following the rules. It's a threshold test not a binary you have it or you don't test. Froome gets a chance to prove his case. At worst, he gets a year penalty, maybe less.

[spartan]

sky have stated multiple times they will not employ riders who have served any drug suspensions.

froome will sit out for 6 months and then ride for who....

it is over for him. at least he will go down as the only rider who has won 4 tdf

[TonyM]

What will be the replacement of Froome in the Sky team (if Froome get some suspension)?

[lw11]

I guess Greg Lemond is going into a pure carbon fiber business so he can no longer be blackballed by the bicycle industry for having a big mouth. The problem with comments like his is that Froome/Sky are following the rules. It's a threshold test not a binary you have it or you don't test. Froome gets a chance to prove his case. At worst, he gets a year penalty, maybe less.

It kind of is a "you have it or you don't test." He has 1,000 mg threshold which he was twice over. There's a precedent for riders going a bit over and serving bans and to say at worst he only gets a year penalty; he loses his Vuelta title and his reputation and legacy has a huge cloud over it, even more so with the publicity surrounding Brailsford and Sky over the past 18-24 months.

[TonyM]

I however have the feeling that the Sky team/ Brailsford don‘t really care about it is said about them etc....

Actually something good as they do „their thing“ but in the case of doping and arrogance they really do not help the cycling sport in general.

And no wonder sometimes you meet some really aggressive car drivers on the roads who do not recognize our sport. It really doesn‘t help the cycling sport neither all of us biking on roads etc....

[Geoff]

@TonyM, you missed the most important one:

"The fallacy that salbutamol does not improve performance is only true if you use it as prescribed. Taken orally or by injection it acts as an anabolic steroid, similar to clenbuterol, the drug that Alberto Contador was positive."

[TonyM]

@TonyM, you missed the most important one:

"The fallacy that salbutamol does not improve performance is only true if you use it as prescribed. Taken orally or by injection it acts as an anabolic steroid, similar to clenbuterol, the drug that Alberto Contador was positive."

Yes!

And who knows about all the products that are taken in order to hide other products.

Only Sky knows.
And we know now that they for sure cheated.

[nemeseri]

And we know now that they for sure cheated.

No we don't. It stinks like crazy, but there is a slight chance that they can properly defend themselves. Don't forget that AAFs aren't public normally and there might be 10-20 cases every year where athletes can properly defend themselves. Hell, Froome might have had this AAF before multiple times and they might have a canned defense already prepared. That would also answer why they accepted the giro's appearance fee and why Cookson praised the team only a month before the shitstorm. He must have known about the AAF.

Don't get me wrong. I'm almost entirely sure it's more than treating asthma and there is some connection between abusing this drug and short term performance gains (not yet proved or published). But it's only cheating if it's against the rules.

Are they ethical? Hell no! Did they lose their reputation as a transparent team? Absolutely!
I think we can take the "marginal gains" literally. They went as far as possible regarding TUEs, currently legal drugs, using illnesses as an excuse for abusing drugs. They are deep in the grey. That still won't make them a cheater per se.

After this they should (and will) lose the white as snow status they had in the eye of the fans, no matter what will be the outcome of the AAF.

[TonyM]

Yes you are right! We don’t know for sure. Let’s see what happens now.

[TonyM]

I am just upset that such cases just don’t help the cycling sport in general.

And such things just do not help us on the roads with car drivers etc....

But that’s the way it is and let’s look positively in 2018!