Chris Froome says he almost left Sky in 2011, tells of tension with Bradley Wiggins

Tour de France champion's autobiography outlines his feelings on 2012 race when he was 2nd to team mate

by Simon_MacMichael   May 25, 2014  

Wiggins and Froome (pic Bettini Photo, courtesy Pinarello)

Chris Froome says he came close to leaving Team Sky in late 2011, and has laid bare the tensions within Team Sky during the 2012 Tour de France, where he finished as runner-up to team mate Sir Bradley Wiggins.

Froome, who succeeded Wiggins as Tour de France champion last July, is also critical of Sky team principal Sir Dave Brailsford in extracts published in The Sunday Times from his autobiography, The Climb.

In particular, Froome says thar his understanding of what thhe was promised when he signed a contract to stay with the British WorldTour team in 2011 was not reflected in the way he was treated during the following year's Tour de France, which he rode in support of Wiggins.

Tensions between the Sky’s two star riders began simmering during the 2011 Vuelta, which Wiggins rode after retiring injured from the Tour de France. Froome took the race lead, but was ordered to ride in support of Wiggins.

However, Froome finished the race the stronger rider, placing second behind Geox-TMC ‘s Juan Jose Cobo, and many believe he would have won the race had Sky placed its faith in him rather than Wiggins.

A new deal

It was immediately after the Vuelta that Froome signed a new, three-year deal with Sky, but the 29-year-old says that he was tempted by offers from rival teams that were able to guarantee him undisputed leadership in major stage races.

Referring to the package originally offered to him by Brailsford, he said: "I wanted a contract that reflected being a leader, rather than a domestique.

"It was getting stressful and I sent Dave a long and quite strong message saying there would be no more going back and forth. I also said that that was the final offer, I was going elsewhere."

Froome revealed he was unhappy with the backing he got from Brailsford ahead of the 2012 Tour, saying: "I wanted Dave to agree that I had a chance to win the Tour de France, or at least not be stuck in a system where I couldn't.

"Finishing second in Spain after doing so much work for Brad had given me confidence. When other teams proposed contracts that showed me they wanted me as their leader, that made me think: why shouldn't I go for the Tour de France?

"Dave was enthusiastic and convincing and, though I wanted reassurance, I also wanted to stay with the team.

"I thought that what he told me meant that I could go to the Tour de France and have my chance to win it. But he didn't actually say this. Instead, he spoke of two guys riding for GC with one being the designated leader and the other riding as his back-up.

"The details were never teased out. Dave's words would mean just what he chose them to mean.

"To an outsider, unfamiliar with how teams work, it probably seems bizarre that a rider would have to persuade his team to try to allow him to win the biggest race in the sport."

Wiggins "arrogant"

On the 2012 Tour de France, Froome won Stage 7 at La Planche des Belles-Filles, with Wiggins third and taking the race leader’s yellow jersey, which he would keep all the way to Paris. Froome was not happy with his team mate’s reaction, however.

“He had to do lots of interviews,” explained Froome. “I heard him say something like: ‘A fantastic day for the team. Chris winning the stage; I’m in the yellow jersey. Great.’ Then he added: ‘Now he’s got his stage win, he’s going to be an integral part of helping me to try to win the Tour.’

“I thought it was such an arrogant thing to say: Chris has had his little moment, now he can concentrate on his real job.”

Froome disclosed that he got support from another Sky rider who felt marginalised on that year’s race, then world champion Mark Cavendish whose ambitions of defending the green points jersey he had won the previous year took second place to supporting Wiggins.

He said: “One day on the bus Cav slipped me a note: ‘No great man ever complains of want of opportunity.’

“I felt Cav was saying: ‘Don’t get to the end and say you didn’t have the opportunity.’”

Froome went on: “I felt that the team weren’t prepared to recognise that I was a potential winner. If I wasn’t allowed to try, accepting that would involve a very significant sacrifice on my part: they hadn’t treated me in the way that had been promised.

“I was in third place now and had my reservations as to how Brad was going to cope when we got to the real mountains”

That 'attack' on Wiggins

It was on Stage 11 of the race to La Toussuire-Les Sybelles that the tension between the pair became public knowledge when Froome made a move that some interpreted as an attack on Wiggins.

“The plan was to scorch the earth again, just as we had done on La Planche des Belles Filles to put Bradley in yellow,” explained Froome. “I suggested that maybe it might be possible for me to attack towards the end of the stage, after I had shepherded Brad almost to the top.

“The response was a frown from team principal Dave Brailsford and a slight unease that the question had been asked. I was used to this hypersensitivity towards Brad’s feelings but Brad was basically two minutes ahead. Today was a day when we could kill off his main rivals, Cadel Evans and Vincenzo Nibali, for him and take another stage.

“I wasn’t putting my hand up and asking if I could help myself to Brad’s Tour or have a weekend away with his wife. I was asking could I go for a stage win, and get myself in a slightly better position.”

Froome recalled how Nibali attacked with 12km of the climb remaining, and how he shut that move down shortly afterwards.

When the Italian attacked again, Froome went past Wiggins in pursuit of Nibali, then overhauled him, with the thought in his head: “Okay, Vincenzo. What have you got now?”

He continued: “It felt electric; pure racing. Brad and I were going to be one and two on GC tonight. Behind me, though, Brad had been dropped by Nibali straight away. [Sports director] Sean Yates was in my ear on the radio. ‘Froomey, Froomey, Froomey. I’m hoping you’ve got the okay from Bradley for that?’

“He was telling me that unless Brad explicitly said I could go, I would be having a spell in the naughty corner. I kept pushing. Then I heard Brad’s voice on the radio.

“’NO-OOO, NO-OOO, NO-OOO.’

“He sounded like a man who had just dropped his oxygen tank near the top of Everest. Brad was folding physically and mentally, and quicker than I had thought possible. I got the feeling that he would literally just get off his bike were I to carry on pushing. What was a simple and perfect plan to me seemed to translate for Brad into a public humiliation.

“I slowed and waited for him. He hadn’t just cracked; I think he felt betrayed. By the time he was back in touch with me, Brad perked up a little. All the same, I knew that by nightfall I would be in the stockades”

Clearing the air with Brailsford

Froome revealed that in the evening, he was summoned to Brailsford’s room and asked what the matter was, and told the team principal that playing a secondary role to Wiggins was not what had been agreed when his contract had been renegotiated the previous September.

In a sign that his attack that day had long been planned, Froome added in his book that he had checked the document with his girlfriend (and now his fiancée) Michelle Cound that morning should he need to refer Brailsford to it following the stage.

He told her: “I’m going to tell him that I have every right to attack on this climb at the end of the stage. I feel fresh. I can do this.”

Brailsford told Froome that with Wiggins in the yellow jersey and the race heading towards its conclusion with only one summit finish and one individual time trial in the stages remaining, the team’s focus was on Wiggins.

Froome countered that his team mate might crash, as had happened in the previous year’s Tour, or fade in the final week, as he had done in the Vuelta, and it therefore made sense for him to be allowed to try and take time from Nibali.

“Dave, the man with a plan for all occasions, said that it was wrong to speak now of ‘what ifs’. These were the facts. We had to work with the facts. So we talked facts. Day one, I punctured. No contingency plan. Fact.

“Dave immediately apologised for that oversight. He was sincere but the point was made. There had been promises made and yet from the puncture to the special lightweight wheels and skewers, which Brad was using exclusively, all had been geared towards Brad. I had thought this was the team that didn’t do oversights.

“Dave said to me: ‘Brad wants to go home. He’s ready to pack his bags and leave the race altogether.’

“I remember thinking: ‘So it’s okay for him to leave and not give anybody else a hand? If he leaves, will I have to carry his bags?’”

At the back of the team bus the following day, with Yates and Brailford in attendance, Froome told Wiggins: “Listen, if you’ve got a problem with me, come straight to me, don’t go round to other people and make the problem worse. Come speak to me and we can sort it out. But it doesn’t help if you go telling Sean, telling Dave, telling everyone else what problem you’ve got or why you’re unhappy. Speak to me about it.”

He said that Wiggins “sort of nodded and muttered a few words.”

A prearranged plan

On the final mountain finish of the race, there were further signs of discord between the pair in the last kilometre when they were the closest two riders in pursuit of stage winner Alejandro Valverde of Movistar, with Froome turning round to gesticulate at Wiggins.

Afterwards, Froome was asked why he didn’t just follow his instincts and ride after the Spaniard.

“I gave the party line. ‘Brad’s in optimum position to win the race, and at the moment he’s poised to win so. . . we’re on track. And no, I’m not going to be attacking or anything like that.’

“I realised, at last, that everything had been geared towards this.

“It was never going to be any different. The story was completed long before we got to France. Bradley wins. The book is written. The documentary is made. The promise is fulfilled. We had just been acting it out,” he added.

66 user comments

Latest 30 commentsNewest firstBest ratedAll

Andy Halls wrote:
Wiggo is just a time trialist a soloist he does not understand the meaning of team player

The same Brad Wiggins who was at the front of the pack in the yellow jersey as part of Cavendish's lead out train? Not many tour leaders would put themselves in that much risk down the cobbles of the Champs. Christ, Cadel Evans wouldn't even ride the final stage on his yellow bike such was his want to not risk anything going wrong at such a late stage in the race.

Andy Halls wrote:
they all respect froomey as he is a genuine team leader not just a wheel sucker.

A few years ago when Fabian Barthez played for Manchester United a number of the red tops would refer to him as a clown. This is one of those tabloid phrases real people don't use, a bit like "romp", so whenever I heard someone refer to Barthez as a clown I knew straight away it wasn't their opinion, but merely them regurgitating the nonsense they had read in a paper and trying to pass it off as their own knowledge. I get a much similar feeling when I see people using the term "Wheel Sucker" about Wiggins.

posted by farrell [1305 posts]
26th May 2014 - 10:46

like this
Like (40)

Andy Halls wrote:
Wiggo is just a time trialist a soloist he does not understand the meaning of team player

I don't know, the turn he put in on the final few laps of the 2011 World Championships for Cav was amazing.

Dedicated cycling price comparison | http://www.leadoutbikes.com

posted by mckechan [178 posts]
26th May 2014 - 11:21

like this
Like (32)

Comparing Froome to Kevin Pietersen is plain stupid and misses the obvious fact that individual riders are recorded as the winners of bike races and teams as winners of cricket matches. And lets not forget that Froome walked the talk by winning the Tour. A better comparison for Wiggins/Froome/Sky situation would be Formula 1 where team orders sometimes rob the public of seeing the best driver win races.

posted by LinusLarrabee [32 posts]
26th May 2014 - 11:24

like this
Like (24)

People seem quite polarised and I guess that is because people like to line up behind personalities.

Sky spent a long time priming Wiggins as their poster boy so I understand why the plan was put him on the podium in France. There's a certain naivety in Froome's story: did he really expect Brailsford and the team to suddenly switch to him? Froome cannot have missed that Wiggins was team leader and that the focus was on him. Did he forget how the Dauphine Libere panned out in 2012?

Froome's 'form' is and probably was a fair bit more superior to Wiggins in the mountains. It's academic about whether Froome could've won 2012. But his performance really set up 2013. And he duly won it and in a much more impressive individual performance. If Wiggins and Froome have any sense they will join forces for 2014 and whomever they choose as their team leader SHOULD be supported and aided by their team mates. Froome is ideally situated for that role and I think Wiggins had been making all the right noises for this to happen....what will happen now though?!

posted by Colin Peyresourde [1086 posts]
26th May 2014 - 11:45

like this
Like (21)

Take a look at Moore's excellent book, Slaying the Badger. Top sportsmen in the '80s with egos to match and plenty of shenanigans.

Same old same old, except these days it's all over the (social) media as it happens.

Move along. Nothing to see here.

ColT's picture

posted by ColT [207 posts]
26th May 2014 - 13:03

like this
Like (24)

jova54 wrote:

If he thinks he is so good then his chance will come soon to prove it. A 3 year contract signed after the 2011 Vuelta will mean that his option will be up later this summer and then let's see who wants to employ him.

I dunno - I bet half the teams in the peloton would snap him up. A team like Trek or Cannondale who have a lot of fire power but no out and out TDF contender would sign him up if they had the budget. Froome's conditions would probably based on demanding team no1 slot for the overall in stage races. I think they would accomodate a TDF winner in this.

posted by domofarmfrites [19 posts]
26th May 2014 - 13:11

like this
Like (20)

I wonder what Froome would have thought had Porte attacked in 2013? Porte knew he was in the team to support Froome and that's what he did. Whereas Froome decided that he wanted to be number 1 the year before, despite the fact that he was being paid to support Wiggins. Whether Froome felt good or not, he should have waited for orders from the Team Leader.

posted by southdownswolf [5 posts]
26th May 2014 - 13:13

like this
Like (23)

Interesting that Froome is making out Wiggins to be so poor in the mountains in 2012. I didn't see that - I saw Wiggins take the lead at one point when Froome 'couldn't do any more', to then be attacked by him a moment later!

Froome's an incredible, natural climber, sure. Wiggins is a good climber (ToC last week) and a great time trialist. Just because he couldn't match the acceleration on steep gradients doesn't mean he is blowing up.

Anyway, all pretty insulting and designed to destabilise/ put off Wiggins from joining the TDF team/ sell some books

Such a shame as a great British talent, I want to like Froome but he's making it hard to do so..

posted by 700c [556 posts]
26th May 2014 - 13:22

like this
Like (38)

Froome knew in advance that Wiggins was the leader. If he didn't like it, tough - he was being paid to do a job.

Wiggins didn't come across well with some of his comments, but I think Froome comes across even worse with this. No need to release it now, other than money.

posted by dp24 [150 posts]
26th May 2014 - 14:29

like this
Like (23)

Just goes to show (again) that the single minded focus and self belief necessary to win the world's toughest bike race doesn't necessarily accompany a well rounded or likeable personality.

Question is, why do we keep acting surprised that this is the case?

posted by Nixster [64 posts]
26th May 2014 - 17:23

like this
Like (20)

I would hardly call Wiggins a one-trick-pony. He's won pretty much everything there is no win in cycling with the exception of a monument. It's also doubtful whether he actually would have beaten Wiggins in the 2012 Tour, it probably would have been very tight.

At the 2012 Tour Froome hadn't proven anything in his career, why on earth would Team Sky back someone who hadn't even won a week long stage race before, never mind a grand tour. In the 2012 TdF Froome was surprising the fans every day with his performances in the mountains, but who's to say whether it would last in to the 3rd week? There was far too much risk involved with backing Froome.

posted by willjeffcott [8 posts]
26th May 2014 - 17:28

like this
Like (21)

One trick pony...
Madison
Pursuit
Time Trial
TDF Stage Race...
Yep - he's a bit limited to be honest...

If Wiggo was leader, that's that until told otherwise. The timing of this is disappointing, but then those who reach the top don't do it by putting other people first.

posted by BikeBud [94 posts]
26th May 2014 - 18:48

like this
Like (18)

I think Froome comes across very, very badly in this. It's pretty clear his Planche des belles Filles attack was pre meditated, and against the wishes of his team. And to make that public in the words quoted here, after having won the Tour seems really very spiteful.

Also the Cav note seems to me to be saying button it, you'll get your chance.

posted by Saintlymark [7 posts]
26th May 2014 - 21:05

like this
Like (16)

Interesting in terms of the Tour obviously. I personally think putting Wiggins into the Vuelta might be smarter planning, but Sky were burned badly in the 2011 Tour when Wiggins broke his collar bone and they were left without a leader, so I suspect the team will want options in France.

Also anyone referring to Wiggins as a wheelsucker needs to go rewatch this year's Paris Roubaix. Also being a 'wheelsucker' that can hang on until the very final climbs is no slight on a rider.

posted by Saintlymark [7 posts]
26th May 2014 - 21:14

like this
Like (22)

Daft really. The 2012 Tour was tailor-made for a TT-er who he enough to diesel up the big hills. In other words: Wiggins.

No doubting that Froome's the better climber, but he wasn't the better TT-er (albeit still an excellent one).

But really the fact that so much was made out of that tiff underlines the fact that it was a pretty dull Tour. I don't blame Sky for that; Cadel was poor, Contador was banned, Nibbles not yet a Giro winner and I can't even remember if poor Andy Schleck was even there. A perfect storm for Wiggins, really which is not to suggest that he didn't earn it or wasn't a worthy winner.

Last year was better, but curiously despite the win started to show the gradual unravelling of the Sky machine - perhaps in part because of lack of leadership on the road (though I maintain it was a mistake to leave Eisel out).

But yeah, a bit too soon and adds fuel to the 'not Chris's year' fire. I'm calling Contador for the win this year - there, I've said it.

Ghedebrav's picture

posted by Ghedebrav [1026 posts]
26th May 2014 - 23:03

like this
Like (13)

Saintlymark wrote:
Interesting in terms of the Tour obviously. I personally think putting Wiggins into the Vuelta might be smarter planning.

Only if they change the Vuelta. Of all the Grand Tours the Vuelta is the pure climbers race. You have to be able to accelerate up 20-30% ramps and Wiggins doesn't have that. The Giro could be his alternative, but the Tour suits 'Sir Brad' more.

Interesting to see how things have played out with Uran and Henao though. I always got the sense that despite their success in the Giro they weren't really trusted. Second place last year and a top ten in 2012 for Uran and they just let him go to OPQS?! I know that he was prime for leading a team, but why didn't Sky back him? I think the answer is really somewhere in the mist of Henao's blood results ironically.

posted by Colin Peyresourde [1086 posts]
27th May 2014 - 0:00

like this
Like (15)

Don't forget everything we read in the media, in books like this is bound to be manipulated, controlled, edited, etc. So whatever has been selected to be published and the words used could be very far removed from what Chris Froome actually thinks. Until I actually sit down, have a beer with him and look him in the eye, I would not believe any of it! Smile

posted by doubledex [17 posts]
27th May 2014 - 9:02

like this
Like (10)

With the right support, Wiggins could do something the Vuelta. Remember who won last year? A lightly ridden rider with some talent can do a decent job in Spain. (Dan Martin is my other long distance Vuelta tip!)

Also Wiggins doesn't have to ride the Vuelta to win it, he's talked about using the Vuelta as a stepping stone for the world TT champs.

posted by Saintlymark [7 posts]
27th May 2014 - 10:02

like this
Like (16)

Lot of people questioning the timing of this, but I don't think this bit is Chris' work. Once it's in the hands of the publishing and marketing droids, anything can happen. Ever read a book where too much of the story is given away on the back cover? Marketing. Notice how every book of this nature is released at just the right point for observers to "question the timing"? Marketing. You might think he gets the final say, but I reckon there is a chance that it's written into his contract that this stuff is outside his authority "because as your publishers, we understand the market and will act in your best interests to sell the most copies".

All that said, the sniping that goes on with intra-team rivalry would do my head in. I'd rather be Eisel, Stannard or Renshaw than Wiggins or Froome.

If I could have, say, 6 bikes, would it stop me drooling over others that I don't have?

posted by notfastenough [2948 posts]
27th May 2014 - 11:31

like this
Like (10)

I think that Sky need to bite the bullet.

After the late (very, very late) payment of bonuses owed to Froom by Wiggins, after all the words spoken or in print that they have used and the debacle that was the UCI World Championship Road Race there is no way that these two riders can operate effectively in the same team.*

As Froom is the reigning TdF Champion then Sky should back him to the hilt. Bradley should have been offered one or two of the other Grand Tours.

Either that, or as they insist on acting like a couple of five year olds, treat them like a pair of five year olds.

* In the same squad is fine.

posted by levermonkey [341 posts]
27th May 2014 - 16:26

like this
Like (11)

It's a book that needs the oxygen of publicity to sell.
That said, does anyone else pick up the vibe of a Yoko Ono to the Beatles here Wink ?

posted by arfa [446 posts]
27th May 2014 - 17:41

like this
Like (13)

I know this is to garner publicity for the book, but Froome (and many of his defenders on here) seem to overlook that cycling is a team sport. You support your leader - that is your job. Whether you like it or not, that is what you are paid to do. I buy that Froome lost La Vuelta supporting Wiggo, but that was his job. If you don't like it, you keep the problems in house and sort it out, not have petulant arm waving attacks to show just how superior you are in the mountains. The leader of the team was quite clear to everyone, and yet Froome is there checking the small print of his contract to see what he could get away with? I admit that Froome is a better climber, and deserves his Tour victory, but to slate Wiggo who did a lap of the World Champs course out front for Cav, led him on to the Champs Elysee and didn't quit the Olympic road race to save himself for the time trial shows that the guy is a class rider but also a team player, unlike Mr Froome.

posted by WDG [12 posts]
27th May 2014 - 19:43

like this
Like (11)

Some good points on here. I can't add anything but my sarcasm:

Wow. A book by Chris Froome. This will be good to read... that'll put me to sleep at night!

posted by stupegg [2 posts]
27th May 2014 - 20:47

like this
Like (5)

LinusLarrabee wrote:
A better comparison for Wiggins/Froome/Sky situation would be Formula 1 where team orders sometimes rob the public of seeing the best driver win races.

Agree. The Alonso-Hamilton feud in 2007 would be a better comparison.

posted by Tony [66 posts]
27th May 2014 - 21:19

like this
Like (5)

Another case of throwing a handgrenade into the room and waiting for the fallout, Sky's PR machine must love this type of attention or they would deal with it and prevent any damage to the sponsor.

Cycling Content Producer / Editor

FurnaceMedia's picture

posted by FurnaceMedia [17 posts]
27th May 2014 - 21:23

like this
Like (8)

jova54 wrote:
QuoteEnd Quote.

Because they offered him a chance to win races?

No!

Because they offered him more money!

Well yes. And why did they offer him more money? Partly because they had it yes! But probably because to quote President Lyndon Johnson

“It's probably better to have him inside the tent pissing out, than outside the tent pissing in.”

Sky had the cash to make sure Froome wasn't competing with Wiggins. That's all fair and above board if that simply bought their way out of having Froome dish it to Wiggins in the mountains as he surely would have done as he did until called back. And that's OK. Using money to win professional sports events is the name of the game really.

But I think Froome's complaint is that maybe he was naive to believe Brailsford was going to allow him a shot in 2012 (if he earned it) or at least let him build a contingency position. And that when push came to shove he realised that possibly he's been duped.

If he thinks he was taken advantage by clever use of words then its a fair complaint. In a team you'd hope that people would be properly honest rather than cleverly manipulative.

Cycling is like a church - many attend, but few understand.

posted by oozaveared [505 posts]
28th May 2014 - 14:51

like this
Like (4)

WDG wrote:
I know this is to garner publicity for the book, but Froome (and many of his defenders on here) seem to overlook that cycling is a team sport. You support your leader - that is your job. Whether you like it or not, that is what you are paid to do.

Yeah we know how the sport is reputed to work. But that's just stating the ideal. There are riders trying to make a name, there are riders possibly like Froome that have been bought or retained to stop them being in other teams, or as part of succession management, there are just the dedicated senior domestiques that have long ago traded hope of personal glory for a better financial deal. When you're trying to sign or retain a talented rider you can't just tell them to do what they're told. Promises are made, career or season ambitions discussed, about what races they'll ride, how many shots at GC they might be allowed, what support someone like Cav might get for the green jersey. Or how many stage wins they might be allowed in that team because others have or have not been promised this or that already. Riders have careers, they have personal ambitions, personalities and egos. Those deals and understandings are as much a part of their contract as the financial parts.

The Army is supposed to work by just telling people what to do and them doing it. Pretty much like the simple formula you mentioned above. But it does not work like that. That's why the training on leadership is so important. It may look like people just get orders but there's way more to leadership and creating a functioning team than just orders. In reality teams of people need to be managed, encouraged, motivated, their personal talent or status needs recognition their morale needs attention, or they cease to be a team. Teams are complicated organisms, they need discipline but they also need a host of other personal and emotional factors to be taken into consideration.

People even the junior domestiques are not robots or slaves but part of the team. The trouble with the Ladybird book of pro cycling idea that it's simple slavery to GC contender is unrealistic. Domestiques; senior, junior, some looking to be noticed by other teams, some just hoping to scrape back in the team next year, some looking to retire, and all with the various other motivations and ambitions that exist in pro cyclists need to be recognised. If team managers and the whole back up staff only had to develop tactics and tell everyone what to do then they'd be paid buttons.

Manging the egos and ambitions, the personalities, motivations, styles, abilities of a team of elite athletes is pretty tricky stuff.

As Froome points out.

Cycling is like a church - many attend, but few understand.

posted by oozaveared [505 posts]
28th May 2014 - 16:10

like this
Like (3)

I can see why Cavendish left.

posted by J90 [75 posts]
31st May 2014 - 16:11

like this
Like (2)

Both riders generate strong views but you cant argue with the numbers.
if you compares palmares for the 2 riders there is just no comparison. Froome has had one great season (2013) and another pretty good one (2012). Wiggins has 16 years of winning on a world stage; Froome is nowhere near that.
Froome is 5 years younger so he may become significant. Not there yet

posted by iro [3 posts]
2nd June 2014 - 13:32

like this
Like (5)

The excerpt of the book does sound like it was written with the benefit of (2012) hindsight. Sure, Froome had been held back in the 2011 Vuelta to be beaten by the colossus that is Juan Jose Cobo. But other than that he had done nothing as a pro. The rumours had been that Sky were close to binning him.

Wiggins had been 4th in the Tour in 2009 (now 3rd after Armstrong's disgrace) , Sky team leader since 2010, had won Criterium-Dauphine in 2011 and entered the 2012 Tour off the back of winning Paris-Nice, Dauphine and Romandie.

But his team mate, who had won nothing at all in his career at that point, expected to be allowed to ride against his team leader, and was cheesed off when the team vetoed it? I don't know if the ghost writer spiced it up a bit, but if that is a realistic description of Froome's mindest then the Froome Dog is a grade A whopper.

posted by Chris James [159 posts]
2nd June 2014 - 14:57

like this
Like (4)