Re:
Might not mean anything, there has to be a clause in the contract for that.
Still, QS are designing a 4-year plan, so they must know something more than we do :P
This is a tricky subject.
Cycling has a long tradition of having gentlemen riders, who had honor, courtesy for each other, and respect for the race.
So the idea to wait for the leader when something happens out of his control, is a very old one and based on this tradition.
On the other hand...
Regardless of contact, there was intention, twice.
He just bullied himself into position in a small gap, pretty normal in these sprints, but still very dangerous.
Like I said before, he definitely pulled a "Cav" but was lucky to get away with it.
If someone had crashed because of that move, I'd...
Both are at fault, and intention can't be proved on the footage alone, it's too ambiguous.
Show that footage to 100 people, some will say DQ, others will say no DQ.
On that fact alone, the DQ is far too harsh without clear proof of intention to endanger another cyclist.
I vote "no".
Re: Re:
I mean against the pure sprinters.
Kittel, Greipel, Cavendish, etc
The ones that can't climb :)
Sagan is more of a puncheur / classics specialist who also sprints pretty well.
Finally something happening in UCI.
Good measures, but still a little conservative.
We'll see how it pans out.
Also the cap at 176 riders per peloton won't allow many more teams to join in, max 22.
Re: Re:
Simply because Contador has won the Tour twice, the Giro twice, the Vuelta 3 times and when he didn't win, he finished in the podium or at least top 5 in most GTs (when he didn't crash).
His favoritism is backed up by his results.
Porte won bupkis apart from the Paris-Nice, zero GTs...