The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
So given that with that size of gap it is inappropriate to have cars or motorbikes between the breakaway and the peloton, and given that some drivers are that arrogant/oblivious, is there anything the organisers could have done to prevent it? Whether it was in a 2.1 race or the Tour de France?So there was an agreement made before the start between organizers and riders that there would be more moto's before the groups to make sure cars were stopped in advance (which usually happend with rolling road closures). Then a few kilometers into the race the break was forming. The break was not even 20 seconds ahead when a car came out of his driveway in between break and peloton. Apparently it was riding in the same direction as the riders. Peloton stopped (Ineos and Red Bull first) and immediately started to protest. 3 riders were assigned as representatives. De Bondt, Lazkano and Thomas. The first 2 voted to stop the race, Thomas wanted to restart. Apparently the jury didn't listen to that vote and they still decided to restart, which made a lot of riders mad.
There's some rumors that UCI points won't count for this race, but I haven't seen any official confirmation. If that's the case, there's just no point in continuing anyways, unless you're a contiteam who wants some TV time.
So given that with that size of gap it is inappropriate to have cars or motorbikes between the breakaway and the peloton, and given that some drivers are that arrogant/oblivious, is there anything the organisers could have done to prevent it? Whether it was in a 2.1 race or the Tour de France?
Unless they can cite the governing rule-set of the sport where it mandates a simple majority of representatives of the riders with a veto on whether a race is allowed to continue for the willing participants, I don't see any reason why anyone should listen to them.3 riders were assigned as representatives. De Bondt, Lazkano and Thomas. The first 2 voted to stop the race, Thomas wanted to restart. Apparently the jury didn't listen to that vote and they still decided to restart, which made a lot of riders mad.
Unless they can cite the governing rule-set of the sport where it mandates a simple majority of representatives of the riders with a veto on whether a race is allowed to continue for the willing participants, I don't see any reason why anyone should listen to them.
cool another race ruined by spoiled brats
Trying (against the rule-set in force) to coordinate as a mob to destroy the opportunity for others to race. "Spoiled brats" is too kind."Spoiled brats" for not wanting to get hit by cars.
Trying (against the rule-set in force) to coordinate as a mob to destroy the opportunity for others to race. "Spoiled brats" is too kind.
So what? ~"[pick your terrorist attack of choice] wouldn't have needed to happen if not for [motivation for the terrorists]".They wouldn't even have needed to protest if it wasn't for the safety issues.
"Spoiled brats" for not wanting to get hit by cars.
nobody got hit by a car
So what? ~"[pick your terrorist attack of choice] wouldn't have needed to happen if not for [motivation for the terrorists]".
Quite lucky, considering the idiot cabbage yesterday.
That incident did of course cause a crash.
Oier Lazkano sees red when about forty riders prepare to return to the fight. “Ok, ok… Bravo! You had an opportunity to change things, but you’re not taking it.” He is interrupted by Anthony Delaplace. “But get back to the bus you!” Tensions are rising. “Why don’t you wear your balls? Are you waiting for what to happen? For another death?”, we can hear in the distance.
That incident did of course cause a crash.
Did but in a more passive aggressive way;It did, mixed with riders who aren't looking out or slowing down properly, and Van Gils who is at the back of the peloton on his own not looking.
The person in the car btw apparently ignored a road block, and according to one source even ignored instructions from the gendarmerie. Is it dangerous? Yes, absolutely. Can the organizer do anything about French morons on the road? Not really.
The only solution for this is more money (impossible) or more circuits, which means you're going away from what traditional cycling is, definitely if we talk about stage races. Or you know, you go to the desert. OneCycling will be happy with all this. I'm surprised I haven't see Plugge using this to promote his BS like a real politician.
In the first place I would recommend those WT teams to not go to this race in the future, no idea why they were all here when everyone knows Besseges is a dangerous race, even if we forget about the cars. Always very nervous and chaotic, always a lot of crashes.
The situation of course shouldn't have arisen (and might have been more preventable than today's, but in both cases it was far more about an irresponsible driver than what race organisers had not done).Quite lucky, considering the idiot cabbage yesterday.
That incident did of course cause a crash.
Either the action in question is legitimate or not. If it's not legitimate, then it's analogous to excusing terrorism if you sympathise with the motivation for it. If the action is legitimate, then you can argue that straightforwardly and you don't have to sympathise with the motivation for it.Not the same...