- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
Brian Cookson at the site in Paris where the UCI was founded (source Brian Cookson Images, Flickr)Presidents of UCI and WADA critical of spectators’ hostility towards Chris Froome
The president of the UCI, Brian Cookson, has described the behaviour of a number of fans during the Tour de France as ‘hooliganism’ reports The Mirror. WADA president, Sir Craig Reedie, has also said that Chris Froome should not have had to endure abuse during the race.
Froome recently won the Tour for the second time in three years, but endured abuse from a number of roadside fans. One is said to have doused him in urine while another was captured on film spitting at him.
“I am worried about the beginnings of an element of hooliganism coming towards our sport which we have largely been able to avoid in recent years,” said Cookson. “I think Chris was subjected to a fairly nasty form of antagonism from a small number of people.”
Cookson also said that he was concerned about more than just the treatment of Froome.
“There was also a little bit of slightly joking, slightly hooligan-type behaviour in places with cars being kicked and things being thrown at support vehicles.
“The Tour de France, all of cycle racing, is a great free sport – it is possible to get close to the athletes, to the competitors, in a way that is not really possible in any other sport. If we want that to continue, then we all have a responsibility to behave.”
Team Sky have blamed segments of the French media for fuelling ill-feeling towards Froome and their other riders (Richie Porte said he was punched during one stage). Froome himself has singled out ex-pro cyclists turned TV pundits Laurent Jalabert and Cedric Vasseur for dropping strong hints that they believe his performances are artificially enhanced.
WADA president, Reedie, told Sky Sports that he too was unimpressed by crowd behaviour during the race. "I think that was very regrettable and I hope that it involved only a very small number of spectators. I do not believe that is how French supporters of cycling normally behave.”
Reedie says that unless riders test positive, they should be given the benefit of the doubt.
"I assume there has been a wide and extensive testing procedure for the riders in the Tour de France and we await the results with interest. But unless there are findings or evidence to the contrary, all sports people must be given the benefit of the doubt.
"The UCI are certainly making sustained efforts to change the culture of the past. They have had an independent commission report and have created an independent anti-doping agency and I think it is pretty important the UCI wins this particular argument."
Those thoughts were echoed by IOC president, Thomas Bach, who told CNN that he thought cycling was now ‘on the right track’.
“The biggest danger is not that the cheat is being caught and that we have a doping case. The biggest danger is that with every doping case there is a suspicion being shed on the clean athletes.”
Bach said that $10 million had been earmarked by the Olympic Committee to fund anti-doping research, with a further $10 million set aside to combat match fixing and corruption.
Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn't especially like cake.
Latest Comments
- Barraob1 1 hour 28 min ago
It was cheaper and better when the IVCA ran it. Elite events don't give a shit about riders
- David9694 1 hour 34 min ago
Elderly man sentenced following serious crash in Ringwood...
- Slartibartfast 3 hours 29 min ago
What I find most amazing is that they didn't use this an opportunity to encourage drivers to check their vision and get an eye test. I was waiting...
- slc 4 hours 11 min ago
The Cugel I knew typically prevailed on others to prepare food. But I was always curious about the porridge of drist and raisins enjoyed on the...
- kingleo 5 hours 10 min ago
Cyclists have been riding in Bister for about 150 years, and now all of a sudden they are a great danger to pedestrians.
- the little onion 5 hours 36 min ago
I didn't remove the sound because I didn't think that it mattered - quite clearly the swearing was in reaction to an act of frankly horrid...
- Nigel_2003 6 hours 24 min ago
Know how the limiter screws on your derailleur work and use the right ones to keep chain on a manageable cog at the back and/or chainring at the...
- Freddy56 6 hours 47 min ago
Story one: "Here is all the deals at 50% off."...
- andystow 7 hours 51 sec ago
Front wheel trued and tensioned last night. I think it took me well over an hour.
Add new comment
33 comments
I was out there for 3 stages and on Alpe d'Huez on the Saturday. Yes there are some idiots out on the road and yes there was some heckling and booing watching other stages in the bar at the campsite.
But what is remarkable is that the crowds are so close and the riders so vulnerable to attack that it is a credit to cycling that nothing massively major in the form of attack happens. Riders could easily be really hurt, badly injured or possibly even killed by a determined nutter.
My point is that the attacks were reprehensible but the riders pass millions of people extremely closely and without much protection and it's amazing how infrequently this stuff happens.
Seb Coe is funny, claims today everyone is out to get the IAAF over drugs when we know countries like Kenya, Russia and Jamaica all have massive problems.
But then we have this from the blood experts and completely blows him out of the water
http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1sn73ks
Coe's main interest is keeping the cash machine topped up from major sponsors. That doesn't go hand-in-hand with cleaning up the sport!
"Presidents of UCI and WADA critical of spectators’ hostility towards Chris Froome"
Well thats told the spitters punchers and urine throwers I doubt we will see any further examples of this kind of behaviour.....Not!
Had the UCI and other interested parties grown a set years ago clean athleats would not be facing this kind of behaviour now.
The UCI turning a blind eye to hemocrit levels, ignoring the misuse of medical exemptions, possibly ignoring bad test results, not insisting on life bans for dopers not stopping ex dopers to be employed by teams? 24 hours testing, All would have been good starting points but what did they do just about Sweet FA!
Still I bet the sport is much cleaner than athlectics right now! Mainly thanks to TEAM led initiatives!
Brian is in a great position to undo the wrongdoing of his predessors I hope he will pick up the cudgel.
With Sky it is two issues.
1) Some people can not believe the improvements made by some riders can be done clean.
2) The Man U of cycling
Point one is discussed too many times so lets ignore that one
Point two I think is a real reason for many. Sky are reported to have a budget double that than most teams and people do not like it. Some may say the sport needs 'modernisation' but at what cost ?
do people want dominate teams all the time and we know the questions over a certain American one.
So Sky become the favoured hated team as money seems to dominate above the sport ....
Disliking SKY is this seasons trendy opinion to hold.
If anyone was serious about a clean sport, the same demands would be made of every team because as history shows, doping is not confined to any one team.
I've disliked Sky since they warmed up & down behind screens outside their Death Star bus, hidden from view - a show of arrogant power and status (which ironically was a behaviour they changed before they won anything!).
If Sky were serious about a clean sport they would lead the way on anti-doping (as per their core values), instead they are no better than the other major teams and react with PR when they are caught-out!
and now we hear this morning Tom Danielson failed a test for synthetic Testerone.
Of course he says he has no idea how that happened, standard defence from a proven doper.
Oh dear, what will JV (the self-appointed voice of clean cycling) say?
Anyone recall the Tour? Anyone recall the 'Yes, of course we will release the data' stuff from Saxo Tinkoff, from Movistar, from Astana?
Well?
Where is it?
Where is the public demand for it?
Well?
I've been watching cycling since Edwig Van Hooydonck invented bib knickers. I've seen just about every 'hero' turn out to have feet of clay, but this is a targeted witch hunt and has very little to with cleaning up the sport and everything to do with idiots throwing accusations because they think hating SKY is the done thing.
you will get this because people are so cynical from the past.
As for Astana you obviously missed all the comments when they dominated the Giro with frankly ridiculous efforts and riders like Landa coming from nowhere.
Be cynical of all teams unless they can prove otherwise. Yes it is guilt before innocent but in every sport have to do it.
Why are only SKY being held to 'true transparency', and why only now?
Astana have a much worse actual record as far as evidence; actual positive drug tests...
Movistar have Valverde; suspended for 2 years following Operation Puerto...
No demands for transparency, no public approbation, no media backlash...
There is a case for transparency, it is unfortunately being led by an irrational and one sided hatred of SKY.
Anyone recall the Tour? Anyone recall the 'Yes, of course we will release the data' stuff from Saxo Tinkoff, from Movistar, from Astana?
Well?
Where is it?
Where is the public demand for it?
I don't even like SKY, but this current witch hunt will damage the potential for cycling sponsorship; why bother if all you get is stupid sniping and innuendo?
Because they have made being 'clean' the core part of their ethos. Their stated aim at the outset was to win the Tour with a CLEAN British rider, and they produced a manifesto thicker than the bible which spelt out how they would act so the fans can trust and believe in them, including transparency. They have broken some of those pledges and certainly haven't been transparent. And they have produced some of the most unbelievable moments in the Tour over that last 4 years.
They have been transparent, just not to you as you're not a doping agency or an international cycling organisation.
FAWT: You seem to have a different definition of transparency than the most of the world. Disclosing what is legally required by the competent authorities is not "transparency", it's doing the bare minimum to stay in business. If that was the definition then Astana would be a far more "transparent" team than Sky.
I'd take the Webster definition: "visibility or accessibility of information especially concerning business practices". Or Wikipedia: "Corporate transparency describes the extent to which a corporation's actions are observable by outsiders". And it that sense I think Sky has actually been above average transparency-wise, but nowhere near teams like Lotto-NL Jumbo or FDJ. They do some things well, but then cultivate an air of "marginal gains" mystery that does ring very similar to the US Postal malarkey. They refuse to delve into the difficult stuff like Leinders or Tiernan-Locke. And they actively obfuscate things by saying ridiculous stuff like Froome did 5.7W/kg up LPSM or going on about how inaccurate estimates and power meters are while Vetoo's numbers are pretty much +/- 2% off Gesink's for every climb in the Tour (the mean is even tighter).
"We are an open transparent team". Meh. I think that rubs a lot of people the wrong way (I'm not referring the idiots throwing stuff that should be arrested, I don't know them nor do I have anything to do with them). Slipstream walked the walk a bit more, but they also cranked the rhetoric far beyond anything sustainable. Now they'll have to walk it back. Far worse outcome for everyone. If Sky really wanted to be left alone, then the truth will set them free (or at least cut them a little more slack): "We're trying to be a little more open here and there for PR purposes, but we're really all about winning and making money. We want to keep as much information private as possible to maintain our competitive advantage and play up our tech and training savvy for marketing purposes. That is far more important to us than furthering any transparency or anti-doping advocacy agenda that outsiders want to thrust upon us." That would be all the transparency I'd need from Sky (I think Froome has held himself to a higher standard and I appreciate it).
They have done more than that and e.g. offered effectively an 'open doors' policy to their data to WADA and the UCI at least. When it comes down to it, however, they are a racing team in a highly competitive business - so it comes as no surprise to many that they don't want to indiscriminately distribute their race and training data, medical records and other personal information to all and sundry. I wouldn't expect that of any team.
As for post-race performance data, i'd love to see more of that - and Sky riders have released that and similar data before (I seem to remember poring over details of several of Bernie Eisels SRM power files on TrainingPeaks and elsewhere, still have some somewhere)... but full training and medical data to the hoi polloi ? Nah, again I personally I wouldn't want or expect that either from any team.
The issue some 'fans' have is not necessarily doping, it is with Team Sky per se. They are the arrogant team of the peloton - whether true or not, that is how many view them. That doesn't excuse the behaviour of some (and if the individuals can be identified then the UCI should notify the french police and demand action against them). However, Sky should think about their PR - a start would be true transparency.
Roger Federer would be proud of the number of back-handers in this thread.
The problem with drugs in Rugby Union is at junior level with youngsters using a quick fix in trying to emulate the top stars who have the time and facilities to train. I was told when i played your simply not big enough, talent yes. So i hit the gym and put on 2 stone (cleanly may i add) and reached where i wanted which was county level.
Its all to do with education both to players, coaches and to the public who see "big blokes" and straight away say drugs without knowing diddly squat.
Look at the drug bans and the vast majority are the young uns or their coaches not the top stars who, like cyclists, are on the list to say where they are for testers.
yep and you could say the same with the cyclists getting caught are those trying to reach the top.
However most of us accept that those getting caught are only a small % of the cheats and thats the bigger problem really.
I saw it as mainly French frustration.
Good to see that the Sunday Times has had a slow news week and been given the financial green light to discover athletics is rotten to the core at last. No??!!
I assume there isn't anyone brave enough to throw piss at rugby players, footballers, athletes, or anyone else on foot who can chase you down.
I'd love the FA to reveal how many players are tested each year for PEDS and how often. I'm pretty sure premiership players aren't hiding under the sofa pretending they can't hear the doorbell. Money talks.
sadly true. TBF we had the case of Rio Ferdinand that showed the system can work but there is simply not enough people looking elsewhere.
The likes of Kimmage does and is continuing pointing out the problem Rugby has with steroids (top doping sport in the UK) but that is different from looks like almost undetectable blood doping.
They do - its all made public, they're not trying to hide the numbers.
We have to remember people abusing riders is not new, Cav had piss thrown at him before. There will always be some deranged feral individuals who try and do these kind of things to riders.
Come on Brian, the crowds are responding to your lack of leadership on doping.
You do your bit and provide a sport that the people can genuinely believe in, across all nationalities, and everyone benefits.
Not at all, the idiots were reacting to some jumped up french muppets who got pissed at yet again a brit winning their precious tour.
Some of the abuse was way out of order, fine if you want to boo...that's about all.
The problem I see is not Froome, but it is the trust in cycling, no-one has trust in the UCI and WADA, that leads to no trust in the teams and riders. That leads to speculation by so called experts in their armchairs, which leads to people throwing piss and spitting at riders.
Completely agree. Froome has passed all his tests, which doesn't mean anything more than he has passed the tests. Didn't Armstrong pass 499 out of 500 tests? The BBC article proved the bio passport isn't 100% accurate, the CIRC report said doping was still rife. Then add to that the US-Postal-esq performances from Sky ...
Sort out the doping controls and TUE's and team doctor's and even the UCI doctors/boards, and then we'll trust that the riders are clean.
Catch, fine/ban the spitters, punchers and urine throwers. They have no place in the sport either.
Really? one stage win in the entire tour is US Postal esque?
Do not get the whole Sky/US Postal thing. Anyone who is old enough to have followed the sport pre-Armstrong would remember teams like TI-Raleigh (1980 TDF - 11 stage wins + yellow and white jerseys. On British bikes!). Nobody wins a grand tour without a strong team.
I like Cookson (he's better than the last bloke) but where were he and the UCI during the Tour? You'd think that when ex-dopers like Jalabert are casting aspersions on current riders, the UCI might at least have the balls to stand-up for their own anti-doping program and the riders within it.
Pages