Crashes, what can be done?

[CyclistAbi]

So Thomas used Covi as an airbag on stage 11. And Rogla hit the tarmac without any additional protection involved. Due to crashes happening at the same time and on the same section. One got away more or less without a scratch and the other one got some cuts in the hip area.

I am sure that the one using the airbag would trade places without much hesitation involved.

P.S. And both used helmets. Imagine that.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

Rather than trying to be snarky, perhaps you could address the issue. Have I interpreted correctly what you were trying to say, or are you making, as it appeared from your initial comments, an appalling accusation?

 

[SHAD0W93]

So Thomas used Covi as an airbag on stage 11. And Rogla hit the tarmac without any additional protection involved. Due to crashes happening at the same time and on the same section. One got away more or less without a scratch and the other one got some cuts in the hip area.

I am sure that the one using the airbag would trade places without much hesitation involved.

P.S. And both used helmets. Imagine that.

Yes, since landing on bones or a bike is such an airbag. Maybe you should approach Jumbo and Roglic about your airbag idea.

 

[CyclistAbi]

@Armchair cyclist

I won't respond to your questions twice. My answers were verbose enough in the first attempt. I already told you that. If you have problems with understanding, as you mentioned language barrier. Just say so and be more specific about the part causing you issues with understanding.

So in short if you want to discuss this further quote the section you are refuting and make your claims. We can take it from there.

 

[CyclistAbi]

@SHAD0W93

FIS was the one that governed this when it comes to skiing. Hence it's UCI who needs to govern this when it comes to cycling. It's their responsibility. Setting dates, approaching apparel manufactures, communicating it with the teams ...

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

If you are willing to neither make yourself clear, nor allow others to try to clarify for you, I really can't see much point in trying to get meaningful contribution out of you.

So I will take you at your word, that you think that course organisers are psychotics who design finishes with the express intention of causing crashes ("crashes... are there by design"), because they believe that sporting competition cannot be acheived otherwise ("If the crash didn't occur, to make the selection, then the system failed"). And I shall treat any other comment I see from you in these pages as emerging from the same mindset, and give them the respect that that mindset deserves.

 

[CyclistAbi]

@Armchair cyclist

So what is your point?

 

[BR2]

There was an accident/ crash today between a moto and an athlete during the Hamburg Ironman - the motorcyclist is dead.

 

[CyclistAbi]

So at stage 3 finale of the TDF 2023, Philipsen deviated from his sprinting line, pushing van Aert into the barriers and by doing that ruining his sprint. At this point van Aert acted appropriately, by giving up and pressing on the brakes, to prevent a crash from occurring and to after report the incident. To get Philipsen relegated. So far so good. Commissioners decided against relegation and in my opinion failed to do their job.

P.S. Indirectly causing future incidents such as Groenewegen-Jakobsen and Roglič-Wright.

 

[RedheadDane]

P.S. Indirectly causing future incidents such as Groenewegen-Jakobsen and Roglič-Wright.

One of these, is not like the other.

 

[Izzyeviel]

It was more the barriers coming out that stopped Wout, the deviation happened after he sat up. Wout should be angry with the organisation, not his fellow sprinter.

 

[CyclistAbi]

One of these, is not like the other.

It's exactly the same. Both crashes could be avoided if brakes and resulting to relegation would occur. Just like van Aert demonstrated today. This is on how it should be done.

And this is what commissioners need to start doing. Supporting it. Until then they are in their part responsible for causing crashes in bunch sprint stages.

Now that this part was discussed feel free to move to Philipsen-van Aert incident. By for starters expressing if in your opinion the commissioners made the right decision or not. In the light of them doing their job.

 

[CyclistAbi]

It was more the barriers coming out that stopped Wout, the deviation happened after he sat up. Wout should be angry with the organisation, not his fellow sprinter.

I see. In your opinion the barriers somehow pushed van Aert into Philipsen. And commissioners should relegate barriers. Got it.

 

[RedheadDane]

It's exactly the same. Both crashes could be avoided if brakes and resulting to relegation would occur.

One caused the crash - but obviously not the serious consequences - by literally pushing another rider into the barriers.
The other... didn't.

 

[CyclistAbi]

@RedheadDane

Lets move on to discussing Philipsen-van Aert incident and the role commissioners played. Did they do their job appropriately or failed at it?

 

[RedheadDane]

@RedheadDane

Lets move on to discussing Philipsen-van Aert incident and the role commissioners played. Did they do their job appropriately or failed at it?

So you accept that Wright didn't cause that Roglic crash? Good.

Commisaires did their job.

BTW, I'm a bit concerned by the fact that a rider dying didn't cause you to revive this thread, but a rider not being relegated for not causing a rider to not crash did... I feel like you don't quite have your priorities straight.

 

[SHAD0W93]

@RedheadDane

Lets move on to discussing Philipsen-van Aert incident and the role commissioners played. Did they do their job appropriately or failed at it?

Then stop bringing it up. Everyone else has moved on and the majority has correctly placed Roglic at fault for running into Wright’s left elbow who already passed Roglic.

 

[Izzyeviel]

I see. In your opinion the barriers somehow pushed van Aert into Philipsen. And commissioners should relegate barriers. Got it.

If wout sticks to his lane, he ends up in the barriers. This is the moment he sat up & the deviation from Jasper comes later. Ewan and Dylan had far worse deviations in this sprint, if anyone should be relegated, it should be those two. (Ewan started behind Wout & Dylan ended up in the middle)

 

[Lequack]

So the title is: Crashes, what can be done?
UCI says: nothing

 

[SHAD0W93]

So you accept that Wright didn't cause that Roglic crash? Good.

Commisaires did their job.

BTW, I'm a bit concerned by the fact that a rider dying didn't cause you to revive this thread, but a rider not be relegated for not causing a rider to crash did... I feel like you don't quite have your priorities straight.

Which is crazy since the airbag could have helped with the impact honestly and maybe more helpful then protecting the collarbone.

 

[CyclistAbi]

Commisaires did their job.

First thanks for expressing your opinion. And indeed lets keep the discussion about commissioners this time. Not any individual rider.

So if your stance is commissioners did their job. Then next time van Aert should just continue to sprint, as that resulting to crash will automatically put Philipsen at fault?

Note that this is actually how it is now. And i deeply disagree with this.

Which is crazy since the airbag could have helped with the impact honestly and maybe more helpful then protecting the collarbone.

Then again you two are not actually someone i should take too seriously? That is your opinion in regards to safety in pro peloton. I mean you have opinions and i will give you that. But are you two actually claiming you give a damn about improving safety in pro peloton? In what way exactly?

 

[CyclistAbi]

@Izzyeviel

I seen the video and am convinced the deviation happened. So an image won't convince me otherwise. On top of that barriers are going in the other direction. Hence they could never do what your initial claim was. To somehow start pushing van Aert into Philipsen. As for what other riders were doing at that time. It's not really about them. As none of them made an official compliant. In the end we are discussing commissioners this time. And the decision they made.

Should commissioners relegate or should they oppose and encourage riders in van Aerts position to cause a crash. As it won't be their fault. Like it is now.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

It's exactly the same. Both crashes could be avoided if brakes and resulting to relegation would occur. Just like van Aert demonstrated today. This is on how it should be done.

And this is what commissioners need to start doing. Supporting it. Until then they are in their part responsible for causing crashes in bunch sprint stages.

Now that this part was discussed feel free to move to Philipsen-van Aert incident. By for starters expressing if in your opinion the commissioners made the right decision or not. In the light of them doing their job.

Try rewatching but without wearing these.

 

[Izzyeviel]

well they probably made the right call. The don't change your lane rule is there to stop what we saw at the criterium - blatantly changing your line and forcing rivals into the barriers. Its not there to start dq'ing or relegating people who've deviated slightly but haven't endangered anyone nor impeded anyone.

 

[CyclistAbi]

Try rewatching but without wearing these.

I get it i am mostly talking to trolls. My mistake being the initial assumption majority actually gives a damn about this aspect of sport. Improving safety. Reality being majority would rather see more drawing pins to be used than to actually improve safety. I will adjust my stance on this subject accordingly.