Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Back to news
news
Racing
ASO reportedly considering barring Chris Froome from this year's Tour de FranceChris Froome on Alpe d'Huez (picture copyright Anne Martin)

ASO reportedly considering barring Chris Froome from this year's Tour de France

Regulations believed to permit organisers to exclude reigning champion from race while salbutamol case is ongoing
by Simon_MacMichael
Thu, Mar 22, 2018 16:38
10

Tour de France champion Chris Froome may be barred by organisers from defending his title this year should his ongoing salbutamol case not be resolved ahead of the race starting 1 July, according to a report from Press Association Sports.

The Team Sky star, who is targeting the Giro d’Italia and Tour de France double this year, a feat last achieved 20 years ago by the late Marco Pantani, returned an adverse analytical finding for twice the permitted level of the anti-asthma drug during last year’s Vuelta, which he won.

UCI president David Lappartient is among those who have called on Froome, who has vowed to clear his name, to voluntarily suspend himself from racing until the case is concluded.

However, he is continuing to compete, as permitted under the rules of the World Anti-Doping Agency, and finished 35th overall at Tirreno-Adriatico last week.

There is no prospect of the matter being settled one way or the other before the Giro d’Italia begins in Jerusalem on 4 May, much to the dismay of organisers RCS Sport who want to avoid a repeat of the situation that arose in 2011 when Alberto Contador won the race despite his ongoing clenbuterol case and was later stripped of the title.

Press Association Sport says that while RCS Sport have no room for manoeuvre on the issue, two “senior cycling sources” have told it that ASO has more flexibility on the issue due to specific regulations of the Tour de France aimed at protecting the image of the race.

As a result, they believe that Froome, who is aiming to win the Tour de France for a record-equalling fifth time, could be excluded from the race in the event that the case is ongoing, and ASO is also said to believe that the wording of its rules would enable it to withstand any potential legal challenge from Team Sky.

Froome’s next race, and his final one before the Giro d’Italia, is the Tour of the Alps – formerly the Giro del Trentino – which begins on 16 April.

Chris Froome
Giro d'Italia 2018
Tour de France 2018
ASO
salbutamol
Simon MacMichael

Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.

Add new comment

10 comments

Avatar
SteveAustin | 6 years ago
0 likes

this is the problem with drugs in cycling: it has never been resolved to a point that someone is banned within a reasonable time. but then again we have never got to a point that a cyclist can conclusively be accused of cheating as they have the right of appeal and in the majority deny any such wrongdoing.

until we have a baseline, for suspension, then we will alwasys have these farcical situations where a cyclist was found to have drugs in their test results, and remain competing until their appeal/explanation/Methuselah has grown a beard

Avatar
maviczap | 6 years ago
3 likes

I think this is ASO's way of trying to speed the process up so it's resolved before the start of the Tour.

 

Avatar
Leviathan | 6 years ago
4 likes

I don't understand why it takes so long to decide these things. They have had months to arrange a hearing. What fresh data could they be analysing? If Froome can't provide an explanation then he should be out. They should have just set a date and be done with it. He (and Sky) flew too close the the sun and got burned. Better to play it safe and ask; will what we are doing look good in 5 years time?

Avatar
madcarew replied to Leviathan | 6 years ago
0 likes

Leviathan wrote:

I don't understand why it takes so long to decide these things. They have had months to arrange a hearing. What fresh data could they be analysing? If Froome can't provide an explanation then he should be out. They should have just set a date and be done with it. He (and Sky) flew too close the the sun and got burned. Better to play it safe and ask; will what we are doing look good in 5 years time?

I think that's the hard part. Froome has to be provided the opportunity to demonstrate (as it's a restricted substance, not a banned one) how the analytical finding could have come about. That means he has to have the opportunity to show that he could have taken the drug in a legal manner and still returned the AAF, in which case he is entitled (but not guaranteed) to get off without sanction. This means he needs to be given fair opportunity to replicate the conditions in his body that day and show that legal application of the drug could return that high level of return. That's not a simple thing to do, but others have achieved that. However, one party or the other does seem to be dragging the chain rather.

Avatar
don simon fbpe | 6 years ago
5 likes

Perhaps Sky should offer some evidence to support their position. I will, of course, reject it, and keep on rejecting it, until the thread has reached 200+ posts and everyone else is bored

Avatar
HarrogateSpa | 6 years ago
2 likes

I'd be interested to know who leaked the information about Froome's AAF, which should have remained confidential. I guess someone at the UCI, but I don't know whether it was with or without the permission of Lappartient. The bloke comes across as a right politician.

Avatar
The_Vermonter replied to HarrogateSpa | 6 years ago
2 likes

HarrogateSpa wrote:

I'd be interested to know who leaked the information about Froome's AAF, which should have remained confidential. I guess someone at the UCI, but I don't know whether it was with or without the permission of Lappartient. The bloke comes across as a right politician.

 

He courted votes to win an election to become UCI President. What else would he be but a politician? 

 

As for ASO banning Froome: Cool. I have a hard time believing a person can be two times over the legal limit of a drug by mistake. 

Avatar
KINGHORN replied to HarrogateSpa | 6 years ago
0 likes

HarrogateSpa wrote:

I'd be interested to know who leaked the information about Froome's AAF, which should have remained confidential. I guess someone at the UCI, but I don't know whether it was with or without the permission of Lappartient. The bloke comes across as a right politician.

 

Team sky thenselves along with the UCI agreed to release the information, no leaking here!

Avatar
peted76 replied to KINGHORN | 6 years ago
5 likes

KINGHORN wrote:

HarrogateSpa wrote:

I'd be interested to know who leaked the information about Froome's AAF, which should have remained confidential. I guess someone at the UCI, but I don't know whether it was with or without the permission of Lappartient. The bloke comes across as a right politician.

Team sky thenselves along with the UCI agreed to release the information, no leaking here!

That's simply not true. It was the Guardian and LeMonde newspapers who 'broke' the story.. from an anonymous leak (most likely from within the UCI).

 

Avatar
bobbinogs | 6 years ago
2 likes

Let's face it, whether you are a fan of Froome/Sky or not, the whole thing is a bloody farce and makes our sport look completely ridiculous. I sincerely hope that the UCI learn from this fiasco...but then nothing seems to have changed (process wise) since dirty bertie.

Latest Comments