2012 Vuelta a España: Stage 4:Barakaldo-Estación de Valdezcaray 160.6 Km

Page 33 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
No_Balls said:
I really love this argument. As if their is some sort of excuse for themselves to deliberately creating a crash and then push like there is no tomorrow to gain time. All based on Moviestars whereabouts this season. There were others in the crash too.

How difference a year and a couple of victories makes
I don't think and believe the crash was deliberate. You can make a case for being a gentleman and stop when you noticed one of your riders crashed into the leader.
 
Jan 3, 2011
4,596
0
0
Arnout said:
I don't think and believe the crash was deliberate. You can make a case for being a gentleman and stop when you noticed one of your riders crashed into the leader.
Noone is claiming that they caused the crash on purpose
 
Sep 9, 2009
6,391
0
0
No_Balls said:
I really love this argument. As if their is some sort of excuse for themselves to deliberately creating a crash and then push like there is no tomorrow to gain time. All based on Moviestars whereabouts this season. There were others in the crash too.

How difference a year and a couple of victories makes
You don't have great reading comprehension if that is what you made of it.

I was mocking the idea, propigated by Movistar, that a racing attack which indirectly leads to a crash implies fault. I do not blame Movistar for Levi crashing - Levi should be able to descend and if he goes beyond his limits trying to follow, that is his lookout.

In this situation, until someone can name which Sky rider made contact with someone, I don't see much more than Unzue getting upset. If someone can name a specific Sky rider who made contact, i'm sure there are plenty of Spanish journo's happy to ask them to confirm or deny tomorrow morning.
 
Waterloo Sunrise said:
You don't have great reading comprehension if that is what you made of it.

I was mocking the idea, propigated by Movistar, that a racing attack which indirectly leads to a crash implies fault. I do not blame Movistar for Levi crashing - Levi should be able to descend and if he goes beyond his limits trying to follow, that is his lookout.

In this situation, until someone can name Sky rider made contact with someone, I don't see much more than Unzue getting upset. If someone can name a specific Sky rider who made contact, i'm sure there are plenty of Spanish journo's happy to ask them to confirm or deny tomorrow morning.
It would be classy if you would react on the Terpstra statement though.
 
Mar 12, 2009
191
0
0
LaFlorecita said:
My theory: He saw Froome wasn't that good, tried to test him a little, if he'd gotten a gap he'd ridden on, but there's no need to put in a huge attack on such a crappy climb which isn't gonna create big gaps anyway. Oh, if only the climb had been Bola del Mundo or Cuitu Negru..
I can't imagine there was anything that AC saw in Froome today that could have shown that he 'wasn't that good'.

For one reason or another, Contador is partaking in mind-games.

He's either incredibly confident of winning or he feels the need to break Froome mentally off the bike in order to win.
 
Sep 9, 2009
6,391
0
0
Arnout said:
It would be classy if you would react on the Terpstra statement though.
If Nikki can actually name who he thinks caused it, I'd have something to react to.

The fact people keep saying 'Sky' makes me think the whole thing just boils down to saying the attack made a crash likely, so it was their fault, which is a very weak argument to me.

There must be an actual proximate cause. Either someone fell over of their own volition, or through contact. Someone may be to blame, or it may be an unfortunate accident with no real blame. Until someone gives a specific explanation, or can point something out on the replay, I don't see any content to respond to.
 
The Sheep said:
You Brits sure like to play the victim and pretend the world is out to get you.
Errr, no, I think you'll find that Valverde is playing the victim, while the evil Sky is once again the villain.

Whatever rocks your boat.

Bottom line: It will probably spice up the rest of the race and Contador will still end up the winner.
 
Contador's comments:

"I was tremendously lucky to avoid the crash. My teammates crashed on the left but I managed to stay on the bike even though my wheel touched another wheel in the chaos. I was right behind Movistar riders and Sky had gone sprinting on the right side. The Movistar boys were eager to go forward and that's when everything [sic] has happened...."

Not much clarity on the actual cause of the incident, but it does put to rest that the question of whether the attack precipitated that crash (at least it does for me).
 
Havetts said:
Gesink doesnt seem to have the capability to respond ot the accelerations, couldnt today, couldnt yesterday. Hence it'll be very hard for him to even take time. But who knows, maybe we will get a 3 man sur place like Ax-3-Domaines :D?
Well doctors said it will take at least a year before he regains all his muscle strength he had before in his right leg. So basically he's at a slightly worse level all year than he was before. But gradually getting stronger. Next year he is back at his best and then he should get stronger again if he wants to win a GT. (giro/vuelta, tour is impossible w/contador)
 
Arnout said:
I don't think and believe the crash was deliberate. You can make a case for being a gentleman and stop when you noticed one of your riders crashed into the leader.
Ok, strong words there. But seeing them realise what happened and still, the moment after coming up with the entire team, didnt looked as if they had any problems with it either. And as a final, embarrasing, twist to this they drop the lie they didnt knew who was in the crash.
 
Waterloo Sunrise said:
If Nikki can actually name who he thinks caused it, I'd have something to react to.
The fact people keep saying 'Sky' makes me think the whole thing just boils down to saying the attack made a crash likely, so it was there fault, which is a very weak argument to me.

There must be an actual proximate cause. Either someone fell over of their own volition, or through contact. Someone may be to blame, or it may be an unfortunate accident with no real blame. Until someone gives a specific explanation, or can point something out on the replay, I don't see any content to respond to.
So in other words, you are disregarding his statement because . . . he didn't mention the bib number(s)? That's kind of weak, especially when you are relying on non-perfect information yourself to draw your conclusions.

And I don't think you understand the concept of proximate cause, because if you did, you'd know that there is a strong argument that Sky's attack WAS the proximate cause of the accident. Doesn't mean that a Sky rider actually caused the accident, but there actions set off the chain of events that lead to the accident (proximate cause).
 
Mar 22, 2010
908
0
0
Publicus said:
Or AC is just tweaking Froome a little. Either way, we'll know if Froome has the legs (or AC for that matter) soon enough.
There is a lot lost in reading text versus hearing the actual tone. It's good message board fodder, though. :)

It's great to have AC back. I don't recall any such eagerness for how events could unfold during the tdf.
 
Apr 14, 2010
1,368
0
0
Publicus said:
So in other words, you are disregarding his statement because . . . he didn't mention the bib number(s)? That's kind of weak, especially when you are relying on non-perfect information yourself to draw your conclusions.
He believes what he wants to believe and accepts what evidence agrees with it. Pretty typical human nature.
 
Mar 22, 2010
908
0
0
Mellow Velo said:
Errr, no, I think you'll find that Valverde is playing the victim, while the evil Sky is once again the villain.

Whatever rocks your boat.

Bottom line: It will probably spice up the rest of the race and Contador will still end up the winner.
I think a lot of unrequited animosity towards US Postal is transferred to Sky. Just my .02, not that it matters one way or the other.
 
Sep 9, 2009
6,391
0
0
Publicus said:
So in other words, you are disregarding his statement because . . . he didn't mention the bib number(s)? That's kind of weak, especially when you are relying on non-perfect information yourself to draw your conclusions.

And I don't think you understand the concept of proximate cause, because if you did, you'd know that there is a strong argument that Sky's attack WAS the proximate cause of the accident. Doesn't mean that a Sky rider actually caused the accident, but there actions set off the chain of events that lead to the accident (proximate cause).
With respect, I have not drawn conclusions, other than that my own viewing of the overhead replay showed no contact by a sky rider. If someone else can see it and points it out, I am open to a Sky rider having caused it.

As to the meaning of proximate cause, you clearly have a very loose definition of immediate. The proximate cause of this incident, to me, was either a touch of wheels, a clash of line, or an inattentive rider caught off guard. The attack is the broader context which made all of those potential causes of a crash come in to play.
 
Mar 12, 2009
191
0
0
Publicus said:
And I don't think you understand the concept of proximate cause, because if you did, you'd know that there is a strong argument that Sky's attack WAS the proximate cause of the accident. Doesn't mean that a Sky rider actually caused the accident, but there actions set off the chain of events that lead to the accident (proximate cause).
So if I'm riding along in the peloton next to Amets Txurruka and tell a really funny joke, Amets cracks up laughing and veers into another rider, causing more riders to fall behind him.

I'm the proximate cause of the crash, but is it my fault? This is surely the same as SKY attacking and then riders going down as a response to the attack? If one of the SKY riders actually touched the wheel that caused Valverde to go down, that's different, but essentially all we've got is that SKY attacked and then there was a crash behind, perhaps as a reaction to SKY's attack but not because SKY's attack was actually dangerous.
 
wether or not Sky caused the crash it was still a case of bad sportsmanship imo. I think Sky did cause the crash btw, Niki by far the most credible source so far.

I am very eager to see how this will impact the rest of the Vuelta. I think it'll come back to bite Sky in the *** real bad later on, never mind that the spaniards probably will at some point start working together against Froome this will make it even more likely
 
Jan 3, 2011
4,596
0
0
djlovesyou said:
So if I'm riding along in the peloton next to Amets Txurruka and tell a really funny joke, Amets cracks up laughing and veers into another rider, causing more riders to fall behind him.

I'm the proximate cause of the crash, but is it my fault? This is surely the same as SKY attacking and then riders going down as a response to the attack? If one of the SKY riders actually touched the wheel that caused Valverde to go down, that's different, but essentially all we've got is that SKY attacked and then there was a crash behind, perhaps as a reaction to SKY's attack but not because SKY's attack was actually dangerous.
What if u told a joke to the race leading making him laugh so hard that he crashed and then taking advantage of it afterwards? ;)
 
Waterloo Sunrise said:
With respect, I have not drawn conclusions, other than that my own viewing of the overhead replay showed no contact by a sky rider.
Contact is not necessary to cause a crash. If a rider swerves dangerously and another falls while trying to avoid him then it could be said to have been 'caused' by the dangerous maneuver.

That said, I've not seen the overhead so I've no opinion on this particular incident.
 
And what did Unzue have to say about Bertie attacking in the climb and preventing Valvpiti from closing the gap (he was just at 15" at that point)? These guys really have some nerves making these ridiculous accusations. If Sky had waited they would have come up with another outlandish accusation anyway, just like LA did when Ullrich waited for him in 2003.
 
Jul 25, 2011
2,007
1
0
webvan said:
And what did Unzue have to say about Bertie attacking in the climb and preventing Valvpiti from closing the gap (he was just at 15" at that point)? These guys really have some nerves making these ridiculous accusations. If Sky had waited they would have come up with another outlandish accusation anyway, just like LA did when Ullrich waited for him in 2003.
Contador isn't racing against Valverde
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY