Cancellara Pushes for Extreme Weather Protocol

Page 3 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
He is NOT speaking for the peloton. He is speaking for himself and a select group of riders. Several riders do not share his sentiments.

If he wants to speak for the whole peloton he should do so via their union. As an official spokesperson.
 
Seems like some of the objects against an extreme weather protocol is based on the "Cancellara wants it, and he says that stage in T-A was too extreme, so we shouldn't have a protocol!" mentality.
But just because Cancellara (and others) think those conditions were too extreme doesn't mean that a protocol would agree.
 
I wait for the other riders,which don't agree with Cancellara,to make a stand and ask for more races in extreme conditions.I'm sure that race organizers and fans will be delighted.Time for this whining baby to retire,he doesn't have a clue about cycling,who the *** is this guy really :rolleyes:
 
Feb 17, 2012
2,756
0
0
Jagartrott said:
The machismo is strong in this thread.
Luckily there are some people that say sensible things.

An extreme weather protocol is needed. Period.
You need to have clear rules to avoid having to constantly make ad-hoc and arbitrary decisions.
What is extreme then? Extreme for Fabian has been everything from a little slippery 500-meter road where he managed to stall the complete stage, snowy conditions where everything was covered in 4 meter snow except.. for the actual road which was completely fine all the way to finish line (the Giro stage) to the stage a couple of days ago. There's absoutely no way of taking anything he says about weather conditions seriously.

Of course we need a protocol but it god damn should not going to involve this guy's opinion on the topic.

He even often has a go despite not being in the actual bloody race.. He's pathethic. I really think he is.
 
Oct 23, 2011
3,846
2
0
For me Cancellara lost his credibility a bit when he was acting all tough saying they shouldn't cancel any of the wet cobbles in that TDF stage last year but then after the stage when it turned out he wasn't as good as he thought on wet cobbles they were suddenly too extreme and dangerous despite the fact that IIRC nobody got a real injury that day, except Froome who crashed on a random wet road, before the cobbles had even started.

But of course there's nothing wrong with a weather protocol. I imagine it will be difficult to have a clear and satisfactory content; but if all the involved parties make a good weather protocol it should be good for everybody.
 
Feb 17, 2012
2,756
0
0
Jagartrott said:
The protocol should be designed by doctors, riders and DS based on health and mechanical risks both.
Drafts can be further discussed until a consensus is reached.
Good luck with that.

I'm sure the Belgians and the Spanish have the same perceptions as to when the conditions are too much.
 
Of course it won't be possible to reach a consensus where everyone agrees. There will always be situations when some think it's too extreme and others not. However, with a protocol those who think the conditions are too extreme can't really complain, they would simply have two options:
1: Abbandon.
2: Go slow, and risk losing time.
 
While a protocol would be could to codify, I think it will be too hard for those involved to really account for every situation. I guess there are a lot of ways it could take shape, more than just a "x temperature and y percipitation means..."

I think the best solution is to start with a scale of varrying implications.

Green-good to go
Yellow- Be careful but your well being is still yours/teams responsibility.
Orange- Be careful, stage still on, but no cut off and no limits on car feeding/bottles/clothes, (other rule changes I'm missing)
Red- Neutralized stage, everyone behind the Commissaire.
Black- Stage cancelled.

Obviously, it is pretty much what is in place now. So the important part is choosing who decides, and when.

As it stands, the parties concerned are riders/teams, organizers, UCI officials, (fans, and journos too, but won't have any input,)

One option is for a jury to be defined (one of each? teams rep., organizer rep, and UCI doc? Chief Comm.?), and then vote on the label for the day, each day. Rules with that label is binding for the stage.

As it stands, the gentleman's agreements are not satisfying the situation. While it won't make anyone happy, a procedure will at least leave people unhappy in the right way.
 
Good for him. I'm glad he's speaking up. He's certainly not the only rider to have similar concerns. I'm not 100% sure I agree in this particular scenario but then, I wasn't out there riding and the riders are the ones out there performing so they should definitely have some say. Half the fans wouldn't care if the riders had to stop and wrestle a bear on their way up a climb.
 
Re:

Maaaaaaaarten said:
For me Cancellara lost his credibility a bit when he was acting all tough saying they shouldn't cancel any of the wet cobbles in that TDF stage last year but then after the stage when it turned out he wasn't as good as he thought on wet cobbles they were suddenly too extreme and dangerous despite the fact that IIRC nobody got a real injury that day, except Froome who crashed on a random wet road, before the cobbles had even started.

But of course there's nothing wrong with a weather protocol. I imagine it will be difficult to have a clear and satisfactory content; but if all the involved parties make a good weather protocol it should be good for everybody.
This precisely. His flip-flopping depending on which option best benefits him and his team makes him the last person that should be influencing a decision of this magnitude.
 
Cancellara should just shut his trap. Everything that comes from him since that neutralization at the Tour 2010 when they passed the Col de Stockeu is a joke.
As someone stated before, something matters to him only when it gives to him or his team an advantage.
Not to mention his stupid reaction at the new Hour Record.
The man's pathetic.
 
Feb 22, 2011
462
0
0
Seems the questions: Do you loathe Fabian Cancellara? and Does cycling need an Extreme Weather Protocol? should occupy two different forum topic threads. Why would anyone's love (or hate) for one rider have any bearing on the discussion? I can see arguments against (cycling is an extreme sport, HTFU) and arguments for (competing in 120°F heat is sick), but any protocol does not have to be designed to make Fabian Cancellara happy.

Leaving the decision of what is "too extreme" to each pro cyclist is just going to cause the argument to be about personalities rather than overall rider safety in extreme weather.

I, for one, cannot wait for one of those rolling radio antenna wearing lightning rods to get struck by a big bolt of lightning! Now THAT'S how they did it when I was young!
 
Personally I think that stage was fine, because it was only snowing on the uphill finale. As it was snowing on the MTF, its unlikely your going to crash uphill (unless your Denis Menchov or Alexander Vuillermoz)

If they are descending in snow, it should be neutralised or stopped. To choose out of those two options would be the Chief Commisaire or the Organisers.

If the Temprature is above 35c or even 30c, it should be neutralised or if descending is involved cancelled or the climb and descent removed.

If their are weather warnings then these should be taken into account as well. If a/the rider(s) dont agree, then they shouldnt start that race if it a single day or not start the stage.
 
Seems like a lot of people around here think Extreme Weather Protocol = neutralising/stopping a stage if there's a light drizzle.
Honestly, I don't think anyone - even Cancellara - is pushing for that, and even if some people actually were an Extreme Weather Protocol could actually help shutting them up. Imagine this situation:

An EWP is made, conditions like the ones in the T-A stage Sunday are deemed suitable for riding, could be something like this; "If there's snow only one the final climb then the race will be ridden as planned, but all time-limits and limits to receiving help from team cars are suspended." then, when all the complainers start going "You can't make us ride this!!!!" the organisers can simply take out the EWP, find the right page and reply: "Actually, we can. Nobody is going to force you to go fast, or even continue the race."
 
Cancellara showed several times that he does not mind extreme weather at all. 2013 Milan-Sanremo is the first example that comes to mind. That is not the issue at all.


The issue here is not about the weather but about why on earth RCS would put a high mountain stage in Tirreno while it's supposed to be a mere prep race/springboard for Tirreno Adriatico.

However I'm still wondering why all these classic racers - Van Avermaet, Vanmarcke, Cancellara - still favour Tirreno over Paris-Nice which is increasingly becoming the better prep of the two. I can't really understand that. RCS wants to make Tirreno a baby Giro. Quite the opposite to 10 years ago. It makes no sense at all. Of course, I bet many CN posters love it but not me obviously.
 
Echoes said:
However I'm still wondering why all these classic racers - Van Avermaet, Vanmarcke, Cancellara - still favour Tirreno over Paris-Nice which is increasingly becoming the better prep of the two. I can't really understand that. RCS wants to make Tirreno a baby Giro. Quite the opposite to 10 years ago. It makes no sense at all. Of course, I bet many CN posters love it but not me obviously.
Well, Tirreno usually has longer stages than Paris-Nice.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY