Ming the Merciless
There is no mercy
- Location
- Inside my skull
Sky are currently trawling hospitals looking for their next grand tour winner.
It’s weed not blow.I agree but the same points could have been made by anyone. It just felt like Floyd wanted a bit of publicity for his blow farm. Maybe cycling's made me cynical.
I don't remember that book. IIRC "It's not about the bike" protested much but proved little and even some of that turned out to be lies.
Irony - it’s good for the blood and it doesn’t show up in a urine test.It's a good job you spotted the irony before you posted that.
I've no idea on the proof required, it seems like Sky are clutching at straws now. How sickly are these cyclists? Its amazing they manage to leave the house.
Does it? Isn't overoptimisation of a nebuliser a possibility?I find it hard to believe that it’s down to over zealous use of a pump type inhaler, due to the amounts in question, so that just leaves tablet or injection forms.
I note that the date in the URL is December 2017, after Froome's adverse analytical finding. I didn't find the previous version on the WADA site. I wonder if that's changed recently?I think use of nebuliser requires a TUE. So he'd be in more trouble if that were the case.
Or could it be that just the dose delivered and not the nebuliser itself is what would require the TUE ref:
Nebulizers are by definition inhalation devices and thus not prohibited as a method. However, the inhalation of salbutamol in doses recommended by the manufacturer is most likely to result in urinary levels of salbutamol exceeding the urinary threshold of 1,000 ng/ml and thus, the use of salbutamol with a nebulizer requires a TUE.
I'd really hope that they keep his old inhalers at least going back a few weeks so when told on 20th or whatever it was, they still had the one from the 7th... but given what we've heard about Sky's medical record-keeping, there's probably not a chance. As I understand it, the burden of proof here is now on Froome, so even if it's the lower "balance of probabilities" standard (aka more likely than not) often used in civil courts, if they can't robustly produce the tampered inhaler or a reasonably-convincing stack of other suitably-damaged old inhalers, I wouldn't expect that defence to avoid a ban.How about a good old conspiracy theory ...? For example, that some evil third party tampered with the inhaler or the urine samples!
The 'They can't beat me on the bike so they nobbled me!' defence.
Citizen suggests an element of residency.Give it time. He'll be "Kenyan cyclist Chris Froome" soon enough if things don't go too well. The same way Andy Murray seems to swing between being Scottish and British depending on whether he's winning.
Edit: Being serious for a minute (which was never my intention) he became a British citizen in 2008 and started riding on a British licence in 2010.
I watched it again, still interesting.They repeated the programme last night.
A good watch, IMO
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b09glhsh/britains-cycling-superheroes-the-price-of-success