Is there any actual source anywhere for these very confident statements? Given how they're presented as facts, I reckon there is?
It's all well and good discussing measures against crashes in pro cycling, as ideally we'd want as few as possible in any case, but I'd be interested to know how we know there are actually more of them now.
I can still remember the Team Sky documentary from their 2011 TdF, so thats 15 years ago now, where theres a section of how you must just survive the first week of the Tour because literally theres a crash everyday that results in a rider, because theres alot of energy in the peloton, sprinters and their teams are jostling more for their wins, and often a favourite for the podium, going home and not making it to Paris. And theres like maybe a 30sec-1min compilation of crash after crash after crash, the DS calling out crash on the radio constantly.
Coverage wasn't as extensive in those days maybe not all the crashes that certainly happened, stuck in people's minds as much.
I dont feel from what ive watched over the years its gotten markedly worse. I mean i did watch one of the races in Flanders the other week where the men seemed to handle the conditions fine but the women riding the same roads were like bambi on ice, though it seemed it was alot of the proconti level riders and teams causing the issues. Experience is often lacking I feel.
But really the only thing that I see thats changed is younger riders dont seem to engage brain as much in bunches anymore they seem to be in that were indestructible mode and will happily ride faster into situations where caution would be better for it.
Like Pidcocks crash, descending at 60kph, now he's a skilled rider and can descend like a man possessed, but what went through his mind that said its ok in that moment to grab a water bottle ?
And btw none of this crash protection stuff would have made any difference to the injuries he ended up with.