|
Tour de France 2016 :..: Stage 12: Montpellier - Chalet Reynard
|
| weirdskyfan64 |
Posted on 15-07-2016 08:31
|
Protected Rider
Posts: 1387
Joined: 15-03-2014
PCM$: 200.00
|
The reason the time was neutralised is because ASO knew they had stuffed up in their organisation of the stage.
If you were working in a shop, and knocked over and broke a customer's vase, would you tell them they'd have to buy it again?
Disclaimer- Most of my posts are me thinking aloud. And most of what I think is rubbish.
Winner of a FIFA Prediction Fair Play Award (a phrase becoming increasingly ironic)
"... Because he (me) has a sound tactical mind in general..." jandal7, at 9:30 am GMT on 12th May 2016
|
| |
|
|
| TheManxMissile |
Posted on 15-07-2016 08:37
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 18187
Joined: 12-05-2012
PCM$: 0.00
|
Note: This is not a direct response to Spilak, he just provided the qutable section
Spilak23 wrote:
[quote]Willfull deviation from the course, attempt to be placed without having covered the entire course by bycicle, resuming the race after having received a lift in a vehicle or on a motorbike.
I'd like to see his rule applied consistantly, so every time there's a road blocking incident and a rider has to take a step forwards on foot they are dq'd from that race. Note how it makes no mention of an exception for carrying or pushing the bike, if you are not peddaling you are outside of the rules.
Obviously the rule is designed to combat purposfeul shortcutting or other such tactics like train rides (which we know did used to happen).
____________________
The whole situation is a mess. As usual the UCI rules are open enough to allow them to react to such a mess and try and find a reasonable solution. I'd much rather have this openness in the rules than strict and rigid ones. Purely because cycling is so open to random events, be it weather or fans or nature or whatever. Anything can happen out on the road that is far beyond the control of the UCI/ASO or the riders.
I think a lot of the contention comes back to an always present disagreement between fans. Old Cycling vs New Cycling. Old being you deal with whatever happens and New being the more structured and protected. And guess what, there's not going to be a right answer to that, or to what happened yesterday.
|
| |
|
|
| ringo182 |
Posted on 15-07-2016 08:40
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3472
Joined: 03-01-2008
PCM$: 1348.00
|
I think a lot of the contention comes back to an always present disagreement between fans. Old Cycling vs New Cycling. Old being you deal with whatever happens and New being the more structured and protected. And guess what, there's not going to be a right answer to that, or to what happened yesterday.
The correct answer is what happened  |
| |
|
|
| Arberg27 |
Posted on 15-07-2016 08:43
|
Protected Rider
Posts: 1070
Joined: 21-10-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Amazing how Froome attacking, Quintana simply can't be with  |
| |
|
|
| AbhishekLFC |
Posted on 15-07-2016 09:12
|
Directeur Sportif
Posts: 11677
Joined: 27-07-2015
PCM$: 1861.50
|
When does the stage start today? I've had enough of this. Please get them back on the road! And try not to mess up again UCI/ASO.
I'm guessing no one's making a thread for stage 13 then 
Edit: Never mind, I see they've started
|
| |
|
|
| Strydz |
Posted on 15-07-2016 09:29
|
Team Leader
Posts: 5894
Joined: 02-08-2011
PCM$: 1625.00
|
What I find amazing is why we don't already have a rule for this type of incident, we've had so many incidents with involving motos/cars colliding with riders and yet no set rules to deal with what to do, how was this type of incident not foreseen?
Hells 500 Crew and 6 x Everester
Don Rd Launching Place
Melbourne Hill Rd Warrandyte
Colby Drive Belgrave South
William Rd The Patch
David Hill Rd Monbulk
Lakeside Drive Emerald
https://www.everesting.cc/hall-of-fame/ |
| |
|
|
| Spilak23 |
Posted on 15-07-2016 10:27
|
Team Leader
Posts: 7357
Joined: 22-08-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
https://twitter.com/assekevin/status/...wsrc%5Etfw
Both should be sent home 
|
| |
|
|
| jaxika |
Posted on 15-07-2016 10:32
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3148
Joined: 16-07-2008
PCM$: 9300.00
|
Wow. Then Movistar cant say anything. And even he was given 7 seconds. |
| |
|
|
| dev4ever |
Posted on 15-07-2016 11:15
|
Small Tour Specialist
Posts: 2282
Joined: 13-03-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
I was wondering why Quintana and Valverde were smiling so much they crossed the line. What a circus 
|
| |
|
|
| Forever the Best |
Posted on 15-07-2016 11:31
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3803
Joined: 27-06-2014
PCM$: 400.00
|
https://twitter.com/assekevin/status/...wsrc%5Etfw
Quintana should be disqualified.If Nibali was disqualified in Vuelta then so should Quintana! |
| |
|
|
| Arberg27 |
Posted on 15-07-2016 12:15
|
Protected Rider
Posts: 1070
Joined: 21-10-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
Because of all the chaos it's ok, he can see Porte and are afraid that the same thing happens with him. Would also be boring if he not was with. |
| |
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 24-11-2024 22:30
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| ringo182 |
Posted on 15-07-2016 12:18
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3472
Joined: 03-01-2008
PCM$: 1348.00
|
Arberg27 wrote:
Because of all the chaos it's ok, he can see Porte and are afraid that the same thing happens with him. Would also be boring if he not was with.
My computers at work won't play the twitter video. What is Quintana doing? |
| |
|
|
| dev4ever |
Posted on 15-07-2016 12:24
|
Small Tour Specialist
Posts: 2282
Joined: 13-03-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
ringo182 wrote:
Arberg27 wrote:
Because of all the chaos it's ok, he can see Porte and are afraid that the same thing happens with him. Would also be boring if he not was with.
My computers at work won't play the twitter video. What is Quintana doing?
Trying to get through the chaos unharmed, by grabbing onto a moto.
|
| |
|
|
| Alakagom |
Posted on 15-07-2016 12:39
|
World Champion
Posts: 10891
Joined: 19-11-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
I think this is non-issue personally, but if Froome did that the haters would be full in force
|
| |
|
|
| ringo182 |
Posted on 15-07-2016 12:43
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3472
Joined: 03-01-2008
PCM$: 1348.00
|
Well there have been about 20 pages of Froome hating in this thread alone because he got knocked off his bike by a motorbike. I think that proves the point perfectly |
| |
|
|
| Virenque |
Posted on 15-07-2016 12:47
|
Junior Rider
Posts: 31
Joined: 19-03-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
I think it's fair to give Froome and Porte some kind of compensation for what happended. The problem is that the next group is also slown down by the motorbikes and spectactors, and they get no time back. The pictures show Valverde coming back to the Tejay-Aru-Quintana group in a way faster pace than that group.
The issue for me is not Froome-Porte getting some time back, it's the next group not getting any.
In my opinion there's only two ways to deal with what happend yesterday; doing nothing at all or neutralising all time gaps on the stage. |
| |
|
|
| Feraess |
Posted on 15-07-2016 12:50
|
Amateur
Posts: 11
Joined: 10-04-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
Strydz wrote:
What I find amazing is why we don't already have a rule for this type of incident, we've had so many incidents with involving motos/cars colliding with riders and yet no set rules to deal with what to do, how was this type of incident not foreseen?
Of course it was always going to happen, but they can't openly admit that they can't protect riders (which would be the case if they made official rules for it). They have to be seen to be dealng with this problem at source (i.e. protecting the riders better), rather than just accept that fans are regularly going to knock riders off their bikes.
I happen to think that the relaxed and almost informal nature of road cycling regulations is one of the best parts of the sport. It's far better to have people looking at whether the riders keep within the spirit of the sport, rather than the letter of the law. If you spell everything out in minute detail then everyone becomes a rules lawyer. Whereas now we can just say the organisers screwed up but did their best to ensure that there was no effect on the race overall, and we can move on. |
| |
|
|
| Kritzo |
Posted on 15-07-2016 12:52
|
Domestique
Posts: 624
Joined: 12-10-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
Strydz wrote:
What did this decision do for rider safety? Not attacking you at all, it's a genuine question as to the reasoning behind that statement
If the time would stand then fans would know that they directly can affect the race. By doing this ASO signals that no such thing as sabotage will be "rewarded".
Proud Member of the Leeds United Army!
RAFAL MAJKA |
| |
|
|
| Feraess |
Posted on 15-07-2016 12:57
|
Amateur
Posts: 11
Joined: 10-04-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
Virenque wrote:
I think it's fair to give Froome and Porte some kind of compensation for what happended. The problem is that the next group is also slown down by the motorbikes and spectactors, and they get no time back. The pictures show Valverde coming back to the Tejay-Aru-Quintana group in a way faster pace than that group.
The issue for me is not Froome-Porte getting some time back, it's the next group not getting any.
In my opinion there's only two ways to deal with what happend yesterday; doing nothing at all or neutralising all time gaps on the stage.
Actually, everyone behind the Froome group has already been given compensation because Froome's group were given Mollema's time, which included the delay for the crash. The only remaining injustice is in allowing riders to rejoin groups they had previously been dropped from, but there's no way of determining precisely what effect that had. |
| |
|
|
| Stromeon |
Posted on 15-07-2016 13:04
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3507
Joined: 06-10-2012
PCM$: 200.00
|
ringo182 wrote:
Well there have been about 20 pages of Froome hating in this thread alone because he got knocked off his bike by a motorbike. I think that proves the point perfectly
I think, having read through this thread, that your assertion is incorrect: the vast majority of hate in this thread is directed firstly towards the ASO, for implementing insufficient safety measures, secondly towards the UCI, for an extremely dubious time gap readjustment/neutralisation. Froome has benefited more than most from the time gap fiasco and there appears to be a certain two-way link there (see Mollema's tweet for the insinuation of something along those lines), and his decision to start running up the mountain without his bike is somewhat questionable: although I understand the panic of the moment, the Tour de France is a bicycle race, not a running race; surely trying to contravene this principle is against the spirit of the rules, if not the rules themselves? Thus Froome is logically perceived as doing more wrong than the other riders, even if the fault of the chaos lies with the ASO, and the fault of the resultant chaos from the initial chaos lies with the UCI, if that makes sense
|
| |
|
![imgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpg](https://imgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpg)
