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!
Only if he got it from a rider, I think.Billie said:Dan Martin tweeted he got a wheel from another team which results in 2 minute fine.
hrotha said:Only if he got it from a rider, I think.Billie said:Dan Martin tweeted he got a wheel from another team which results in 2 minute fine.
Richeypen said:Hopefully nothing comes of it. Its a ****** rule that should have been got rid of after the Porte debacle. Common sense should surely rule in these circumstances.
Richeypen said:Hopefully nothing comes of it. Its a ****** rule that should have been got rid of after the Porte debacle. Common sense should surely rule in these circumstances.
StryderHells said:Richeypen said:Hopefully nothing comes of it. Its a ****** rule that should have been got rid of after the Porte debacle. Common sense should surely rule in these circumstances.
It's a sensible rule, can't have riders from opposing teams giving mechanical assistance to eachother and same goes for team cars helping out riders from opposing teams.
Richeypen said:Hopefully nothing comes of it. Its a ****** rule that should have been got rid of after the Porte debacle. Common sense should surely rule in these circumstances.
StryderHells said:Richeypen said:Hopefully nothing comes of it. Its a ****** rule that should have been got rid of after the Porte debacle. Common sense should surely rule in these circumstances.
It's a sensible rule, can't have riders from opposing teams giving mechanical assistance to eachother and same goes for team cars helping out riders from opposing teams.
TMP402 said:Richeypen said:Hopefully nothing comes of it. Its a ****** rule that should have been got rid of after the Porte debacle. Common sense should surely rule in these circumstances.
I interpret it as preventing a big team having a secondary team also at WT level, giving the big team racing and technical support. I've seen a team car give bottles to rival riders a number of times (eg the team car of one rider in a two-man break giving supplies to both) and it's never seriously punished, though.
TMP402 said:Richeypen said:Hopefully nothing comes of it. Its a ****** rule that should have been got rid of after the Porte debacle. Common sense should surely rule in these circumstances.
I interpret it as preventing a big team having a secondary team also at WT level, giving the big team racing and technical support. I've seen a team car give bottles to rival riders a number of times (eg the team car of one rider in a two-man break giving supplies to both) and it's never seriously punished, though.
The actual wording of the rule was posted at the point of the Porte "debacle". Riders and teams are allowed to render one another minor services such as gels and bidons, however outright mechanical assistance is not allowed as this is interpreted as being for reasons of collusion.Richeypen said:TMP402 said:Richeypen said:Hopefully nothing comes of it. Its a ****** rule that should have been got rid of after the Porte debacle. Common sense should surely rule in these circumstances.
I interpret it as preventing a big team having a secondary team also at WT level, giving the big team racing and technical support. I've seen a team car give bottles to rival riders a number of times (eg the team car of one rider in a two-man break giving supplies to both) and it's never seriously punished, though.
Happens all the time. Normally great camaraderie away from the front of the race between all the teams and team cars. Always loved this video of Kenny Van Hummel fighting the time cut with 2 other riders from 2009.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rTPKaeFbcA8
Billie said:TMP402 said:Richeypen said:Hopefully nothing comes of it. Its a ****** rule that should have been got rid of after the Porte debacle. Common sense should surely rule in these circumstances.
I interpret it as preventing a big team having a secondary team also at WT level, giving the big team racing and technical support. I've seen a team car give bottles to rival riders a number of times (eg the team car of one rider in a two-man break giving supplies to both) and it's never seriously punished, though.
Food and drinks and medical help between teams is allowed because of the consequences of not giving this help can have on health of riders.
Mechanical assistence is not allowed.
PremierAndrew said:Billie said:TMP402 said:Richeypen said:Hopefully nothing comes of it. Its a ****** rule that should have been got rid of after the Porte debacle. Common sense should surely rule in these circumstances.
I interpret it as preventing a big team having a secondary team also at WT level, giving the big team racing and technical support. I've seen a team car give bottles to rival riders a number of times (eg the team car of one rider in a two-man break giving supplies to both) and it's never seriously punished, though.
Food and drinks and medical help between teams is allowed because of the consequences of not giving this help can have on health of riders.
Mechanical assistence is not allowed.
And extremely bad luck throwing you out of GT contention could result in depression. Lack of mechanical assistance can also have consequences on health of riders if that's the reason
Oh, come off it. The exact point is that while nobody likes to see a GC settled by one, a mechanical can - and does - happen to anybody, and it hits everybody equally. Third party assistance, however, is not equal; Clarke wouldn't have handed his wheel over to Aru, or Contador, or Landa, or anybody else in that GC battle, therefore it's an unfair advantage and merits a penalty. Pretty straightforward. Sure, in this particular instance it wasn't especially relevant to the overall outcome, but then if the same thing happens later in the race and is penalized, it opens up a whole new set of issues. It's a perfectly justified rule to have in place and it was a crystal clear infringement of the rule, therefore it required punishing. The real question, to me, is whether the required penalty as it stood at the time - 2 minutes being the minimum punishment - ought to be reconsidered. Not whether the act should be an infringement, because it absolutely by all means should.Richeypen said:It in no way should be a black and white issue. Anything that stops races being decided by mechanicals should be applauded. Yes the Clarke Porte situation was collusion but what exactly is wrong with that?
Richeypen said:It in no way should be a black and white issue. Anything that stops races being decided by mechanicals should be applauded. Yes the Clarke Porte situation was collusion but what exactly is wrong with that?