Wada’s statement does not kill questions around Chris Froome

Inconsistencies remain over defending Tour de France champion who is chasing history

Team Sky rider Chris Froome before the start of Thursday’s stage in the Tour de France. Photo: Stephane Mahe/Reuters

Team Sky rider Chris Froome before the start of Thursday’s stage in the Tour de France. Photo: Stephane Mahe/Reuters

a
 

Chris Froome and Team Sky will be hoping that the lengthy statement published last night by the World Anti-Doping Agency, clarifying the circumstances around the decision to drop his salbutamol case, finally defuses the tense and fractious atmosphere around the defending Tour de France champion.

Sky’s team principal, Dave Brailsford, has been pressuring both Wada and the UCI president, David Lappartient, to explain their decision more fully as the atmosphere of hostility from French fans towards Froome continues.

Reacting to the statement at the stage start in Brest on Thursday morning, Froome said: “I’m happy that they have released more data and as I’ve said from the beginning I’m happy for them to do that.”

Yet inconsistencies remain, which will concern those who have both the time – and energy – to trawl through the latest in a long line of statements from the UCI, Wada, and Froome’s team.

Froome and Belgium’s Jasper De Buyst get back on the road after crashing during the first stage. Jeff Pachoud/AP
Froome and Belgium’s Jasper De Buyst get back on the road after crashing during the first stage. Jeff Pachoud/AP

Most striking is the Wada reliance on the UCI’s decision to waive a pharmacokinetic study, attempting to recreate the conditions surrounding Froome’s sample from last year’s Vuelta a España, which was not even considered worth mentioning in the UCI’s original statement issued on July 2nd that cleared Froome.

In contrast, Diego Ulissi of Italy was subjected to a nine-month ban after his pharmacokinetic study, following a similar adverse analytical finding on stage 11 of the 2014 Giro d’Italia, failed to convince the UCI.

“I can’t speak for Ulissi but I know in my case it stopped at the explanation phase,” Froome said. “There are two phases: explanation phase and than after that, if that’s not sufficient, it goes to the pharmaceutical study. Mine stopped before it even got to that phase.”

Wada stated that the UCI accepted that in Froome’s case a “pharmacokinetic study would not have provided reliable evidence.”

The statement added that Wada took into account Froome’s physical condition, “which included an illness, exacerbated asthmatic symptoms, dose escalation over a short period of time, dehydration” and added that like Ulissi, Froome was “midway through a multi-day road cycling race.”

But Froome was critical of the possible inequality of treatment of athletes according to financial status.

“If an athlete is given a guilty sentence for his lack of funds and support then I think that’s an extremely dire situation for sport in general,” he said. “It’s not for me to say if there should be some kind of fighting fund but it would definitely help people in that position.”

The Wada statement – published 20 minutes before England kicked off against Croatia in the World Cup semi-final – firmly puts responsibility for the outcome of Froome’s case at the UCI’s door, saying that “from start to finish” the UCI was “solely and exclusively in charge of the procedure and dealt with all procedural aspects of the case.”

Dave Brailsford speaks to the media before the start of stage two. Photo: Ian Parker/PA Wire
Dave Brailsford speaks to the media before the start of stage two. Photo: Ian Parker/PA Wire

As stated by the UCI, Wada asserted that cycling’s world governing body had reached “the right and fair outcome on this very complex case”.

According to the statement, the combination of Froome’s “within-subject variability for salbutamol excretion, the sudden and significant increase in salbutamol dosage prior to the doping control, and the number of consecutive doping controls meant that the analytical result could not be considered inconsistent with the ingestion of a permissible dose of inhaled salbutamol.

“In the Froome case, the test was applied the same as for any other athlete by looking at the unique physiological and circumstantial details that could be clearly determined. Froome was able to show the UCI Tribunal how it was possible that he took a permitted dose of salbutamol.”

According to Wada, between 2013-17, of the 41 completed cases that involved salbutamol as the only substance, 21 out of 41 resulted in suspensions. Yet only four of the 57 completed cases had been within road cycling. – Guardian service

a
The Irish Times Logo
Commenting on The Irish Times has changed. To comment you must now be an Irish Times subscriber.
SUBSCRIBE
GO BACK
Error Image
The account details entered are not currently associated with an Irish Times subscription. Please subscribe to sign in to comment.
Comment Sign In

Forgot password?
The Irish Times Logo
Thank you
You should receive instructions for resetting your password. When you have reset your password, you can Sign In.
The Irish Times Logo
Please choose a screen name. This name will appear beside any comments you post. Your screen name should follow the standards set out in our community standards.
Screen Name Selection

Hello

Please choose a screen name. This name will appear beside any comments you post. Your screen name should follow the standards set out in our community standards.

The Irish Times Logo
Commenting on The Irish Times has changed. To comment you must now be an Irish Times subscriber.
SUBSCRIBE
Forgot Password
Please enter your email address so we can send you a link to reset your password.

Sign In

Your Comments
We reserve the right to remove any content at any time from this Community, including without limitation if it violates the Community Standards. We ask that you report content that you in good faith believe violates the above rules by clicking the Flag link next to the offending comment or by filling out this form. New comments are only accepted for 3 days from the date of publication.