-
Fair enough maybe @mdcc_tester can shed some light?
Seems like Froome is in quite a spot of bother. The Sky statement looked like damage limitation to me. Not sure how much good will the sponsor has left!?
GoatandTricycle-
Is it that damaging to Sky? Everyone assumes pro cyclists are all juiced up anyway don't they and any press is good press so they probably rub their hands together thinking of all the free coverage.
-
Is Froome in a spot of bother? He has a right to due process, which has been breached in the instance as someone at the UCI leaked the Adverse Analytical Finding news to Le Monde and the Guardian before Froome has had his chance to respond. As is his right under the UCI rules.
For all we know, this could’ve happened to other athletes in the past who’ve subsequently cleared their names without the press getting hold of it.
Given Froome’s behaviour over the past 3 months, I get the feeling he expects to be exonerated. Time will tell.
hippy
andyp
I really don't know anything about his case other than that snippet. He might've showed there was a chance legal doses were excreted in high levels but perhaps not as high as he tested for so they still issued a ban albeit a shorter one. They will often issue a reduced ban in cases where contamination is proved. So, basically the athlete didn't intentionally cheat but they still tested positive, ie. they were dumb not malicious. They will get 2y instead of 4 or similar.