Doping

The biggest problem Froome has is the sheer collective hysteria around anything he does that far outweighs the reaction to any other rider. I have never really warmed to him as a character or athlete but fuck me he gets a raw ride, given the wider context of the sport where literally every hero is tainted in someway.

Reporting in Cycling News and now Cycling Tips have become regular hatchet jobs, ditching objective reporting in search of clicks. Even Philippa York has joined in. Peter Flax wrote this at Cycling Tips, which prompted this rebuttal on INRNG's comments from RonDe, one that sums up my thoughts on it:

I understand your position Larry and, to be honest, I’ve barely said a word about the accusations about Froome on these pages but, having read the sanctimonious article you posted from a website called “Cycling Tips” that, I confess, I’ve never read before, I’m going to post a single reply. Its not addressed at you Larry but your post is where I start from.

People may not like Froome. They may think he is guilty of any number of crimes. But the idea that he, not officially guilty or sanctioned of any crime by anyone as yet, should not even have the gall to pin on a number and should, voluntarily and whilst protesting his innocence, sit on his behind for months and not race is profoundly wrong. And it would be profoundly wrong whoever it is. They say Froome is ruining his sport, being “disrespectful,” whatever that means. I say “whatever that means” because I honestly don’t get it. To be frank, I put it down to the Internet Age where anyone who can pick up a keyboard with WIFI can spout off their opinion as if it speaks for millions or carries any logical weight. Should people who have not been declared guilty be put in jail immediately any accusation is made? Few would think so. Should accusation equal demonstration of guilt? Few, again, would think so. I say this regardless of if he is guilty, by the way, The point is guilty men are punished and not merely accused ones. The first is justice the second is prejudice. Much of the Internet furore is little short of mob rule by the uninformed which benefits no one. That is truly disrespectful to the sport.

I’ve watched every televised minute of this Giro. I saw few people on the side of the road expressing their obvious displeasure at Froome. Yes, we had a few cheeky lads dressed as doctors or Ventolin inhalers. It is taken as banter. Fair enough. Opinions should not be banned. Of course, we cannot know how many offered up an oath to Froome as he rode past them, often labouring, but, in the end, flying. Perhaps many did. But I also saw lots of people who seemingly didn’t care at all. I saw many who seemed to be genuinely encouraging him, especially as he rode alone on stage 19. In my mind THEY are the cycling fans and not those who become bitter, twisted husks pouring out their displeasure or worse. Again, you can think whatever you like about Froome or whoever else but, when the race is on, its a race and I say you let them race.

Perhaps the thing that gets me most here is the hypocrisy. Where were the self-righteous and self-styled guardians of the sport when the people in the spotlight were called Pantani or Virenque or Armstrong or Rasmussen or Valverde or Contador or Ricco or di Luca or Vinokourov or…. should I go on? Many people in many countries berate “dopers” until the guy in the spotlight happens to be “their guy”. “Their guy” gets a free pass, his crimes are invisible, his past ignored. This is simple hypocrisy, a foul double standard. Were there articles berating any of these I’ve named for pulling on a number? Did these riders, all from the Internet Age, receive articles from bloggers suggesting that their pulling on bib shorts was “disrespectful”? Were people writing 1,000 words to say how these riders made them sad to see racing? More is going on here than one leaked AAF with Froome, itself hardly the biggest crime in cycling but one that has received Internet comment out of all relation to its seriousness. People, as I say, are allowed their opinions but ability to express yourself is not the same as valuable and knowledgeable comment.

Froome will be judged guilty or innocent in due course. He will receive a punishment or legal absolution in due course. But the world will still turn. People will still have bike races. If cycling can carry on despite a Texan cheating on a scale incomparable to Froome’s suggested crime in a sport where there are team bosses accused of pay offs to win races in their riding careers and where, even in this race, home riders have received in race penalties for cheating on time trials then I simply fail to see how an asthma inhaler “disrespects the sport” in a way more grievous than that. Innocent until proven guilty must be the legal standard always and not least when it is abuse of something legal rather than the use of something illegal that is at issue (note the difference). I’m not try to persuade anyone that any rider here is clean. Some simply choose to see what they want anyway. My argument is simply for consistency and lack of hypocrisy. And now I’ve said my piece.

Also they x-rayed Froomes bike after Friday's stage.

Can you provide any evidence of this as I read the X-ray machine was at a MTB event in France