The live blog is sometimes slow to load, so please give it chance, or maybe try refreshing the page if it’s really sluggish.
Live blog: When to take a nap during the Tour de France; Sky booed at team presentation + more
All the cycling news from this site and beyond…
Fri, Jul 06, 2018 07:47
Help us to bring you the best cycling content
If you’ve enjoyed this article, then please consider subscribing to road.cc from as little as £1.99. Our mission is to bring you all the news that’s relevant to you as a cyclist, independent reviews, impartial buying advice and more. Your subscription will help us to do more.
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.
27 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
Robert Hardy 2 minutes ago
Serious injuries as defined in statistics span from an uncomplicated fracture of a forearm bone to catastrophic multiple injuries that result in death in subsequent weeks and months. Consequently without further analysis they may be quite misleading, it may be that the statistics disguise what would otherwise have been fatal injuries at the roadside due to effective early treatment by first responders and subsequent trauma care OR that they reflect an increase in injuries at the lower edge of the severity spectrum OR neither. From the numbers alone we do not know and so are not in a good position to draw inferences about the seeming fall in deaths and rise in reported serious injuries.
yodhrin 5 minutes ago
@chrisonabike The intense resistance Network Rail seem to put up against absolutely any infrastructure project near the railways that would lead to more passengers on the railways is perpetually baffling to me.
yodhrin 11 minutes ago
@jackcycles Sorry Vincent, but your legacy will be to be remembered as a grumpy failure and pub bore, who twists facts to suit narratives and has never knowingly been correct about anything in his miserable life.
Didsbury 56 minutes ago
@mdavidford Surely we have been Norman since 1066?
Didsbury 57 minutes ago
@mdavidford Surely we have been Norman since 1066?
chrisonabike 1 hour ago
@belugabob true, but doing that and persuading most parents to drive their children to school entailed a hefty sacrifice of children - and not a few parents. (Luckily that was "back then" and we probably wouldn't tolerate it now... OTOH while "fixing things" should have much smaller casualty numbers, "during the transition" it could well increase...)
belugabob 1 hour ago
Well, accommodating the motor vehicle required "transformation of streets", so we've proved that it's possible...🙄
Circles 2 hours ago
Yet another case of planning agreements made but never fulfilled, nor checked by the LA. Developers can do what they want, it seems
HarrogateSpa 3 hours ago
Yes let's see action. The draft CWIS3 was unambitious, and I don't expect the final version to be much better. The funding for active travel is disappointing, and there is little or no political will for meaningful change. I'm in favour of making cycling to school safe by building proper cycle facilities in towns and cities for everyone - not by putting in a few metres of cycle track to a school entrance then giving up.
60kg lean keen climbing machine 3 hours ago
I personally don’t see any reason in not going straight to Byrton if you are not a Garmin or Wahoo fan, or you want a value alternative to the big two. I currently run a Bryton 420 and in 4 years of owning and using it has been fab, if I had some cash or needed to replace then I now would not hesitate to buy a Bryton again.
27 thoughts on “Live blog: When to take a nap during the Tour de France; Sky booed at team presentation + more”
That seems a bit harsh… I
That seems a bit harsh… I lose track, but haven’t we now all agreed that if there was no case to answer on Froome’s salbutamol matter, and the various governing bodies are all happy, then everything is copacetic…?
brooksby wrote:
I had to look that up.
Chateau!
davel wrote:
Are you sure you didn’t mean Gateau!
So if there’s no drug case to
So if there’s no drug case to answer for and no one in the Sky team has recently crashed/abused/tripped a popular rival, then the only thing left to blaim must be….
Brexit!
Disgusting behaviour from the
Disgusting behaviour from the alleged supporters of cycling. You could see the team were not impressed.
Pathetic. I hope Sky do
Pathetic. I hope Sky do really well in the Tour. And not just because I have a tenner on G. Each way, mind.
S_P_A_C_E_M_A_N wrote:
To win or to crash? 😉
Disgusting behaviour, such
Disgusting behaviour, such ignorant barbaric people. Team Sky can shove it in their faces by winning it.
This is what happens when the
This is what happens when the media, assisted by the UCI leaker, Hinault & others, feed the barbarism. We’ve seen it repeatedly on this website and many others. The sport is the poorer for it.
Vaughters is expressing concerns about security: https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/jul/05/team-sky-tour-de-france-rival-education-first-chris-froome-jonathan-vaughters
Thanks to all the haters for screwing things up, you fucking morons.
All this booing is pretty
All this booing is pretty poor, but no worse than being called a fucking moron for having a fact based differing opinion.
Go figure.
don simon wrote:
opinion
əˈpɪnjən/
noun
noun: opinion; plural noun: opinions
1.
a view or judgement formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge.
fact
fakt/
noun
noun: fact; plural noun: facts
a thing that is known or proved to be true.
So you can’t really have a differing opinion about something that is fact. It is fact, that’s it. No question.
Obviously you can have an opinion about the methods used to reach that fact and apply the appropriate debate skills to discuss such a subject.
Martyn_K wrote:
opinion
əˈpɪnjən/
noun
noun: opinion; plural noun: opinions
1.
a view or judgement formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge.
fact
fakt/
noun
noun: fact; plural noun: facts
a thing that is known or proved to be true.
So you can’t really have a differing opinion about something that is fact. It is fact, that’s it. No question.
Obviously you can have an opinion about the methods used to reach that fact and apply the appropriate debate skills to discuss such a subject.— don simon
Back out of the woodwork, are we?
WADA & UCI decided to drop charges as they weren’t able to do a reliable test. That is the fact. He hasn’t been proven innocent, just not guilty. You think he’s innocent based on that fact, I think that I’d be naive in thinking that the peloton is clean and that he’s had a lucky escape. If you can’t deal with that, it most certainly isn’t my problem. I will get more robust with responses hereon in.
[/quote] Back out of the
[/quote] Back out of the woodwork, are we? WADA & UCI decided to drop charges as they weren’t able to do a reliable test. That is the fact. He hasn’t been proven innocent, just not guilty. You think he’s innocent based on that fact, I think that I’d be naive in thinking that the peloton is clean and that he’s had a lucky escape. If you can’t deal with that, it most certainly isn’t my problem. I will get more robust with responses hereon in.[/quote]
Wrong.
WADA and the UCI never raised ANY charges, therefore there were no charges to drop. The FACT is that those bodies found an adverse test result that needed investigation and decided not to progress with the matter as evidence indicated that there is/ was no wrong doing. This is not my opinion as it has been detailed in all communications from the UCI & WADA.
Your blatant flaming and trolling regarding this matter is tiresome.
If you really think that he is guilty then i suggest you focus your energy on attaining a position or role within WADA or the UCI where you can officially progres your vendetta to reach an endpoint that is obviously badly needed by you. Good luck.
Martyn_K wrote:
I agree.
Jonathan Vaughters, definitely not a Sky fanboy, has a clearer view of the process than the morons. From the link I posted:
In this case, it was public, which is really unfortunate and whoever leaked it — because somebody inside the UCI leaked it — it’s just nasty, vindictive behaviour to do that,” he said. “It doesn’t actually allow the system to work in the way that it should in a case involving a restricted substance, as opposed to a banned substance.”
So before you all cry ‘foul’ and ask for beheading, bear in mind the… oh sod it I give up, you simply don’t give a shit about facts. <sigh>
And if you don’t like being called a moron try being a bit less moronic.
Martyn_K wrote:
Wrong.
WADA and the UCI never raised ANY charges, therefore there were no charges to drop. The FACT is that those bodies found an adverse test result that needed investigation and decided not to progress with the matter as evidence indicated that there is/ was no wrong doing. This is not my opinion as it has been detailed in all communications from the UCI & WADA.
Your blatant flaming and trolling regarding this matter is tiresome.
If you really think that he is guilty then i suggest you focus your energy on attaining a position or role within WADA or the UCI where you can officially progres your vendetta to reach an endpoint that is obviously badly needed by you. Good luck.
You’ll have no problem going into detail about what the evidence is then, will you? Repeating that there is evidence, isn’t evidence in itself. This moron is perfectly happy that the hard of thinking can’t stand that there is an opposing view.
Challenging a position is not rolling, so grow the fuck up. If you’re tired,you know what you can do too.
Keep on supporting Froome, I don’t fucking care. Let him race (UCIsay he can) I don’t fucking care.
I’m surprised it took so long to not raise charges after an AAF. You seem to think it was simple, 9 months says it wasn’t. Not being charged does not prove innocent.
Sad really.
Sad really.
Let’s just hope that all they
Let’s just hope that all they do is boo. If i was Froome i’d rather that than having piss thrown at me or even worse.
The best way to answer these people is to go and win the thing.
If Froome is on the podium for any stage or even at the end the meeting with the badger is going to be an interesting watch!
Or will he take his own
Or will he take his own advice and strike!
Sky should be twinned with
Sky should be twinned with Millwall FC – No one likes us, we don’t care!
In the meantime the Froome fans will be happy that he’s competing and the anti-Sky can please themselves by asking how if Froome won the Giro sans asthma nebuliser, why did he need one at last year’s tour?
The rest of us can just hope to enjoy some cracking sprint finishes, at least one successful breakaway and some beastly days in the mountains.
Froome needs to go on the
Froome needs to go on the counter attack and have a bottle of piss to squirt at ‘fans’.
Yorkshire wallet wrote:
That’s not a bad idea at all. He should definitely make sure his bidons are clearly labelled though
.
StraelGuy wrote:
“Bleurghh..!! Don’t remember having asparagus last night!”
Yorkshire wallet wrote:
With or without salbutamol?
Sad shameful behaviour. Mob
Sad shameful behaviour. Mob mentality.
Eat Gateaux wearing your
Eat Gateaux wearing your chapeaux in the chateau on the plateau.
It is just strange that all
It is just strange that all other riders previously caught with AAFs remain so silent. Don’t they deserve equal treatment, i.e. to be exonerated?
Really fascinating and
Really fascinating and illuminating words from Jonathan Vaughters talking to The Cycling Podcast about Froome, anti-doping, WADA and more:
https://thecyclingpodcast.com/podcast/a-pre-tour-de-france-ramble-part-two-episode-23
Those wishing to remain ignorant should not listen to in case they accidentally learn something.