Will you boycott watching the TDF?

billyhead

I love the TDF as a spectacle but if Froome participates this year I will have to give it a miss. If he is allowed to compete the sport is getting dirtier at a pro level and will lose all credibility.

Raam

No.

07Lapierre

No

godtabh

I'll watch it for what it is

ednwireland

No

Cee-Jay-Cee

No of course I won’t boycott it and to be honest I hope he’s in it.

rollingscone

I'll continue my defacto boycott of almost all racing by virtue of not being arsed about watching sport on TV

CrowdedHouse

No - I'll be watching out for Dan anyway.

rushfan

Absolutely I'll watch it. I'll also watch the Olympics when they're on, a bit of baseball when I'm in the States. All synonymous with drug use.

victor201

no will watch as per usual , it still a spectacle to enjoy

Alf Veedersane

billyhead wrote: »

I love the TDF as a spectacle but if Froome participates this year I will have to give it a miss. If he is allowed to compete the sport is getting dirtier at a pro level and will lose all credibility.

"Getting dirtier at a pro level'.

Lol.

lennymc

yes. there is no way I am racing it this year.

wpd

I will watch it and i hope Froome rides and wins it

then i hope he is stripped of vuelta/giro and tour

this will highlight the joke the uci is

dastardly00

No

Mint Sauce

I'll watch it, but the same as last year, I wont be cheering Froome or Sky.

Tigerandahalf

For the scenery and helicopter shots with the various field arts that are made up by the local people in various areas, it is worth watching. The coverage on itv4 has been very good the last couple of years with snippets of info on the regions and their history.
The cycling itself is a bit ****e.

CramCycle

I didn't watch the Giro but felt there were grounds for that. No reason to boycott the TdF. Where is it starting this year?

Djoucer

Hell no.

You accept the tour and all the ****e that goes with it. That's the point.

All the moaning about Froome will have be out in full sky kit by July rolls round.

Alp d'Huez is back this year!

Chips Lovell

Nope. If I didn’t boycott it in the EPO era, I’m hardly going to be boycotting it in the Ventolin era.

Markx

I'll watch for the scenery and the pageantry and the feeling of summer it gives me. When they were in Corsica it looked amazing.

denismc

I refused to watch "Breaking Bad", sure tis full of drugs!

Lemming

Come to the dark side; follow the UCI DH on redbull TV instead. There may or may not also be cookies *

Less drama, more excitement.




* your mileage may vary

Irish Raven

No. I don't watch the tour just for froome....Although he is by far the best GC cyclist in the world. No one even close or near his level....

RobFowl

lennymc wrote: »

yes. there is no way I am racing it this year.

You're just afraid of me kicking your arse;)

Amprodude

I will watch the Tour. Hopefully Froome doesn't win it.

Cookie_Monster

I'll certainly be watching it, sure the drugs speculation is half the fun...

1bryan

I'll be watching, if only for Carlton's great commentary and will hope our mutual hero, Froomey, inches ever closer to Lance's 7 titles.

rollingscone

RobFowl wrote: »

You're just afraid of me kicking your arse;)

Oh dear...RobFowl saw Froome running up that hill last year and got all excited/confused that he couldn't find the swim part anywhere! ;-)

greenspurs

"Tour de France organisers are planning to deny Chris Froome a place in this year’s race if his salbutamol case has not been resolved.

The president of world cycling’s governing body the UCI, David Lappartient, wants such major events to refrain from making such big decisions, and expressed hope that Froome’s case would be resolved “quickly”.

The urgency has been highlighted after two senior cycling sources said that ASO, the French company that runs the Tour, has no intention of letting a rider compete with a potential anti-doping violation hanging over them."

LCD

I was loving the Giro, watching the highlights every evening & listening to the Cycling Podcast's daily updates. Then once Froome came back into the picture I just lost interest.

Yes I will follow the tour, but if it is the annual Froome/Sky show I can see myself losing interest.

The sport has a reputation for being dirty, now a guy who is under investigation for being dirty is winning. How can cycling expect to have credibility in the eyes of the non cyclists? Either sort it out or adapt the approach of other sports & ignore it.

irishrover99

If their was anything worth boycotting, it was the first 3 stages of the Giro, and i done that but it was hard trying not too tune into see what was going on.

Doing that for 3 weeks,i think the telly would have to been thrown out the window so i wouldn't watch it and the thing is just breathing a sigh of relief that it survived the champions league final the other night without been smashed up.

ford2600

billyhead wrote: »

If he is allowed to compete the sport is getting dirtier at a pro level and will lose all credibility.

It was never the cleanest race
http://www.wbur.org/onlyagame/2017/06/30/tour-de-france-maurice-garin-peter-cossins

The doping has been there from the get go, mainly to dull the pain at first and to keep riders awake on the 400km stages.

It's genesis was to sell newspapers, now it is to sell cycling gear, holidays to Israel etc etc

It was always a spectacle and still is. It was always brutal and still is.

People cheat in amateur sports, they just have more reasons when it's professional. When it is the hardest sport the likelihood is higher again of cheating.

View it as entertainment and it is still enjoyable. It is not an event for idealist.

Froome is the current bad guy; what story doesn't need one. He might not be so unpopular if he didn't look so awkward on bike or gave a flying fcuk about the history of cycling and its stupid rules. Cycling fans can be very forgiving to stylish cheats.

Chips Lovell

billyhead wrote: »

...the sport is getting dirtier at a pro level...

I'd have to disagree with this. Twelve years ago the biggest scandal in the sport was rampant EPO use, blood transfusions, private blood banks. Now the biggest scandal is a rider's alleged overuse of the world's most commonly prescribed asthma medication.

Some perspective is needed. The sport has come a long way in the past decade.

odyssey06

As a ventolin user I will boycott it if Froome doesnt race, out of asthmatic fellowship.

terrydel

billyhead wrote: »

I love the TDF as a spectacle but if Froome participates this year I will have to give it a miss. If he is allowed to compete the sport is getting dirtier at a pro level and will lose all credibility.

It hasnt been much of a spectacle for a long time by all accounts.
Didnt watch any of it last two years but noted what was going on and it seemed no loss to miss it. I'll probably watch little if any this year, certainly wont be making any effort to see it. Froome/Sky are just the final straw in a long list of reasons as to why I just cant be arsed with it, its impossible to have any faith in what you are watching, and then you have the likes of Sky wanting to portray themselves as holier than thou, all the while gaming the system. They want to have their cake and eat it, at least in the past the cheats didnt go out of their way to try portray themselves as angels.

irishrover99

Do you's all really think that Ventolin is the only PED that is been used these days?.
For all we know, it could be a masking agent for something else that hasn't been discovered by WADA.
Only time will tell but i find it hard to believe that if Froome is doping, and i believe he is, its not only Ventolin he's using.

CramCycle

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

I'd have to disagree with this. Twelve years ago the biggest scandal in the sport was rampant EPO use, blood transfusions, private blood banks. Now the biggest scandal is a rider's alleged overuse of the world's most commonly prescribed asthma medication.

Some perspective is needed. The sport has come a long way in the past decade.

I'd disagree there, the issue of motor doping to me makes it a far less enjoyable sport to watch. While postively anti doping, I am under no illusion that any of these races are not absolutely mental in regard getting around, no matter what you are taking. Motor doping to an extent has taken that away for me for some of the higher up riders on the GC. Like most sports, I can suspend my annoyance to watch the spectacle but motor doping takes away the spectacle, it is no longer a huge effort, it is like hoping on a Honda 50 in an A4 race whenever you hit a short sharp climb. The sting is gone out of it.

I imagine the numbers are low but the regrettable thing is, that there are probably some in the top 10 over the last 5 years who have used such means.

Oddly, and with no proof or names, I think there are probably a few dopers who look at it as a line they wouldn't cross. They see doping as part of the sport, whereas using a motor takes the sport bit out completely.

terrydel

CramCycle wrote: »

I'd disagree there, the issue of motor doping to me makes it a far less enjoyable sport to watch. While postively anti doping, I am under no illusion that any of these races are not absolutely mental in regard getting around, no matter what you are taking. Motor doping to an extent has taken that away for me for some of the higher up riders on the GC. Like most sports, I can suspend my annoyance to watch the spectacle but motor doping takes away the spectacle, it is no longer a huge effort, it is like hoping on a Honda 50 in an A4 race whenever you hit a short sharp climb. The sting is gone out of it.

I imagine the numbers are low but the regrettable thing is, that there are probably some in the top 10 over the last 5 years who have used such means.

Oddly, and with no proof or names, I think there are probably a few dopers who look at it as a line they wouldn't cross. They see doping as part of the sport, whereas using a motor takes the sport bit out completely.

You genuinely think its going on at the top level? Im probably as cynical as it gets but havent seen anything to really say that motor doping is occurring. But I guess its a strong possibility.

greenspurs

terrydel wrote: »

It hasnt been much of a spectacle for a long time by all accounts.
Didnt watch any of it last two years but noted what was going on and it seemed no loss to miss it. I'll probably watch little if any this year, certainly wont be making any effort to see it. Froome/Sky are just the final straw in a long list of reasons as to why I just cant be arsed with it, its impossible to have any faith in what you are watching, and then you have the likes of Sky wanting to portray themselves as holier than thou, all the while gaming the system. They want to have their cake and eat it, at least in the past the cheats didnt go out of their way to try portray themselves as angels.

Do you watch rugby ? Soccer? Gaelic Football? American Football ? Athletics ? Tennis ? Hurling ?
Yeh, cos theres no drugs used in any of those...... :rolleyes:

neris

ill watch it but with alot more suspicion especially with froome and sky.

lissard

Chateau porn is the main reason for watching, certainly not for the cycling which has been mostly drama free for at least 7 years now. For me it's the Giro as the season highlight in terms of entertainment. Froome is pulling the piss at this stage - reminds me of Lance the year he won* the 6th TDF. Froome is only getting stronger* as he's getting older, back to back GTs are supposed to be impossible in the era of clean* cycling.

terrydel

greenspurs wrote: »

Do you watch rugby ? Soccer? Gaelic Football? American Football ? Athletics ? Tennis ? Hurling ?
Yeh, cos theres no drugs used in any of those...... :rolleyes:

Cant stand rugby, so dont watch it.
I watch soccer, occasionally AF (very rarely) No interest in the others.
We've had this debate before, but in simple terms, the weight of evidence against cycling is far and above that of soccer (the reasons as to why that is the case is a different debate). For example, in the last 20 years, perhaps 2 tdf winners have no qs to answer, the rest either have been caught bang to rights or have huge * against them. Similar for other gc's. I'd compare that to the CL winners over the last 20 years having 5 or 6 confirmed cheats on their team every year.
That simply hasnt been shown to be the case. When it is, I'll give up on that too.

Bambaata

No, no sport is clean, whether pro or amateur. If I was to boycott on basis of suspicion of doping I'd get to watch or partake in nothing

Djoucer

The irony of someone watching the champions league but complaining about cycling.

Problem is no matter what froome does, it'll be seen as evidence he's doping.

Earlier in Giro people were saying he was clearly clean as he was getting dropped.

His long stage win was hardly spectacular. People too busy comparing to Landis to actually examine what happened. Modest gains and doing most of damage on descents with a clearly cracking Yates.

greenspurs

terrydel wrote: »

Cant stand rugby, so dont watch it.
I watch soccer, occasionally AF (very rarely) No interest in the others.
the weight of evidence against cycling is far and above that of soccer (the reasons as to why that is the case is a different debate). . I'd compare that to the CL winners over the last 20 years having 5 or 6 confirmed cheats on their team every year.
That simply hasnt been shown to be the case. When it is, I'll give up on that too.

So you watch no sports really, but the only one you have zero faith in is cycling ??
And you believe soccer is clean , just because there has been no one 'caught' .... ( remember Rio's missed drug test ?? ) or the recent rumbling about Spanish teams, or the Italian teams of the 90s ?
We can all be selective as to what we want to see/believe. I just find it strange when people state that only cyclists dope..
That is quite naïve really.

greenspurs

Djoucer wrote: »

The irony of someone watching the champions league but complaining about cycling.

His long stage win was hardly spectacular. People too busy comparing to Landis to actually examine what happened. Modest gains and doing most of damage on descents with a clearly cracking Yates.

BS !!!

All this "most of the damage on the descents" is Sky media sh1te..
Show me all the time he made going down the hills !?

"Hardly spectacular" ??!?!!? he raced away from 5 riders with 80k to go, and stayed away !! Okay only 2 of them were riding hard , but he still stayed away.

Djoucer

Have a read of secret pro

https://cyclingtips.com/2018/05/the-secret-pro-an-insiders-view-on-chris-froomes-crazy-giro-attack/

terrydel

greenspurs wrote: »

So you watch no sports really, but the only one you have zero faith in is cycling ??
And you believe soccer is clean , just because there has been no one 'caught' .... ( remember Rio's missed drug test ?? ) or the recent rumbling about Spanish teams, or the Italian teams of the 90s ?
We can all be selective as to what we want to see/believe. I just find it strange when people state that only cyclists dope..
That is quite naïve really.

I watch soccer as stated, I believe it is far cleaner than cycling. Just my opinion.
Not saying its clean at all, but for me it is cleaner than cycling, and until evidence to the contrary is provided, I'll give it the benefit of the doubt.
I dont watch a lot of sport anymore because I got rid of sky sports due to cost a number of years ago, and simply dont have the time, not only because I dont trust it.
As far as I am concerned cycling has made its own bed and nothing that goes on elsewhere changes that.

greenspurs

terrydel wrote: »

I watch soccer as stated, I believe it is far cleaner than cycling. Just my opinion.
Not saying its clean at all, but for me it is cleaner than cycling, and until evidence to the contrary is provided, I'll give it the benefit of the doubt.
I dont watch a lot of sport anymore because I got rid of sky sports due to cost a number of years ago, and simply dont have the time, not only because I dont trust it.
As far as I am concerned cycling has made its own bed and nothing that goes on elsewhere changes that.

so you are still saying you don't watch cycling, but continue to dismiss it because of the cheats, because soccer players haven't been caught ?
Ignorance is bliss ?
What about athletics ? any comment on that?
I don't see the logic in condemning one sport (that you wont watch), but not others (that you don't really watch) because you will give it 'the benefit of the doubt' .....

terrydel

greenspurs wrote: »

so you are still saying you don't watch cycling, but continue to dismiss it because of the cheats, because soccer players haven't been caught ?
Ignorance is bliss ?
What about athletics ? any comment on that?
I don't see the logic in condemning one sport (that you wont watch), but not others (that you don't really watch) because you will give it 'the benefit of the doubt' .....

The evidence is there against cycling, it isnt yet against soccer, certainly not to anywhere near the same level, hence I give it the benefit of the doubt.
I gave up watching cycling because the stuff I did watch (gc's mainly) 90%+ of winners were proven cheats. When the ratio is the same in soccer I'll probably stop watching that too.
Athletics is probably just as dirty as cycling but I've no interest in it. Is criticising cycling only allowed when you also criticise every other sport?

greenspurs

terrydel wrote: »

Athletics is probably just as dirty as cycling but I've no interest in it. Is criticising cycling only allowed when you also criticise every other sport?

My point is why come on here to state " I don't watch cycling, cos its dirty",
But you watch football , and say that until cheats have been exposed you will watch it??
Cheating is occurring in all sports ( in soccer , cheating could include diving? feigning injury to get a player sent off?) and players that get injured for a long time (drug bans, rehab etc ), missing drug tests, and the use of Human growth Hormone, and blood transfusions....

It really is a case of ignorance is bliss..