Discussion in 'Pro Cycling (Road and Track Racing)' started by Joffey, 15 Sep 2016.
Not authorised to say that much, yet said that much and more?
Don't be absurd. I've merely pointed out how unlikely it is UCI/LADS will be deliberately delaying the due process.......there's no incentive for them to do so, indeed the contrary applies. Moreover, Sky has every incentive to delay. I haven't commented on the effectiveness of the due process or how expeditious it is. Maybe UCI/LADS need longer to study and respond to what's submitted by Sky, but that's just part of the due process, not 'delaying'.
Quite - but you said you didn't know who is delaying the process and how, and went on to speculate that it could be UCI/LADS or Sky that were delaying the process. The discussion on motives and clarification of what constitutes delay versus due process, which are critical to understanding what's going on and the battle being played out, should assist in that perfectly reasonable speculation.
That's an interesting statement, it implies there might be procedural irregularities, that's Froome's lawyer's speciality.
UCI covering bases or responding to a defence?
I get the feeling he'll walk on a technicality. I'm not sure it matters from a credibility perspective. I can't wait for the line 'I've never tested true positive'
That's Chris Froome's new nickname sorted...
Integrity and compliance: the new strong and stable? https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2...appoint-integrity-officer-jiffy-bag-aftermath
Ooof it does'nt look good if a company needs to employ an integrity officer. Integrity, something we've been missing since we started.
There were calls for Sky to employ a morality officer, until everyone realised Sky have no morals to officiate. The Disney takeover is being hurried through so we can all return to the land of make believe.
I bet Deliveroo are keen to get involved, imagine if all their riders were on Sky's super inhalers, a massive increase in productivity for the company, and everyone gets their takeaways sooner, while they're hotter, total win. Maybe if they had been involved from the start the questioning would have been a lot simpler:
Q- what's in the jiffy bag?
A- Tandoori chicken masala.
OK, as you were.
This is lifted from Bikeradar
Very true - To get it thrown out by LADS it seems he would have had to have proved a negative.
Not the story the headline advertised, but I read this as Prudhomme putting the squeeze on the UCI.
Seems a fair assessment but also a fair enough request. Just a shame that they can't do it before the Giro.
Now the Giro organisers thinks Brailsford sold them a lemon....
I still can't understand the whole "appearance fee" thing; World Tour teams have to ride WT events, so I would have thought the organisers would say "send who you farking want, makes no difference to us if you send a 2nd or 3rd rate team as there are plenty others willing to fight for the victory..."
That’s true, but Froome for example is a very, very high profile rider. His presence on the Giro would generate a great deal more coverage for the event. He could have just saved himself for The Tour. Instead he’s doing the Giro and trying to join the legends by holding all three tour titles at once - quite a compelling narrative and valuable for the organisers. The mess with the adverse drug finding has screwed everybody.
Separate names with a comma.