Great point BigMac. Now the question is: what are the rules? Can there be a fine only?
Other questions: is raising the arm, a gesture universally recognized as a sign of protest enough to trigger an investigation? Does a protest have to take place for an investigation to occur? If the answers are "no" and "yes", then it must be Movistar who initiated the protest.
I don't know the rules, so just asking.
Then what do the officials need to determine? If the foul was intentional? If it affected the result? Or is dangerous riding enough to warrant relegation? My guess is #3 is enough to make the case.
Every time such an instance happens, we end-up in a 50-50 situation, and there's controversy. Some were in favor of Nacer being relegated in PN, and side with Zaka today. It goes to show that there's no clear line, and as I wrote earlier, closing the door is as old as sprinting. We may disagree with the verdict today, but also recognize that there can't be a universal, fool-proof rule.
At the end of the day, I still believe it was a bit harsh for Zaka, but also wonder why he closed the door if he had the stage won. And as Angliru stated: did he really have the stage won? I'd like to see aerial video to judge comparative speed and understand if Zaka felt threatenend (which doesn't appear to be the case), or if he didn't need to close the door, in which case it's a big lapse of judgement for him.
My $0.02
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram