- This topic has 49 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 11 months ago by
brooksby.
-
CreatorTopic
-
July 2, 2018 at 9:37 am #28681
Martyn_K
Over the past few months there have been many posts regarding the Sky, Chris Froome investigation.
Many folks out there voiced very strong opinions, some verging on crazy. The witch hunt was widespread and many an internet expert felt compelled to write their misjudged views on here.
So, now that the UCI has dropped the case i thought i would open this thread for those doubters, haters and general idiots to apologise.
I’ve ordered a huge humble pie so please feel free to help yourself to a large portion!!
-
CreatorTopic
-
AuthorReplies
-
alansmurphy
700c wrote:
700c wrote:
You want to pre-judge that outcome too?Yorkshire wallet wrote:Where is ‘The Doctor’? Facing a malpractice case probably.
Eat that pie.
Think that’s a call out for a user on here called ‘The Doctor’ who is a team sky hater rather than a qualified GP…
davel
CygnusX1 wrote:davel wrote:CygnusX1 wrote:davel wrote:If I have a nibble is there a risk of an AAF?That depends on how many nibbles in a 24 hour period and your state of dehydration. I hear that humble pie is very dry and hard to swallow.
Purely medicinal: without it I get carried away with how awesome I am, and ride up mountains repeatedly and stuff. I’m confident I will be exonerated of everything except being awesome and I can replicate anything because that’s how awesome I am.
@davel (with apologies to road.cc for probable copyright infringement)

I like you. Let’s take this offline…
CygnusX1
davel wrote:CygnusX1 wrote:davel wrote:If I have a nibble is there a risk of an AAF?That depends on how many nibbles in a 24 hour period and your state of dehydration. I hear that humble pie is very dry and hard to swallow.
Purely medicinal: without it I get carried away with how awesome I am, and ride up mountains repeatedly and stuff. I’m confident I will be exonerated of everything except being awesome and I can replicate anything because that’s how awesome I am.
@davel (with apologies to road.cc for probable copyright infringement)
alansmurphy
kil0ran wrote:A deal has been done somewhere. The damage to the sport (and the salaries of the UCI) would have been too great to push for a ban.Cream or custard?
davel
CygnusX1 wrote:davel wrote:If I have a nibble is there a risk of an AAF?That depends on how many nibbles in a 24 hour period and your state of dehydration. I hear that humble pie is very dry and hard to swallow.
Purely medicinal: without it I get carried away with how awesome I am, and ride up mountains repeatedly and stuff. I’m confident I will be exonerated of everything except being awesome and I can replicate anything because that’s how awesome I am.
fukawitribe
Well, quite – but if we let
Well, quite – but if we let the truth get in the way of a good stoning, then where would we be eh ?
Simon E
700c wrote:
Is it really too much to ask for so-called adults, even if they don’t admit publicly to being wrong, to actually learn something or have their blinkered preconceptions challenged?700c wrote:Martyn good idea but more chance of hell freezing than people admitting they’re wrongI’m not asking for 4 pages of ‘sorry’, that’s not necessary. just wish people could have a grown-up discussion instead of resorting to insults and mudslinging because they don’t want to think. Far too much of a pre-school playground mentality.
And I’m not being smug. Far from it, there’s no vindication as I never had a firm opinion either way.
captain_slog wrote:I couldn’t see how he could prove his high salbutamol level wasn’t an AAF. The only defence we’ve heard so far has been his assertion that he ‘did nothing wrong’. I assume more details will emerge. But if WADA and the UCI accept his innocence I guess that’s going to have to be good enough for me. They’re the experts and have access to all the evidence and researchWe are not party to the process and have to trust those who run the system. If you don’t trust the UCI, WADA et al then we might as well give up and either (1) see it purely as a sporting spectacle and ignore the doping stories or (2) find another source of entertainment.
Meanwhile the BBC has published an interview with Richard Freeman [transcript]. The timing stinks – his book is due out this week – but he has made some strong statements. And before the knuckleddraggers start stoning him too, bear in mind that he might, just might be telling the truth.
kil0ran
captain_slog wrote:I thought that the AAF would be upheld and a short ban imposed, eg four months. This would be backdated, meaning Froome would lose his Vuelta title but keep the Giro and be allowed to race the Tour. But I also thought that the salbutamol regulations would be reviewed, meaning Froome could claim a moral victory and so everyone would be happy.I couldn’t see how he could prove his high salbutamol level wasn’t an AAF. The only defence we’ve heard so far has been his assertion that he ‘did nothing wrong’. I assume more details will emerge. But if WADA and the UCI accept his innocence I guess that’s going to have to be good enough for me. They’re the experts and have access to all the evidence and research.
I completely accept their judgement and I’m pleased he’s been cleared, just don’t quite see how. Unless there is another medical condition which they can’t tell us out for reasons of patient confidentiality it would be good if they’d provide a detailed analysis of their ruling. Given how so many WorldTour pros have asthma I’m sure they’d appreciate clarity on the number of puffs they’re allowed to take.
CygnusX1
davel wrote:If I have a nibble is there a risk of an AAF?That depends on how many nibbles in a 24 hour period and your state of dehydration. I hear that humble pie is very dry and hard to swallow.
davel
If I have a nibble is there a
If I have a nibble is there a risk of an AAF?
captain_slog
I thought that the AAF would
I thought that the AAF would be upheld and a short ban imposed, eg four months. This would be backdated, meaning Froome would lose his Vuelta title but keep the Giro and be allowed to race the Tour. But I also thought that the salbutamol regulations would be reviewed, meaning Froome could claim a moral victory and so everyone would be happy.
I couldn’t see how he could prove his high salbutamol level wasn’t an AAF. The only defence we’ve heard so far has been his assertion that he ‘did nothing wrong’. I assume more details will emerge. But if WADA and the UCI accept his innocence I guess that’s going to have to be good enough for me. They’re the experts and have access to all the evidence and research.
PRSboy
Haters gonna hate.
Haters gonna hate.
They’ll never admit they were wrong.
joeegg
I doubt there’ll be many
I doubt there’ll be many apologies on here as the haters will still hate. I just hope that the fantastic spectacle of the TdF is not ruined by some road side idiots.
700c
Yorkshire wallet wrote:
Yorkshire wallet wrote:Where is ‘The Doctor’? Facing a malpractice case probably.
Eat that pie.
You want to pre-judge that outcome too?
700c
Martyn good idea but more
Martyn good idea but more chance of hell freezing than people admitting they’re wrong -
AuthorReplies
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.