[Other Sport] Chris Froome cleared over Vuelta drugs test - case dropped

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

About time. The right decisions.

Sabutamol isn't even a Performance Enhancing Drug. It just ensures you can breathe.

This. It's yer bog standard asthma inhaler. Be interesting to know what Froome's reading translated into, in terms of inhaler puffs. Suspect it wasn't that high.

 

[Hamilton]

Surely being able to breathe is performance enhancing, given the inevitable outcome of the alternative...?

We give paraolympians blades so they can run. We don't expect to watch them hop or drag themselves down the track.

 

[Hamilton]

Dan Roan still stirring the pot on the BBC.

"The result will be the source of intense frustration at the UCI who pursued this case over several months, but who were ultimately advised by Wada that Froome's expensively-assembled legal team had sufficient evidence to cast doubt on whether his sample was 'adverse'."

What mealy mouthed words from a reporter who didn't get the story to go his way.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Dan Roan still stirring the pot on the BBC.

"The result will be the source of intense frustration at the UCI who pursued this case over several months, but who were ultimately advised by Wada that Froome's expensively-assembled legal team had sufficient evidence to cast doubt on whether his sample was 'adverse'."

What mealy mouthed words from a reporter who didn't get the story to go his way.

It would seem pretty straight forward to be honest; if you're tested for 21 consecutive days (just in that race, let alone all the days he led Le Tour) where all other days were below the testing level, and one day was inexplicably high, then you have an issue with the test results because if he had 2000ng in his wee on a Tuesday, stands to reason it would also be high on the Monday and Wednesday.

 

[Bold Seagull]

This. It's yer bog standard asthma inhaler. Be interesting to know what Froome's reading translated into, in terms of inhaler puffs. Suspect it wasn't that high.

It's not, I think I read it would be something like 5 puffs over 12 hours instead of 2 or 3.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Surely being able to breathe is performance enhancing, given the inevitable outcome of the alternative...?

It certainly helps.

 

[Stat Brother]

French legends Jalabert and Virenque were caught high level doping, including a failed EPO test.

Did they have their titles and category winning jerseys scrubbed from the record books? No.

There's always been a very special interest in investigating English-speaking riders, the 'interlopers' in a continental european mad sport. Ironically, due to great investigative work by english speaking journalists. Do the french and italian for exampe, zealously investigate their heros?

But since then 'doping' in French professional sport has been punishable by long prison sentences, a fact that contributed to French cycling being so far behind the riders of Laney-poohs era.

 

[rippleman]

That's the trouble with cycling now, all the trust goes out of the window now.

Agreed. Like athletics it is rapidly losing all credibility.

I say let them all take whatever drugs they want. That might make for interesting viewing. Puts them all on the same level then.

 

[Triggaaar]

Chris Froome: Anti-doping case against four-time Tour de France winner dropped

Do you think that's the correct decision, and why?

 

[ozzygull]

Nothing to do with this case, but my daughter who races had an issue with asthma during races. We heard that it could be down to gluten in the diet. So we put her on a gluten free diet to see if it made any difference. She now races without breathing problems and no need for an inhaler anymore. Not sure this would work for everyone but has made a massive difference ti her.

 

[Triggaaar]

...

 

[Weststander]

But since then 'doping' in French professional sport has been punishable by long prison sentences, a fact that contributed to French cycling being so far behind the riders of Laney-poohs era.

During the Tour de France, the French police can raid teams, arrest staff and riders, and charge them whatever their nationality.

With the deterrent you mention, do you think the Tour is clean now from EPO and illegal drugs? (A genuine, non-retorical, question).

 

[Stat Brother]

During the Tour de France, the French police can raid teams, arrest staff and riders, and charge them whatever their nationality.

With the deterrent you mention, do you think the Tour is clean now from EPO and illegal drugs? (A genuine, non-retorical, question).

As was always the case.
The only difference now is that it's the law, any professional sportsman convicted of doping in France can expect long jail time.


No sport is clean but because of it's filthy past I feel cycling is cleaner than most, having been forced to face down the demons from within.

As for [MENTION=4019]Triggaaar[/MENTION]'s question, for me this wasn't about Froome this was politics, team politics, and carts going before horses.

The UCI thought they could be proactive by getting the latest big fish having enabled the last one.
What was completely disgusting was former drug cheats, people who's blood you can slice, former riders who have made money writing warts and all books about their cheating calling out Froome and his inhaler.

 

[Triggaaar]

As for [MENTION=4019]Triggaaar[/MENTION]'s question, for me this wasn't about Froome this was politics, team politics, and carts going before horses.

I don't really understand. He had twice the allowed dose, right? And if so, how is that ok? And why is it politics? I'm not trying to be lazy and not read up on it myself, but I imagine you've read quite a lot on it, and understand the background well, and can probably summarise for us all better than a google search.

What was completely disgusting was former drug cheats, people who's blood you can slice, former riders who have made money writing warts and all books about their cheating calling out Froome and his inhaler.

Presumably that's only disgusting if he hasn't cheated. How is taking twice the allowance not cheating?

 

[Weststander]

As was always the case.
The only difference now is that it's the law, any professional sportsman convicted of doping in France can expect long jail time.


No sport is clean but because of it's filthy past I feel cycling is cleaner than most, having been forced to face down the demons from within.

As for [MENTION=4019]Triggaaar[/MENTION]'s question, for me this wasn't about Froome this was politics, team politics, and carts going before horses.

The UCI thought they could be proactive by getting the latest big fish having enabled the last one.
What was completely disgusting was former drug cheats, people who's blood you can slice, former riders who have made money writing warts and all books about their cheating calling out Froome and his inhaler.

Great post.

And with many British punters always hating the successful, a hatful of forums posters made it plain they wanted Froome and Brailsford crushed. Tried, convicted and sentenced by the Court of no-privy-information Public Opinion.

 

[Stat Brother]

I don't really understand. He had twice the allowed dose, right? And if so, how is that ok? And why is it politics? I'm not trying to be lazy and not read up on it myself, but I imagine you've read quite a lot on it, and understand the background well, and can probably summarise for us all better than a google search.

Presumably that's only disgusting if he hasn't cheated. How is taking twice the allowance not cheating?

Because it's not a performance enhancing drug, there is a limit because there has to be a limit.
Personally I hope this case is used to clear up the very grey area of TUEs, but as said if this is the worst cycling has got (sadly it isn't but you know what I mean) then the sport is in considerably better health, pun intended.

Granted there is a touch of 'American Justice' as well, Froome and Sky were bringing the biggest legal guns possible to fight, but even with that it was still a fight over 1 abnomally in a urine test, which in itself is the weakest of all tests.

All very different to injecting EPO supercharged blood into your system, having had it cleaned in Madrid and couriered to you on rest days.

 

[Bold Seagull]

I don't really understand. He had twice the allowed dose, right? And if so, how is that ok? And why is it politics? I'm not trying to be lazy and not read up on it myself, but I imagine you've read quite a lot on it, and understand the background well, and can probably summarise for us all better than a google search.

Presumably that's only disgusting if he hasn't cheated. How is taking twice the allowance not cheating?

Because we don't know he took twice the allowance. As an example, a kidney infection can prevent salbutamol passing into the urine and it builds up until the kidney functions properly again, then you can piss out 2 or 3 days of salbutamol in one go.

It's not even a TUE to use an inhaler.

 

[Stat Brother]

Because we don't know he took twice the allowance. As an example, a kidney infection can prevent salbutamol passing into the urine and it builds up until the kidney functions properly again, then you can piss out 2 or 3 days of salbutamol in one go.

It's not even a TUE to use an inhaler.

A geek will correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the sample in question was taken moments after a stage where CF had suffered as badly as he'd ever suffered on a bike, at the arse end of a Grand Tour.
If that doesn't fook your system up I can't think what will.

Oh and Trig I'm probably not as learned as you think, on the subject, since Lance and all his gory details, I'm one scandel away from sticking 2 fingers up at professional cycling so I really haven't fully committed to this or Wiggos jiffy bag.
Although obviously many.of my reference points still do, so it's not like I've ostriched the situation.

 

[McTavish]

I don't really understand. He had twice the allowed dose, right? And if so, how is that ok? And why is it politics? I'm not trying to be lazy and not read up on it myself, but I imagine you've read quite a lot on it, and understand the background well, and can probably summarise for us all better than a google search.

Presumably that's only disgusting if he hasn't cheated. How is taking twice the allowance not cheating?

Salbutamol is not banned but its use is limited - riders are not allowed to take more than a certain amount each day. The test measures how much salbutamol is in a rider's urine and then uses that as a proxy for how much has been ingested each day but this test is not perfect and it is important to understand that the amount of Salbutamol in urine is not what is limited, it is the amount ingested.

When the test shows that there is too much Salbutamol is in the urine this is known as an adverse analytical finding (AAF) and then the rider and his team are asked to explain how this has happened - it is not a failed drug test. This should all happen confidentiality to prevent the sort of circus that has gone on around Froome's AAF but it was leaked to Le Monde and The Guardian. Froome and his team have shown the UCI and WADA to their satisfaction that Froome did not ingest too much Salbutomol and so Froome has effectively found "not guilty" and it is agreed that he did not take more than the allowable dose.

This will, of course, not prevent people saying that Sky have bought off WADA or similar...

The politics of it are more complicated and include (amongst other things) the fact that there may well be other riders who have AAFs against them currently who have not been banned from the tour, that AOS (the Tour organisers) banned Froome the day before he was acquitted with it being extremely unlikely that they didn't know that this would happen; Anglo-Saxon vs Euro mainstream etc etc

 

[Triggaaar]

Thanks for the reply.

Because it's not a performance enhancing drug, there is a limit because there has to be a limit.

Not sure there has to be a limit, but if it's not performance enhancing, why not make the limit 10 times what it is, and then if they fail the test, they deserve the hassle that follows?