|
TdF'13 Stage 10: Saint-Gildas-des-Bois to Saint-Malo (July 9)
|
| baseballlover312 |
Posted on 09-07-2013 17:10
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 16429
Joined: 27-07-2011
PCM$: 10438.70
|
admirschleck wrote:
baseballlover312 wrote:
Spilak23 wrote:
Veelers moved slightly to the left, Cav moved slightly to the right. They hit each other and Veelers crashed because he was easing up after doing his work. No need to throw Cav out
You obviously weren't watching.
bblover is right here. Cav should be thrown out! Veelers was going on straight line (repeat video multiple times to see that,please!) and Cav, for some unknown reason (not saying that he wanted to do that) gone left and cleaned up him from road.
Clean as Froome's win this year.
Thank you.
RIP Exxon Duke, David Veilleux, Double Feature, and Monster Energy |
| |
|
|
| Pellizotti2 |
Posted on 09-07-2013 17:11
|
World Champion
Posts: 10121
Joined: 01-05-2010
PCM$: 200.00
|
Still looks rather intentional to me. He even bumps Veelers with his elbow. If that is in fact the case, it's a clear DQ to me.
I could of course be mistaken. Relegation should be enough as long as he apologizes.
|
| |
|
|
| Mwuhi |
Posted on 09-07-2013 17:11
|
Stagiare
Posts: 179
Joined: 02-06-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
Ah, I see, Veelers slipped away a bit, on the white lines. Unlucky to the wrong side. And Cav was probably going to just pass him, if Veelers didn't slipped away.
Still dangerous action as he could have hit the frontwheel of Veelers too. |
| |
|
|
| Kirchen_75 |
Posted on 09-07-2013 17:11
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7702
Joined: 24-07-2009
PCM$: 200.00
|
This:  |
| |
|
|
| alexkr00 |
Posted on 09-07-2013 17:12
|
World Champion
Posts: 13915
Joined: 05-08-2008
PCM$: 300.00
|
baseballlover312 wrote:
Spilak23 wrote:
Veelers moved slightly to the left, Cav moved slightly to the right. They hit each other and Veelers crashed because he was easing up after doing his work. No need to throw Cav out
You obviously weren't watching.
Come on. Someone has to be with me. You don't take a guy out and get away with it. Cycling isn't a contact sport!
Spilak is right. If Veelers wouldn't have been slowing down, he wouldn't have crashed
Like, I said "shoulder to shoulder" are a normal thing in sprints
|
| |
|
|
| baseballlover312 |
Posted on 09-07-2013 17:12
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 16429
Joined: 27-07-2011
PCM$: 10438.70
|
WQell, maybe he shouldn't be thrown out, but a dq of the results and a fine should be a formality.
RIP Exxon Duke, David Veilleux, Double Feature, and Monster Energy |
| |
|
|
| ianrussell |
Posted on 09-07-2013 17:12
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3440
Joined: 09-10-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
My bets on a demotion but never say never with the TdF jury! Also filing a complaint, appealing or anything remotely democratic doesn't make a jot of difference it's the TdF and a total dictatorship - they decide (for right or wrong) end of... |
| |
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 25-11-2024 13:46
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| Wilier |
Posted on 09-07-2013 17:12
|
Grand Tour Specialist
Posts: 5405
Joined: 28-04-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
Kirchen_75 wrote:
This:
Lol Cav didn't kept his line at all. |
| |
|
|
| Spilak23 |
Posted on 09-07-2013 17:12
|
Team Leader
Posts: 7357
Joined: 22-08-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
Pellizotti2 wrote:
Still looks rather intentional to me. He even bumps Veelers with his elbow. If that is in fact the case, it's a clear DQ to me.
I could of course be mistaken. Relegation should be enough as long as he apologizes.
Who on earth would Cav have the intention to take out Veelers?
|
| |
|
|
| baseballlover312 |
Posted on 09-07-2013 17:13
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 16429
Joined: 27-07-2011
PCM$: 10438.70
|
alexkr00 wrote:
baseballlover312 wrote:
Spilak23 wrote:
Veelers moved slightly to the left, Cav moved slightly to the right. They hit each other and Veelers crashed because he was easing up after doing his work. No need to throw Cav out
You obviously weren't watching.
Come on. Someone has to be with me. You don't take a guy out and get away with it. Cycling isn't a contact sport!
Spilak is right. If Veelers wouldn't have been slowing down, he wouldn't have crashed
Like, I said "shoulder to shoulder" are a normal thing in sprints
That doesn't mean winging into the guy with your elbow.
RIP Exxon Duke, David Veilleux, Double Feature, and Monster Energy |
| |
|
|
| Spilak23 |
Posted on 09-07-2013 17:14
|
Team Leader
Posts: 7357
Joined: 22-08-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
alexkr00 wrote:
baseballlover312 wrote:
Spilak23 wrote:
Veelers moved slightly to the left, Cav moved slightly to the right. They hit each other and Veelers crashed because he was easing up after doing his work. No need to throw Cav out
You obviously weren't watching.
Come on. Someone has to be with me. You don't take a guy out and get away with it. Cycling isn't a contact sport!
Spilak is right. If Veelers wouldn't have been slowing down, he wouldn't have crashed
Like, I said "shoulder to shoulder" are a normal thing in sprints
McEwen did it more than once 
|
| |
|
|
| wackojackohighcliffe |
Posted on 09-07-2013 17:14
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7681
Joined: 19-02-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
Wilier wrote:
Kirchen_75 wrote:
This:
Lol Cav didn't kept his line at all.
Yeah, they both failed to keep their line, that's a no-brainer. The question is of intention. |
| |
|
|
| doddy13 |
Posted on 09-07-2013 17:14
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7891
Joined: 04-03-2007
PCM$: 200.00
|
My opinion is that it was clearly Cavendish's fault.
A DQ would be a over reaction.
A relegation and fine would be enough, the only way a DQ would be merited is if Cavendish didn't make the move and apologize for what he did.
There's no point slapping a schleck - Sean Kelly on "Who needs a slap"
|
| |
|
|
| baseballlover312 |
Posted on 09-07-2013 17:14
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 16429
Joined: 27-07-2011
PCM$: 10438.70
|
Spilak23 wrote:
Pellizotti2 wrote:
Still looks rather intentional to me. He even bumps Veelers with his elbow. If that is in fact the case, it's a clear DQ to me.
I could of course be mistaken. Relegation should be enough as long as he apologizes.
Who on earth would Cav have the intention to take out Veelers?
IDK. Because he was mad about being too far from the front to win and could?
RIP Exxon Duke, David Veilleux, Double Feature, and Monster Energy |
| |
|
|
| Spilak23 |
Posted on 09-07-2013 17:15
|
Team Leader
Posts: 7357
Joined: 22-08-2011
PCM$: 200.00
|
baseballlover312 wrote:
Spilak23 wrote:
Pellizotti2 wrote:
Still looks rather intentional to me. He even bumps Veelers with his elbow. If that is in fact the case, it's a clear DQ to me.
I could of course be mistaken. Relegation should be enough as long as he apologizes.
Who on earth would Cav have the intention to take out Veelers?
IDK. Because he was mad about being too far from the front to win and could?
There were still 200 metres left when it happened. He hadn't lost yet. He was aiming for the win, not thinking about taking Veelers out..
Edited by Spilak23 on 09-07-2013 17:15
|
| |
|
|
| wackojackohighcliffe |
Posted on 09-07-2013 17:15
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7681
Joined: 19-02-2008
PCM$: 200.00
|
baseballlover312 wrote:
Spilak23 wrote:
Pellizotti2 wrote:
Still looks rather intentional to me. He even bumps Veelers with his elbow. If that is in fact the case, it's a clear DQ to me.
I could of course be mistaken. Relegation should be enough as long as he apologizes.
Who on earth would Cav have the intention to take out Veelers?
IDK. Because he was mad about being too far from the front to win and could?
Bullshit. If it was, it's because Veelers moved to block him, he's not that petty. |
| |
|
|
| alexkr00 |
Posted on 09-07-2013 17:15
|
World Champion
Posts: 13915
Joined: 05-08-2008
PCM$: 300.00
|
baseballlover312 wrote:
alexkr00 wrote:
baseballlover312 wrote:
Spilak23 wrote:
Veelers moved slightly to the left, Cav moved slightly to the right. They hit each other and Veelers crashed because he was easing up after doing his work. No need to throw Cav out
You obviously weren't watching.
Come on. Someone has to be with me. You don't take a guy out and get away with it. Cycling isn't a contact sport!
Spilak is right. If Veelers wouldn't have been slowing down, he wouldn't have crashed
Like, I said "shoulder to shoulder" are a normal thing in sprints
That doesn't mean winging into the guy with your elbow.
Again. If Veelers would have also been sprinting we would have seen the same picture as above. But, he looked behind (wtf?!) saw it was Cav that is behind him and not Kittel so he decided to slow down
|
| |
|
|
| wogsrus |
Posted on 09-07-2013 17:16
|
Protected Rider
Posts: 1200
Joined: 12-01-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
It doesn't matter if Veelers slows down, it happens in every single sprint. Making that as an excuse is utterly pathetic. Don't think Cav meant it, he wanted to grab Kittel's back wheel and cut the move around Veelers to fine. Relegation from stage at most. |
| |
|
|
| baseballlover312 |
Posted on 09-07-2013 17:17
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 16429
Joined: 27-07-2011
PCM$: 10438.70
|
Spilak23 wrote:
baseballlover312 wrote:
Spilak23 wrote:
Pellizotti2 wrote:
Still looks rather intentional to me. He even bumps Veelers with his elbow. If that is in fact the case, it's a clear DQ to me.
I could of course be mistaken. Relegation should be enough as long as he apologizes.
Who on earth would Cav have the intention to take out Veelers?
IDK. Because he was mad about being too far from the front to win and could?
There were still 200 metres left when it happened. He hadn't lost yet. He was aiming for the win, not thinking about taking Veelers out..
He was way outside where he wanted to be.
RIP Exxon Duke, David Veilleux, Double Feature, and Monster Energy |
| |
|
|
| jph27 |
Posted on 09-07-2013 17:18
|
Team Leader
Posts: 7339
Joined: 20-03-2010
PCM$: 900.00
|
Why would Cav hit him intentionally? It slowed him down and probably cost him a shot at the win - although Kittel was flying. Veelers brought it upon himself, and is far more deserving of a DQ. And before all the Germans come winging in, that was nowhere near Greipel causing the stage 1 crash, which went unpunished.
Rant over. Tea and biscuits anyone?  |
| |
|
