Or... maybe it's ultimately UCI - as the highest authority within cycling - who are answerable to local law.
What exactly are you suggesting ASO should have done? Just taken the time at the requested time anyway?
-
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!
Or... maybe it's ultimately UCI - as the highest authority within cycling - who are answerable to local law.
What exactly are you suggesting ASO should have done? Just taken the time at the requested time anyway?
For those who many wish to have an informed discussion:
She hasn't paid any fines yet, but she could pay up to 1500 euros.
@RedheadDane
Tell me why would you even assume event organiser isn't responsible for the event safety and for that to be regulated by local laws? Why are we even discussing this? Do you know any lawyer you trust and you can just ask? To save us the time on discussing this endlessly.
@jmdirt
In my opinion you don't win a debate or prove something when you start calling other people names. In my honest opinion that just makes you look bad. And it's called using your brain. Or what do you expect for the debate to be linear and tailored to your own taste? Would that even be called a debate?
@King Boonen
I have no problem with your proposition. But tell me first does that PDF prove my claims are bogus? Then please inform me on which grounds as i have no problems with that.
Tell me why would you even assume event organiser isn't responsible for the event safety and for that to be regulated by local laws? Why are we even discussing this? Do you know any lawyer you trust and you can just ask? To save us the time on discussing this endlessly.
@jmdirt
In my opinion you don't win a debate or prove something when you start calling other people names. In my honest opinion that just makes you look bad. And it's called using your brain. Or what do you expect for the debate to be linear and tailored to your own taste? Would that even be called a debate?
@King Boonen
I have no problem with your proposition. But tell me first does that PDF prove my claims are bogus? Then please inform me on which grounds as i have no problems with that.
UCI - again, the higher authority within cycling - overruled the decision made by ASO. Surely by doing that they also accepted that they took the responsibility for any safety issues. Also, you were the one who first brought up local laws. Come to think of it, I'm pretty sure if it was ever brought up at any kind of court, the court in question would probably be CAS.
But you still haven't explained what exactly ASO should have done once UCI refused to accept the suggestion of taking the time at 5 K to go.
I know the race organizers have backed off when it comes to pursuing the matter further. Not only from a compassionate level, but a business perspective as well.
They realize that the poor woman is devastated. She knows the braying hounds have nothing better to do than call for her head.
She admitted that she had to lay low before turning herself in to police to prevent unwanted and completely unnecessary exposure for what she admitted was a stupid mistake. Remember "Bartman?" He was the life-long Chicago Cubs fan attending a playoff game to support his beloved team when he caught a foul ball at an inopportune time and his life changed forever. I won't go into details, but his story is easy to find, and it is truly fascinating.
The TDF race organizers realize that enough exposure has been gained to prevent further actions like these from happening in future. What's to be gained from the poor woman washing bikes? That's just silly talk. Just leave her be and let her get on with her life.
I'm not a lawyer, but if race organizers and teams etc went balls to the wall to sue the woman, I know for sure I would make every effort to point out the fact that no effort was made to prevent fans from stepping on to the road.
What was this poor woman who was attending her first race supposed to think, your honour? She's only seen the race on TV where cameras capture every moment of every spectator screaming into the ears of the riders climbing up a mountain. They are mere inches from the faces of the riders.
No, your honour, we wish to file a counter-suit for all the emotional damage caused to my client.
Just FYI: my washing bikes 'idea' was exactly that, tongue in cheek, silly talk. Even if that was a good idea, do you think that the mechanics would let her (or anyone else for that matter) near the team bikes?
I hope you didn't think that I was serious about rubbing salt in her hangnail either.
Punishment under law includes a deterrent aspect. Can you imagine the anarchy if there were no consequences to our actions?
FYI, not sure about Europe or America but "fans" in Australia can be charged AUD 5,500 for running onto cricket or football pitches at major events and that is for causing no physical injury to anyone. If this woman was fined 1500 Euros she got off very lightly for her stupidity and lack of duty of care that caused injury and mayhem.
Pitch Invasion Penalties At NSW Sporting Venues - Astor Legal
FYI, not sure about Europe or America but "fans" in Australia can be charged AUD 5,500 for running onto cricket or football pitches at major events and that is for causing no physical injury to anyone. If this woman was fined 1500 Euros she got off very lightly for her stupidity and lack of duty of care that caused injury and mayhem.
Pitch Invasion Penalties At NSW Sporting Venues - Astor Legal
@RedheadDane
You believe it's UCI and my claim is ASO. Feel free to ask someone you know with a bit of a law background and knowledge. That is if sport event organiser is responsible for the safety and if it's liable in the case it fails to implement agreed upon safety measurements. Resulting in (predictable) injuries and damages. Basically the end of stage 3. And if such sport event organiser have any grounds in shifting the responsibility to some "superior party".
Anyway lets for now just call it X. Why is it only the woman is made an example of and not the X? Woman took down the peloton with a cardboard and X took down the peloton with a piece of paper (end of stage 3). Why the double standards?
Will making this woman an example of reduce frequency of such incidents in the future? Would making X take the responsibility reduce the occurrence of incidents, such as seen at the end of stage 3? My take on it is making this woman an example of will help jack ***. Making X to take responsibility would in the long term reduce occurrences of incidents, such as seen at the end of the stage 3. As appropriate safety measurements would get agreed upon and implemented in future races.
Anyway in my opinion stage 1 and 3 where safety fiasco. We discussed a bit on what could be done. From salting the nails to education and separating the goats from the bulls. Now lets see if people in power will actually do something about it. Or if they will find another scapegoat in the next safety fiasco. Like blaming some fan from the side of the road again for all the problems. And obviously for the crowd to again have a say in it.
You believe it's UCI and my claim is ASO. Feel free to ask someone you know with a bit of a law background and knowledge. That is if sport event organiser is responsible for the safety and if it's liable in the case it fails to implement agreed upon safety measurements. Resulting in (predictable) injuries and damages. Basically the end of stage 3. And if such sport event organiser have any grounds in shifting the responsibility to some "superior party".
Anyway lets for now just call it X. Why is it only the woman is made an example of and not the X? Woman took down the peloton with a cardboard and X took down the peloton with a piece of paper (end of stage 3). Why the double standards?
Will making this woman an example of reduce frequency of such incidents in the future? Would making X take the responsibility reduce the occurrence of incidents, such as seen at the end of stage 3? My take on it is making this woman an example of will help jack ***. Making X to take responsibility would in the long term reduce occurrences of incidents, such as seen at the end of the stage 3. As appropriate safety measurements would get agreed upon and implemented in future races.
Anyway in my opinion stage 1 and 3 where safety fiasco. We discussed a bit on what could be done. From salting the nails to education and separating the goats from the bulls. Now lets see if people in power will actually do something about it. Or if they will find another scapegoat in the next safety fiasco. Like blaming some fan from the side of the road again for all the problems. And obviously for the crowd to again have a say in it.
I have no idea what on earth a court could find ASO "liable" for on stage 3. What are the riders going to say-yes, that stage was super dangerous, that's why we were all on the front pushing hard and smacking each other off the road in the bunch instead of taking it easy"?
Because the superior party (no need for quotation marks, UCI is superior) overruled them.
You still haven't explained what exactly it is ASO should have done once the decision was made by the UCI to not neutralise the stage as suggested, and accepted by ASO.
Had a stage-long meeting with the verdict possibly only coming after the stage was done?
Just taking the times at 5 Ks to go anyway?
But anyway, yes. You're right! Of course it's not just individuals who should be held responsible for crashes. I just don't see the need to blame the organisation who'd actually accepted the suggestion made by the riders, but was overruled.
Look at all sports,,anything golf, children 's football..both kinds.the handheld camera revolution has changed fan behavior,forever,negatively.and this years TDF field..some of the teams are fleshed up with riders that probably should not be there..the other thing that big teams would probably not accept..starting line announced time bonuses..I have been completely impressed with the race so far from the talent. But some of the lesser teams not getting any face time for individual riders or the sponsors is disappointing..unless Wanty circus has a secret weapon nobody knows about..or unless there is two races..the one were Cav is balls out..and the yellow jersey wearing rider should be tested to prove he is human..and then the other race were riders are looking for participation trophies..
The mountains are going to destroy conti level racers
The mountains are going to destroy conti level racers
I'm sorry, jmdirt. I was almost certain you weren't serious but I was skimming over posts and wasn't paying attention to names. Sorry about that.
Mental note: Pay more attention before going off on mini-rants.
Last edited:
This is something that has been missing in this discussion this week. We have discussed it before on this forum though, that riders can make narrow/bumpy/potholed roads less dangerous by racing accordingly. That doesn't take any responsibility away from the governing bodies, promoters, or fans.
I'll preface that I am well aware that the Pro-Ams that I competed in are not the world tour and definitely not the TdF. That being said, there was a local circuit race here that had a long section of gravel, and if a large group entered it on the first lap there was an easing of the pace (I heard the horror stories about the cat 4/5 fields that didn't chill). I've done both Cascade and Willamette when road issues caused the field to ride slower over sections of road that had been compromised by bad weather. I also did it one year where the front guys from teams who had the cars to do it, switched to mountain bikes for the descent. I agree, who cares about the races that jmdirt did in the '90s!
EDIT: Horner won two of those though!
The thing is it's happened in the past. We've seen the big boy teams neutralize stages on their own initiative if they decide the conditions are too dangerous. It happened last year, even!
So no, I don't buy that the riders all fighting hard for position is inevitable. The problem is that the race favorite teams should be taking control of the peloton, but instead they're all trying to get to the front, hoping that they can push the pace and twist the knife if a crash splits the bunch.
So no, I don't buy that the riders all fighting hard for position is inevitable. The problem is that the race favorite teams should be taking control of the peloton, but instead they're all trying to get to the front, hoping that they can push the pace and twist the knife if a crash splits the bunch.
I don't even know that there needs to be a full on 'neutralization', just slowing from 30 to 25 might be enough. Ride six guys wide instead of eight for a while at a reduced speed. I know that it would suck to do that and, then get hung out in a crosswind section because you were willing to sit back to make it safer, so there needs to be some 'gentleman's' understanding. A soft neutralization?
I have no problems with a 'soft neutralization' as long as they don't throw a hissy fit if someone who is 1 hour down decides to go on a solo breakaway to steal a stage win.
Seems like sometimes a 'soft neutralization' is exactly done by GC teams allowing riders who are far down on the GC to get up ahead, thus taking away the motivation other riders might have to ride for the stage.
Of course, sometimes it's the 'soft neutralization' which allows riders to go up the road and go for the stage.
I can argue that Australia is out of step when it comes to fines for misdeameanours such as parking offences, speeding offences etc - The fining system is out of proportion to the average monthly wages - A 1500 Euro is a decent whack - Anyway hope she is not scared from attending future cycling events.
In general that sounds reasonable and as for your additional questions.
ASO shouldn't have backed out. Implement the agreed upon safety masseurs to prevent predictable injuries and damages. Or cancel the event. UCI can sue if they feel ASO did something wrong. As they backed out, fine, but they need to take the responsibility for it.
As for the UCI. It doesn't really matter in a country, as France, if their internal rules say something like in a case of cardboard incident stone the person on site. It' just not relevant and more importantly it is against the local laws. Nor ASO or UCI is above that. UCI has no power in clearing ASO, as a sport event organiser, from liability for their actions. If ASO feels UCI did them wrong they can sue UCI.
Anyway enough about this for now from my side. Lets wait and see in the future if they learned something from it. As if ASO will again back out of some agreed upon safety measurements that will result in predictable injuries and damages. The time will come when somebody will decide to held them accountable. On why this hasn't happened yet? In general the sentiment in peloton is situation is bad and it is getting worse and nothing can be done about it. Likely the problems is the fear of retaliation and it is easier to not say anything and don't face the public opinion and go thorough the hassle of a law suit. General opinion is currently in favour of nothing can be done. It's not preventable. Only that woman or cyclists themselves are to blame. Always and in all cases. No need to look into it as you won't find anything. Like sure.
Last edited:
Cancel a 21-day event because of possible safety issue on parts of one stage? LoL!
Right, let's imagine ASO decides to sue UCI.
Or, you know, some of the riders decide to sue the responsible party (UCI!)
Do you really think the case would be brought up in front of the French courts, or... wouldn't they rather be brought up in an institution like... CAS?
But, anyway. Why is it so important for you to insist that ASO are responsible, when it's been established that UCI made the final decision.
Last edited:
TRENDING THREADS
-
Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread- Started by DNP-Old
- Replies: 29K
-
Teams & Riders The Great Big Cycling Transfers, Extensions, and Rumours Thread
- Started by RedheadDane
- Replies: 11K
-
Teams & Riders Alberto Contador Discussion Thread- Started by LaFlorecita
- Replies: 51K
-
Teams & Riders Tadej Pogačar discussion thread- Started by Lequack
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Teams & Riders Everybody needs a little bit of Roglstomp in their lives- Started by johnymax
- Replies: 19K
-
Teams & Riders Chris Froome Discussion Thread.- Started by Miburo
- Replies: 21K
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram