Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

news

Updated: ASO exclude Chris Froome from the Tour de France - Team Sky "confident" of winning appeal

French national Olympic committee to hold arbitration hearing on Tuesday, decision expected on Wednesday

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.

Add new comment

95 comments

Avatar
burtthebike replied to nigerian prince | 6 years ago
0 likes

lork wrote:

burtthebike wrote:

lork wrote:

Hooray! Someone stands for what is right!

And you know what is right?

 

Thanks for asking burt. Yes, I do. 

Thank you o lord, and I bow down to your superior wisdom and knowledge of all things.  Are you a cult?

Avatar
nigerian prince replied to burtthebike | 6 years ago
0 likes

burtthebike wrote:

lork wrote:

burtthebike wrote:

lork wrote:

Hooray! Someone stands for what is right!

And you know what is right?

 

Thanks for asking burt. Yes, I do. 

Thank you o lord, and I bow down to your superior wisdom and knowledge of all things.  Are you a cult?

 

no. Though my forum name would be a good one for a cult leader. Are you a bike? 

Avatar
burtthebike replied to nigerian prince | 6 years ago
0 likes

lork wrote:

burtthebike wrote:

lork wrote:

burtthebike wrote:

lork wrote:

Hooray! Someone stands for what is right!

And you know what is right?

 

Thanks for asking burt. Yes, I do. 

Thank you o lord, and I bow down to your superior wisdom and knowledge of all things.  Are you a cult?

 

no. Though my forum name would be a good one for a cult leader. Are you a bike? 

No, but I try not to claim to know what is right before I know the facts.

Avatar
nigerian prince replied to burtthebike | 6 years ago
0 likes

burtthebike wrote:

lork wrote:

burtthebike wrote:

lork wrote:

burtthebike wrote:

lork wrote:

Hooray! Someone stands for what is right!

And you know what is right?

 

Thanks for asking burt. Yes, I do. 

Thank you o lord, and I bow down to your superior wisdom and knowledge of all things.  Are you a cult?

 

no. Though my forum name would be a good one for a cult leader. Are you a bike? 

No, but I try not to claim to know what is right before I know the facts.

 

We all know the facts! EVERYONE KNOWS THE FACTS! What the fuck are you talking about?? He tested POSITIVE for an excessive amout of a restricted substance! 

 

Avatar
Pitbull Steelers replied to nigerian prince | 6 years ago
1 like

lork wrote:

burtthebike wrote:

lork wrote:

burtthebike wrote:

lork wrote:

burtthebike wrote:

lork wrote:

Hooray! Someone stands for what is right!

And you know what is right?

 

Thanks for asking burt. Yes, I do. 

Thank you o lord, and I bow down to your superior wisdom and knowledge of all things.  Are you a cult?

 

 

 

no. Though my forum name would be a good one for a cult leader. Are you a bike? 

No, but I try not to claim to know what is right before I know the facts.

 

We all know the facts! EVERYONE KNOWS THE FACTS! What the fuck are you talking about?? He tested POSITIVE for an excessive amout of a restricted substance! 

 

 

He didn't test positive he had an adverse analytical reading for a substance which he, and many many more pro cyclists, are allowed to take. There is a difference, however slight.

Anyone who takes salbutamol would provide a "positive result" because it would be in their system, Froome provided an adverse result which menat it was above the legal limit.

 

Pages

Latest Comments