- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Chris Froome on Alpe d'Huez (picture copyright Anne Martin)Updated: ASO exclude Chris Froome from the Tour de France - Team Sky "confident" of winning appeal
Tour de France organisers have excluded four-time winner and defending champion Chris Froome from this year's Tour de France, according to a report in the French newspaper Le Monde.
Team Sky will reportedly appeal to the French national Olympic Committee (CNOSF), with a hearing set for 9AM on Tuesday and a decision expected on Wednesday.
Froome returned an adverse analytical finding for twice the permitted level of the anti-asthma drug salbutamol during last September's Vuelta, which he won.
He has continued racing while the case is ongoing, which he is permitted to do since salbutamol is a specified substance rather than one that is banned outright.
Last month, he won the Giro d'Italia, making him just the third man ever to hold all three Grand Tour titles at the same time.
Under article 28.1 of the regulations of the Tour de France, and in compliance with UCI rules, ASO “expressly reserves the right to refuse the participation in – or disqualify from – the event, a team or one of its members whose presence is liable to damage the image or reputation of ASO or those of the event.”
Froome insists that he has done nothing wrong and is confident he will be able to provide a satisfactory explanation for the elevated levels of salbutamol at the Vuelta.
In a statement, a spokesperson for Team Sky said: “We are confident that Chris will be riding the Tour as we know he has done nothing wrong.”
The last time ASO took such action was in 2009, when it sought to exclude Tom Boonen from the Tour de France after the former world champion’s third out-of-competition positive test for cocaine.
While that did not constitute and anti-doping rule violation, ASO believed that the Belgian’s participation could damage the reputation of the race.
However, the day before the Tour de France was due to start in Monaco, a court in Paris ruled that Boonen could take part in the race.
That precedent is likely to be seized upon by Froome and Team Sky’s lawyers, who would also be likely to highlight how Alberto Contador was allowed to ride the 2011 Tour de France, where he was defending the title he won the previous year.
At the time, an appeal by the UCI and the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) against the Spanish national cycling federation’s decision to exonerate him in connection with his positive test for clenbuterol was still outstanding.
The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) eventually handed Contador, who finished fifth overall at the 2011 Tour de France a mainly retrospective ban and stripped him of his victory in the previous year’s edition of the race and his 2011 Giro d’Italia title.
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.
Latest Comments
- Another_MAMIL 2 sec ago
I'll add another vote for short cranks despite being a tall guy. The combination of shorter cranks and a wider stance (Q-factor) was transformative...
- KiwiMike 14 min 44 sec ago
I inspected the bike. There was enough friction to turn the wheel - but eventually the customer was in a situation where the forces involved in...
- hawkinspeter 17 min 15 sec ago
Dagnammit! I couldn't stop myself buying the Essential8 a while ago and it's a fine addition to my collection of multitools, but I didn't realise...
- bikeman01 18 min 23 sec ago
So they say. Plenty of officers to investigate hate speech on Twitter though.
- chrisonabike 22 min 49 sec ago
Overall - what you're describing is how we look at what are choices. So those who will countenance any change (but also those seeking to...
- hawkinspeter 36 min 40 sec ago
To be fair, I don't think he's advocating us going around and killing drivers. Or is he?
- ktache 45 min 42 sec ago
You are a lucky man. I've had some nightmares over the years....
- hawkinspeter 1 hour 18 min ago
"Meet me in the middle," says the unjust man. You take a step towards him, he takes a step back. "Meet me in the middle," says the unjust man.
- casati53x11 3 hours 20 min ago
Many thanks. Yes I already looked at their website and saw those. Apparently the wide ones are for direct mount or aero brakes. The ones I need are...
Add new comment
95 comments
Isn't the point that there are so many variables as to make it a particularly messy grey? That any attempts at replication (and therefore the results) won't replicate entirely the conditions in which Froomedog took it in the Vuelta?
Doesn't it follow that, if Froome hasn't been able to replicate his AAF since, the detractors (and possibly the UCI/WADA) would see that as being evidence of foul play during the Vuelta, while Froome will claim that it's only evidence of not being able to breach the limit under different circumstances?
That's how messy this is. The bulk of this debate is polarised by Froome fanboys and Sky haters, who are contributing, and will get out, the square root of fuck-all. I'm a neutral, and I think the whole thing stinks. Not necessarily because Froome has done anything wrong, but because the world tour is still fucking its image up.
Clearly the best thing for Froome to do is repeat the AAF a couple of times during the Tour and say, "Look, it happens under the conditions that I'm riding Grand Tours! I think I've proved my innocence."
This sort of rubbish that is going on is what is ruining the reputation of pro road cycling.
The UCI isn't progressive enough in making rules, many rules are ambiguous and rules are not always applied equally.
Take the rules on aerodynamic fairings for example, a fairly ambiguous rule as it says fairings can't be integrated to the frame but permits aerodynamic structures/features on the frame. The rules on modification of parts certainly isn't always followed (at least there is a large grey area which is exploited).
More frustratingly, its come to the point where TUE's (an exemption due to a medical need) now occur a stigma to the point that some riders (Tim Wellens eg) have refused to take medication on a TUE because of all the flack he'd certainly receive for using it. YET, drafting a car and taking a "sticky-bottle" are things which, even though they are against UCI rules, are just accepted as being part of cycling.
Uran and Bennett were both handed 20-second penalties in last years TdF for taking illegal feeds, however, the decision was reversed so after it was pointed out that Bardet had also done the same. Sagan was DQ'd from last years TdF for swerving and the eventual collision between him and Cavendish, yet Demare swerved violently (forcing Bouhanni to stop) but didn't receive a penalty. I'm not saying I do or don't agree with any of these individual penalties, just pointing out that they aren't applied equally.
On top of this, cycling, in general, cycling seems to be obsessed with a bygone era of cycling and cyclists but ignores the fact they were caught taking drugs - Merckx (doping), Hinault (refused drugs test - I wonder why...), Pantani (doping).
Along with this, there is a sort of snobbery/elitism that surrounds cycling (even at amateur levels), the ludicrous arguments that came out about disc brakes are a perfect example of this and the snobbery some cyclists have of those who aren't using 11 speed, blah, blah, blah.
The fans aren't much better, the stigma that surrounds asthmatics and those who suffer from hayfever isn't far from playground bullying (eg people running around waving inhalers etc). The way Chris Froome was received (all the booing) when he cycled into the stadium in Marseille last TdF as the GC leader, is another example of the damaging reputation cycling has.
And we wonder why people think of pro cycling as having a bad rap.
I don't really buy the argument that because mistakes were made in the past we have to continue this way.
How can Team Sky know for certain he has done nothing wrong? Of course they can't.
6 days before the race starts? They taking the piss?
Zero class from ASO. Hinault was doped to the eyeballs else why would he refuse a drugs test? Hypocrisy happening here. As someone else has mentioned how many other athletes have competed under the same conditions as Froome that we don't know about? Every last one should have their names stricken from the records if we want consistency and 'what's right' here.
Geraint's chance to shine,sorry crash out again.
This is an outrage! Kenya's finest cyclist MUST be allowed to race. I'm thoroughly offended and I for one will be boycotting this year's Tour by not watching it on the TV.
Aye right I will. Best Sunday ever.
I can't quite believe a cycling organisation actually has a backbone!
Rules is rules! Perhaps not.
Team Sky always play the rules to their maximum benefit. They are entitled to do so. Therefore, it seems only fair that ASO apply their rules to exclude Froome. They are entitlted to do so.
Swings and roundabouts!
Just because the French dont like being beaten in their own country. Its flipping typical of the ASO to do this. And Hinault should remember where he comes from and what was happening when he rode. Just flipping typical.
They've had months to do this and yet it happens less than a week before the start and just a few days after Bernard Hinault sticks his nose in.
What a coincidence.
Hinault's had months to stick his nose in and yet this happens less than a w... etc, etc.
Left to the very last minute to remove the possibility of the CAS appeal ruling in time to reverse the decision?
Also (literally) now Froome has been cleared they can't exclude him surely?
They can exclude who they like, the ASO run the race, not the UCI. Wouldn't stand up in court now, unless they could find some other reason (e.g. his riding style or his insistence on oval chainrings)
Cue the Sky fan boys
Internet debating in nutshell. Play the ball not the man, eh?
This slightly confuses me.
There is no way of knowing if other riders have raced the TdF whilst they have had an AAF and subsequently been cleared.
Seeing as the UCI's own rules allow Chris to race, how can he be prevented from racing? I'm not saying the rules are right (in fact, I think many of the UCI rules don't work particularly well).
It's possible that the entire nation of France can't stand to see a successful non-French team and rider beating them at their own game, so they are using this to try and take away competition from Bardet.
It's hardly like the TdF has much a reputation to protect, that was destroyed totally in the 90's and 2000's.
It's posturing by ASO, they haven't a hope in hell of making this stick, because as you say CF competing is 100% allowed in the current rules.
That's where it hinges for me... shouldn't all riders who are currently defending an AAF (but who've not been subject to a news leak) also be stopped from competing?
And yes, sadly where the TdF is concerned the 'reputation' boat has already sailed...
oops double post
Hooray! Someone stands for what is right!
Until Wednesday at least
Dupe
Dupe
Dope?
So inquisition tribunals were right also.
In reality there is at the best as much PEDs with PROVEN effect like fingers on your hands. And no (something)but(something).
And also, there is not any substance enhancing your performance in multi-stage cycling race.
There are only some believed they do something. But it is faith or deceit, not science.
Wot?
And you know what is right?
Thanks for asking burt. Yes, I do.
Pages