AUbicycles wrote:In the protour there are traditions which are followed as rules such as the last stage of the Tour de France where is it generally accepted that the GC lead is not challenged. When there are mechanicals, it is considered bad form for another rider (Contador) to attack and there are other situations where riders are put in their place although they are acting within the general rules. It is considered 'good form' by most competitors to follow these traditions.
These are matters of professional etiquette, not rules. Doping is a matter of rules, as much as we may wish it, etiquette doesn't really come into play.
AUbicycles wrote:The rules allow for a process but the dispute is not whether the rider failed the doping tests - but whether the discrepancy amounts to doping.
That's contradictory. If the discrepancy puts them under the limit for a specified substance, or the test is invalid for process/control reasons, then it wasn't doping. So yes, the dispute *is* about whether it was doping.
The chances of overturning are slim but the WADA procedures, as imperfect as they may be, permits such due process. Perfect process isn't really possible.
AUbicycles wrote:In a nutshell, I am discontent with the rules and it affects my joy and support of professional cycling - and it pivots around the participation of the single rider who has a very real chance of a podium position but with unresolved doping failure. If Froome withdraws, this would be a solution for me and many others although the rules allow him to compete and the repercussions are a continuing 'doping cloud' over cycling, potential failed races (where the podium riders are DQ, juniors and club riders and other aspiring riders face a increased challenges gaining sponsorship and support as the sport is tarnished.
We all have varying levels of discontent with the impact doping has on the sport. It's completely understandable to feel this way.
It's always going to be the case when we have a problem such as doping where the negative can't even be proven, i.e. proof a rider has not doped / does not dope is not possible to achieve. All that we can say is whether a rider has or has not received a doping sanction.
IOW while their doping status under the rules is binary, there is an "analogue" probability of doping associated with every rider ranging from zero to 100%. How we personally respond to that uncertainty will be variable.