2016 TdF, Stage 12: Montpellier → Mont Ventoux (178km)

[Aleajactaest]

Re: Re:

Froome mechanical? Cance to the front trying to neutralise the descent because of the wind?

He was taking a piss.

No. he was having a natural cheat. It one thing to not attack a GC leader but taking a fake piss so your teammates can recover is not the same. One protects the integrity of the completion by making it fair, this does the opposite by giving his team an advantage. All the way up Mt Ventou, those guys helped sky. Totally unfair.

Velonews did a story about it.

http://velonews.competitor.com/2016/07/tour-de-france/froomes-abuse-of-yellow-was-movistars-missed-opportunity_414736

 

[laurensde+]

Re: Re:

Froome mechanical? Cance to the front trying to neutralise the descent because of the wind?

He was taking a piss.

No. he was having a natural cheat. It one thing to not attack a GC leader but taking a fake piss so your teammates can recover is not the same. One protects the integrity of the completion by making it fair, this does the opposite by giving his team an advantage. All the way up Mt Ventou, those guys helped sky. Totally unfair.

Velonews did a story about it.

http://velonews.competitor.com/2016/07/tour-de-france/froomes-abuse-of-yellow-was-movistars-missed-opportunity_414736

As Brailsford would say, you don't take a whizz on a Monday, but not on a Tuesday.

 

[ppanther92]

Quintana should be dq'ed. There is no other perspective in this story. This years Tour is a farce anyway. And Mollema is *** right with his tweet. He was the one who lost the most after Froome and Porte due the incident and while Quintana was going up with help of motorbikes, he still receives a bonus while Mollema not. *** up...

 

[Deadbody]

Eventfull day. Skys illgal feed, Nairo hanging onto a moto, Froome halting the peleton too let his teamates rejoin, Porte crashing into a moto and Froome running up the mountain.

Great win by De Gendt.

 

[Billie]

Jury president confirmed Froome broke the rules by running without a bike. But decided not to punish him because of 'Unique circumstances'

 

[deValtos]

Re:

Jury president confirmed Froome broke the rules by running without a bike. But decided not to punish him because of 'Unique circumstances'

I'm always amazed what rules they have in that big rule book of theirs.

Most of them need to be thrown out in the name of common sense.

 

[Carols]

Re:

Jury president confirmed Froome broke the rules by running without a bike. But decided not to punish him because of 'Unique circumstances'

Source please. Thanks!

 

[TMP402]

Wow Quintana.

 

[TMP402]

If you look close at some of the videos of this calamity, in some places you can see behind the row(s) of spectators. There are a fair number of bicycles back there. I wonder why one of the spectators didn't offer Froome their bicycle so as to finish the race? Just probably never thought of it.

Also not allowed; You can only take bycicles from one of the two team cars in race or from the neutral car. Taking bikes form side of the road is only allowed at World Championships iirc.

Can you quote a rule for that? Jens Voigt famously took a junior bike in 2010.

Riders may only receive technical support from the technical personnel of their team or from one of the neutral support cars or else from the broom wagon.

Mechanical assistance at fixed locations on the course is limited to wheel changes only except for races on a circuit where bike changes can be made in the authorized zones.

Also, I have been in impression that it was neutral service bicycle that Voigt took. He just coloured the story.

Yeah, that "junior bike" was coincidentally a Mavic.

As for those rules, they don't explicitly outlaw taking a bike, just "technical support", which strikes me as more the Porte-Clarke wheel change. I have a feeling all these issues will be given more clarity the next time the UCI review their rules.

 

[DanielSong39]

Watched the crash in YouTube and it seems like a racing incident. Richie Porte was drafting off of the motorbike and hit it head-on when the bike stopped to avoid a fallen spectator. Much of the blame has to be placed on Richie Porte and therefore the results should have stood.

The subsequent events were pure comedy; Froome running up the mountain and Quintana getting a ride from the motorbike.

I thought both cyclists should have been DQ'd, or at the very least, given a 2 minute penalty. Mollema and the other riders who did not fall should not have have been punished, which is what effectively happened due to the ruling.

Not to mention Aru getting a tow from the team car, a la Nibali.

 

[Ruby United]

Quintana should 100% be DQ. He clearly, caught on video, violated directly an official TDF rule. How is what he did any different to Nibali in the Giro? He has to go. I just can't imagine ASO will do anything. I think they just want to try forget yesterday happened

 

[Ruby United]

Re:

Watched the crash in YouTube and it seems like a racing incident. Richie Porte was drafting off of the motorbike and hit it head-on when the bike stopped to avoid a fallen spectator. Much of the blame has to be placed on Richie Porte and therefore the results should have stood.

The subsequent events were pure comedy; Froome running up the mountain and Quintana getting a ride from the motorbike.

I thought both cyclists should have been DQ'd, or at the very least, given a 2 minute penalty. Mollema and the other riders who did not fall should not have have been punished, which is what effectively happened due to the ruling.

Not to mention Aru getting a tow from the team car, a la Nibali.

Why? Froome didn't break any rules. He finished the race on a bike, he didn't get any illegal help. What did he do wrong?

 

[DanielSong39]

I completely agree that Quintana should be DQ'd, along with Froome and Aru.

I guess "special circumstances" apply.

At this rate, why not neutralize the entire stage for timing purposes?

 

[Billie]

Re: Re:

Watched the crash in YouTube and it seems like a racing incident. Richie Porte was drafting off of the motorbike and hit it head-on when the bike stopped to avoid a fallen spectator. Much of the blame has to be placed on Richie Porte and therefore the results should have stood.

The subsequent events were pure comedy; Froome running up the mountain and Quintana getting a ride from the motorbike.

I thought both cyclists should have been DQ'd, or at the very least, given a 2 minute penalty. Mollema and the other riders who did not fall should not have have been punished, which is what effectively happened due to the ruling.

Not to mention Aru getting a tow from the team car, a la Nibali.

Why? Froome didn't break any rules. He finished the race on a bike, he didn't get any illegal help. What did he do wrong?

You cannot do part of the route sans bike.

 

[Ruby United]

Now I'm quite confused. Is it directly against the rules to recieve a new bike from technical support? Why is this only coming out now?

 

[King Boonen]

Re:

Watched the crash in YouTube and it seems like a racing incident. Richie Porte was drafting off of the motorbike and hit it head-on when the bike stopped to avoid a fallen spectator. Much of the blame has to be placed on Richie Porte and therefore the results should have stood.

The subsequent events were pure comedy; Froome running up the mountain and Quintana getting a ride from the motorbike.

I thought both cyclists should have been DQ'd, or at the very least, given a 2 minute penalty. Mollema and the other riders who did not fall should not have have been punished, which is what effectively happened due to the ruling.

Not to mention Aru getting a tow from the team car, a la Nibali.

Most ridiculous comment of the day so far. Well done.

 

[King Boonen]

Re:

Now I'm quite confused. Is it directly against the rules to recieve a new bike from technical support? Why is this only coming out now?

No, it isn't. The conversation is getting confused of what happened yesterday and what Jens Voigt did. It is against the rules to take a bike from anyone other than your own team or neutral support.

 

[Billie]

Re: Re:

Jury president confirmed Froome broke the rules by running without a bike. But decided not to punish him because of 'Unique circumstances'

Source please. Thanks!

De jury oordeelde mild, zeker in het geval van Froome. "Normaal mag een renner zijn weg niet zonder fiets verder zetten, maar ook hier houden we rekening met de omstandigheden", aldus Valcic.

http://www.hln.be/hln/nl/1295/Tour-...rd-Froomes-tijdsverlies-kwijtgescholden.dhtml

The jury was mild, certainly in Froome's case. "Normally a rider is not allowed to continue without his bike, but in this case we took the circumstances into account" says Valcic

Valcic is the Jury president in Tour de France.

 

[TMP402]

Re: Re:

Watched the crash in YouTube and it seems like a racing incident. Richie Porte was drafting off of the motorbike and hit it head-on when the bike stopped to avoid a fallen spectator. Much of the blame has to be placed on Richie Porte and therefore the results should have stood.

The subsequent events were pure comedy; Froome running up the mountain and Quintana getting a ride from the motorbike.

I thought both cyclists should have been DQ'd, or at the very least, given a 2 minute penalty. Mollema and the other riders who did not fall should not have have been punished, which is what effectively happened due to the ruling.

Not to mention Aru getting a tow from the team car, a la Nibali.

Why? Froome didn't break any rules. He finished the race on a bike, he didn't get any illegal help. What did he do wrong?

You cannot do part of the route sans bike.

But some rules suggest you can. It's unclear.

 

[Billie]

Re: Re:

Watched the crash in YouTube and it seems like a racing incident. Richie Porte was drafting off of the motorbike and hit it head-on when the bike stopped to avoid a fallen spectator. Much of the blame has to be placed on Richie Porte and therefore the results should have stood.

The subsequent events were pure comedy; Froome running up the mountain and Quintana getting a ride from the motorbike.

I thought both cyclists should have been DQ'd, or at the very least, given a 2 minute penalty. Mollema and the other riders who did not fall should not have have been punished, which is what effectively happened due to the ruling.

Not to mention Aru getting a tow from the team car, a la Nibali.

Why? Froome didn't break any rules. He finished the race on a bike, he didn't get any illegal help. What did he do wrong?

You cannot do part of the route sans bike.

But some rules suggest you can. It's unclear.

Jury president has confirmed it's not allowed.

 

[King Boonen]

Re: Re:

Watched the crash in YouTube and it seems like a racing incident. Richie Porte was drafting off of the motorbike and hit it head-on when the bike stopped to avoid a fallen spectator. Much of the blame has to be placed on Richie Porte and therefore the results should have stood.

The subsequent events were pure comedy; Froome running up the mountain and Quintana getting a ride from the motorbike.

I thought both cyclists should have been DQ'd, or at the very least, given a 2 minute penalty. Mollema and the other riders who did not fall should not have have been punished, which is what effectively happened due to the ruling.

Not to mention Aru getting a tow from the team car, a la Nibali.

Why? Froome didn't break any rules. He finished the race on a bike, he didn't get any illegal help. What did he do wrong?

You cannot do part of the route sans bike.

But some rules suggest you can. It's unclear.

No they don't. They say you have to do it under your own steam and they say you can walk across the line as long as you have your bike but this is very clear:

"Wilful deviation from the course, attempt to be placed without having covered the entire course by bicycle, resuming the race after having accepted a lift in a vehicle or on a motorbike"

It was never meant to cover running, but it does if you apply it as written.

 

[Carols]

Re: Re:

Jury president confirmed Froome broke the rules by running without a bike. But decided not to punish him because of 'Unique circumstances'

Source please. Thanks!

De jury oordeelde mild, zeker in het geval van Froome. "Normaal mag een renner zijn weg niet zonder fiets verder zetten, maar ook hier houden we rekening met de omstandigheden", aldus Valcic.

http://www.hln.be/hln/nl/1295/Tour-...rd-Froomes-tijdsverlies-kwijtgescholden.dhtml

The jury was mild, certainly in Froome's case. "Normally a rider is not allowed to continue without his bike, but in this case we took the circumstances into account" says Valcic

Valcic is the Jury president in Tour de France.

Thanks!

 

[filipepc]

Yesterday i couldnít post my opinion, but today i will give it.

It was the weirdest thing i have seen, and i undersatand all the parts...

For one side i think is unfair to punish a rider that has the problemas that froome had.

But i agree with those that defed that the time given back, and the no punishment is just beacuse we are talking about froome and sky. If it was a fair decision? Well, i think so, but the problem is that if it was mollema i think the rules would be diferent... And this is the problem... But well, i prefer to see winning who is stronger in the road so...

 

[Sartorius]

Yesterday i couldnít post my opinion, but today i will give it.

It was the weirdest thing i have seen, and i undersatand all the parts...

For one side i think is unfair to punish a rider that has the problemas that froome had.

But i agree with those that defed that the time given back, and the no punishment is just beacuse we are talking about froome and sky. If it was a fair decision? Well, i think so, but the problem is that if it was mollema i think the rules would be diferent... And this is the problem... But well, i prefer to see winning who is stronger in the road so...

How about Yates on stage 5? Is he Sky rider?
How about Quintana? He got more bonus seconds than anyone else and he cheated ffs.

Sorry, but those arguments about protecting Froome/Sky are absolutely pathetic.

 

[damian13ster]

The decision was fair because it reflects who was the strongest on the road- thats whats important.

Whether the decision would be diferent if it was other rider......noone has a clue and baseless speculation is pointless since it cant be verifies