- 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
news
Chris Froome on Alpe d'Huez (picture copyright Anne Martin)Updated: ASO exclude Chris Froome from the Tour de France - Team Sky "confident" of winning appeal
Tour de France organisers have excluded four-time winner and defending champion Chris Froome from this year's Tour de France, according to a report in the French newspaper Le Monde.
Team Sky will reportedly appeal to the French national Olympic Committee (CNOSF), with a hearing set for 9AM on Tuesday and a decision expected on Wednesday.
Froome returned an adverse analytical finding for twice the permitted level of the anti-asthma drug salbutamol during last September's Vuelta, which he won.
He has continued racing while the case is ongoing, which he is permitted to do since salbutamol is a specified substance rather than one that is banned outright.
Last month, he won the Giro d'Italia, making him just the third man ever to hold all three Grand Tour titles at the same time.
Under article 28.1 of the regulations of the Tour de France, and in compliance with UCI rules, ASO “expressly reserves the right to refuse the participation in – or disqualify from – the event, a team or one of its members whose presence is liable to damage the image or reputation of ASO or those of the event.”
Froome insists that he has done nothing wrong and is confident he will be able to provide a satisfactory explanation for the elevated levels of salbutamol at the Vuelta.
In a statement, a spokesperson for Team Sky said: “We are confident that Chris will be riding the Tour as we know he has done nothing wrong.”
The last time ASO took such action was in 2009, when it sought to exclude Tom Boonen from the Tour de France after the former world champion’s third out-of-competition positive test for cocaine.
While that did not constitute and anti-doping rule violation, ASO believed that the Belgian’s participation could damage the reputation of the race.
However, the day before the Tour de France was due to start in Monaco, a court in Paris ruled that Boonen could take part in the race.
That precedent is likely to be seized upon by Froome and Team Sky’s lawyers, who would also be likely to highlight how Alberto Contador was allowed to ride the 2011 Tour de France, where he was defending the title he won the previous year.
At the time, an appeal by the UCI and the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) against the Spanish national cycling federation’s decision to exonerate him in connection with his positive test for clenbuterol was still outstanding.
The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) eventually handed Contador, who finished fifth overall at the 2011 Tour de France a mainly retrospective ban and stripped him of his victory in the previous year’s edition of the race and his 2011 Giro d’Italia title.
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Latest Comments
- Destroyer666 48 sec ago
"...the beeswax-based covering magically shuns off whatever might be lurking in the corners. Even after multiple rides, when the bars rattled about...
- chrisonabike 1 hour 15 min ago
I've always wondered - why does the one-armed person in the cloak have their hand in the one-armed person with the cane?
- David9694 1 hour 23 min ago
t-boned
- Rendel Harris 2 hours 43 min ago
I didn't know the blue RA saddle was a holy grail - I had a 1986 RA bought new in 1987 with a blue saddle that lasted me very well until 2002 when...
- newbankgyratory 2 hours 53 min ago
Solution: Put these up everywhere. Source: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/traffic-signs
- Rendel Harris 3 hours 50 min ago
Glad you like it - this week was the first proper commuting week since I got it, 250kms nice and warm but not boiled, indeed - and when the...
- Rendel Harris 5 hours 23 min ago
As what you have said is demonstrably untrue, given that the event is organised and has been for the last four years by a professional events...
- chrisonabike 5 hours 52 min ago
Accessibility issue. Of course by necessity / co- evolution the Dutch generally provide a fairly "one size fits standard bikes" parking solution -...
- Steve K 7 hours 7 min ago
I'm there now too, if anyone wants a follow/wants to follow me. @cyclingtheseaso
- Shepton 7 hours 42 min ago
I totally agree. I used to commute through Long Ashton and only started getting agro from motorists when the pavement was made to be a shared path....
Add new comment
95 comments
What surprise that the Froome lovers have stepped out from behind the like button to express their position. I'm still the same, he hasn't proven innocence, just that UCI accepts the story. Still lacking inconsistency and it'll be ineresting to see who else challenges now.
The Doome lovers, whilst still out in force, are finding their heads are spinning violently at this point in time.
Evidence, or lack of it, for their blinkered points of view, however, won’t stop them peddling their half-truths and lies about one of the World’s top athletes.
For any athlete, with this amount of press and social media pressure, to be able to perform at this level for so many years now (at this point in time we believe a drugs free perfomance) is absolutely astonishing, delightful and motivational to ANY aspiring sportsman or sportswoman.
Have a great TdF Froomy!
T
So Don, since you mention sad people, what evidence do you base your belief about Froome being dirty on? You wouldn’t be basing that on something without having evidence for it would you because that would make you look like a real sad c—t. I can only assume that you have seen all the evidence or that you are talking out of your arse.
If i give you my address can you send on the WADA report and evidence that you have obviously reviewed in full?
I would love to take a look and see if i draw the same conclusion as your good self.
Cheers.
About as much evidence as you have.
Now I know what it feels like to be the invited guest at a bukkake party.
The evidence that this did not constitute an AAF is initially based on the UCI statement regarding the advise they received from WADA
There is nothing yet to suggest that decision is wrong - so it's hard to see that saying "as much evidence as you have" has any basis unless we decide our opinion carries more weight than WADAs evaluation. We don't have access to all the data, so we can't drill down any further alas - i'm not convinced that would make much difference for many anyway..
What is a surprise, is that you're still posting on here saying you haven't changed your position in the face of today's events. Oh no, wait, haters gonna hate.
Though I notice you haven't repeated your 'ban the cheat' line. .
What am I hating? Well as UCI say he isn't cheating, I have to accept that he's not going to get a ban. Personally I believe that he's as dirty as fuck, that Team SKY are dirty as fuck and that there is a rule for one and a second rule for another. There are going to be plently who think that they can have a pop at me and not the argument. I have no argument with the ruling and accept it so I will not be making individual replies to sad sacks that can't "win" with grace, you're embarrassing. Keep on dancing and looking like sad cunts!
And yes, ban him as he was over the permitted level. What's the point of having a level if you can concoct a story to get youself off?
EDIT: Just got a couple more names to add to my thick gullible cunt list.
There is no “permitted” level for Salbutamol in urine. It’s an action limit.
You're a joke, mate. Calling people cunts you know you've lost the argument.. in other threads you conflate Contador's case with Froome's- banned vs restricted substance. Evidence heard and there was no AAF case to answer. Move on.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance
I'd also recommend https://www.amazon.co.uk/Mistakes-Were-Made-But-Not/dp/1491514132/ref=nodl_
As a genuine question, what would it take for you to change your mind about Chris Froome? Maybe not on this forum, you probably have too much "invested" in your stated opinion to be able to change your mind publicly, but perhaps elsewhere?
Froome was required to provide a satisfactory explanation for his AAF.
He has done so to the satisfaction of WADA and the UCI.
That is good enough for me.
If the correct procedures had been followed he would have been given anonymity throughout this process.
We have no idea how many other anonymous riders have successfully challenged an AAF.
We know only of the unsuccessful.
Ergo there is no evidence of inconsistency.
a62edf0f39de560a219b7262163b0d45.png
As I think I said elsewhere, I hope you don't find your way onto a jury.
It's OK, I gnored it the first time for being a rather silly comment too.
I think it’s a great analogy
Anyone feeling a little bit silly now after all those raging "liar" "cheat" accusations?
So does Hinault still reckon the riders should go on strike?
Anyone wanna withdraw their comments now?
Who said something about a cycling organisation having a backbone? Clearly the UCI continue to be invertebrates....
http://www.uci.ch/pressreleases/uci-statement-anti-doping-proceedings-in...
.....and day one of the Tour the French media will roll out Richard Virenque to give his usual "expert" opinion.
well, about 90% of Virenque, the other 10% still being other peoples blood.
Sky should just sabotage the tour if they can't run Froome. Go for a breakaway on day one. Team time trial the early stages. Ruin all the sprint stages. Run all the french riders over with the team car.
But the experts haven't found the obvious. It's taken 9 months because nothing is obvious. I assume his guilt as he can't prove innocence. That's the right way to go and might get Team SKY to be a little more forthcoming. Ban the cheat.
This is the cleanest way to go, for me. It will be deeply unsatisfactory and beset by counter-claims and possibly legal cases. But the alternative is messier and way worse PR.
Unfortunately, given the leak of the AAF, Sky botching their image over the last couple of years, the UCI's silence and ASO's hypocrisy, they've lost the luxury of being shakily lenient. They've got to be shakily strict.
No biochemist or test finding will resolve this. It's a management failure, and the new, dynamic French guy who promised to sweep away Cookson's dithering is being just as dithery.
I think there might be legal cases this way too.
Not just in this case either. ASO have the greatest chance as I guess they can invite who they want.
I reckon - I said as much ^
It's horrible and messy either way, but I see Froome facing no sanction as more damaging to the UCI (even if it isn't ultimately the UCI that makes the crucial decision) and world tour.
Ultimately, the UCI should have been all over it - no matter whose court the ball is in, the UCI needs to be protecting what reputation it has left.
Events seem to have overtaken us a little bit.
There was a clearly defined mechanism for Froome to prove his innocence, it seems like he has successfully done so.
Due process takes time, the Movistar rider who was suspended last week had his AAF about 18 months previously.
I hope you're not selected for jury service.
Pages