Crashes, what can be done?

[Squire]

OK, fair point, you don't know if the numbers are correct. So if the numbers are correct, then you do acknowledge the rise as being a fact?

If the numbers are correct, then it's clear that there were quite a bit more reported injuries (if that's what the numbers say, but we don't even know that because the graph just says 'injuries') in 2023 and 2024 compared to the average from the years before. The 200% increase (or 400% as the article claims going from 100 to 300 represents) is extreme cherry-picking of numbers.

But I prefer to discuss things based on something a bit more reliable than 'if the unreferenced numbers shown in a marketing article are correct'. I also prefer people who are stating things as facts to be able to back them up by actual evidence. Other than that, I agree with every good measure that can be taken against crashes and injuries in cycling, regardless of whether the number of crashes/injuries have increased or not. There are still too many of them for my liking.

 

[CyclistAbi]

@Libertine Seguros

Ah, i see. Well it can't really be that bad, as you end up agreeing with most of it. Much appreciated. As for personal digs, it's sporting orientated forum after all and hence i understand that.

Women's health is something i feel we could discuss ATM, as Vollering is vocal about it and we are sort of in a limbo, in between waiting for Airbags to be implemented and the rest that likely won't be implemented or to have any meaningful impact to simply pass by. So maybe women's health is something to take on now, as i doubt UCI president will. Or we don't have to if it's not time yet.

@Squire

At this point i feel it's pointless to debate things like if something happens 100 times 12 years back and now 400 times, on how many percentages increase that really is. It's a lot, isn't it? You asked for data and you got it.

Now if the numbers are true or not, this will get sorted out in future debates. After all this is the very first time i seen such numbers posted anywhere on this forum. So let that just sink in a bit first. What i can say is numbers are likely correct, checked against some public databases and posted articles and it seems consistent. For example the data says we already exceeded 2014 numbers, injuries, in 2026 season and well, it's beginning of April.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

Fire people at the UCI who don't have piles

Seems a bit severe.

Who's going to have to check them all?

 

[Libertine Seguros]

@Libertine Seguros

Ah, i see. Well it can't really be that bad, as you end up agreeing with most of it. Much appreciated. As for personal digs, it's sporting orientated forum after all and hence i understand that.

Here's the crux of the issue.

If there is a spate of injuries in soccer that cause some major players to miss the World Cup, it will be a bad thing. Nobody is going to dispute that. And if dangerous play is contributing to us seeing lots of star players getting injured, we should expect FIFA to clamp down on player or referee behaviours, or if improved shinpads and ankle supports (modern shinpads are ridiculously small and ineffectual) can be introduced, then that's great.

But if I start screaming from the rooftops that the sport of soccer is in danger of dying because of these injuries, and start posting articles that say "Real Madrid make three changes to their starting lineup due to injuries on international duty" and writing forum posts claiming this article actually says "Real Madrid president blames FIFA for endangering players' lives" to back up my claim that the sport is dying... I shouldn't expect people to take me seriously.

 

[jmdirt]

Number of riders involved is a difficult one to track accurately, because it's difficult to define what constitutes being involved in a crash. Are you involved if you have to put your foot on the ground? Because that's something that can happen both because people are crashing in front of you, and because someone crashes into you from the side. If no to the former but yes to the latter, where do you draw the line between the two? If no to both, then how hard does a rider need to crash into you to be considered involved?

And it also isn't data you're going to be able to find for the non-televised early stages of stages/races that were the norm everywhere quite recently, making it impossible to compare to even the mid-2010s. Medical bulletins will probably have survived somewhere going decently far back.

We are discussing crashes. Putting your foot down is not a crash.

 

[jmdirt]

Seems a bit severe.

Who's going to have to check them all?

The CN Forum mods!

 

[Unchained]

Here's the crux of the issue.

If there is a spate of injuries in soccer that cause some major players to miss the World Cup, it will be a bad thing. Nobody is going to dispute that. And if dangerous play is contributing to us seeing lots of star players getting injured, we should expect FIFA to clamp down on player or referee behaviours, or if improved shinpads and ankle supports (modern shinpads are ridiculously small and ineffectual) can be introduced, then that's great.

But if I start screaming from the rooftops that the sport of soccer is in danger of dying because of these injuries, and start posting articles that say "Real Madrid make three changes to their starting lineup due to injuries on international duty" and writing forum posts claiming this article actually says "Real Madrid president blames FIFA for endangering players' lives" to back up my claim that the sport is dying... I shouldn't expect people to take me seriously.

I will take your post seriously if you will. When you crash on a bike during the race, counter football crash behavior is prudent. Most crashed riders try to get up, get going as soon as possible. After years of watching football ( soccer) nobody really talks about an accepted reality, that many players lay on the ground in dramatic states of distress and agony, wincing in unbearable pain, when video is reviewed, @70% I am being generous, the laid out player was either untouched or grazed at best. Another bizarre behavior trait that the game has accepted, all the theater costs nobody anything. The injured player gets a back or leg rub, some freeze spray and help with temporary medical needs by someone who mostly talks to them.. @99% the player is able to continue playing, the injury delay doesn't cost the team anything. . I have seen some pretty horrible injuries from football ( soccer) and the reaction of someone who is truly, broken bone, hand,arm, ankle, knee,ect injury is easier to identify than the run of the mill pro wrestling looking roll around that most thespians try to play on..
I suppose someone will post that Pogacar faked his 3 flats today and his dramatic and desperate chase for drama..

 

[Lequack]

Apparently nothing can be done about crashes still.

 

[Red Rick]

Morgado: "We knew it was slippery and dangerous, so we took extra risks to be in front."

Spoiler

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Morgado: "We knew it was slippery and dangerous, so we took extra risks to be in front."

Spoiler

"It was risky, so in order to be safe we took more risks".

Why am I reminded of that George Carlin quote about "fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity"?

 

[ice&fire]

Recalling Superman's incident at the 2020 TDF opening stage we can say that History repeats itself, first as a farce, then as a tragedy

We're going backwards!

 

[QueenStagiaire]

Recalling Superman's incident at the 2020 TDF opening stage we can say that History repeats itself, first as a farce, then as a tragedy

We're going backwards!

I overlooked the TdF part of your post and thought about how he crashed out in the Giro opening TT and wondered what that had to do with anything. Superman really didn‘t have a great time in the opening stages that year.

 

[awavey]

"It was risky, so in order to be safe we took more risks".

Why am I reminded of that George Carlin quote about "fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity"?

as backwards as it sounds there is some logic to it, in that I think you are safer at the front, than back in the pack, most riders who crash and injure themselves in a way that ends their race, usually are the ones back in the pack minding their own business and get taken down by someone elses crash happening in front of them and they cant react in time.

whether then you increase your risk, above the risk of staying back in the pack, to get to the front of having a race ending crash, well yes thats always likely too.

but I get what theyre saying, they wanted to be on the front because thats the safest place to be when theres a general high risk of crashing, and to get to the front they had to take more risks

 

[Netserk]

as backwards as it sounds there is some logic to it, in that I think you are safer at the front, than back in the pack, most riders who crash and injure themselves in a way that ends their race, usually are the ones back in the pack minding their own business and get taken down by someone elses crash happening in front of them and they cant react in time.

whether then you increase your risk, above the risk of staying back in the pack, to get to the front of having a race ending crash, well yes thats always likely too.

but I get what theyre saying, they wanted to be on the front because thats the safest place to be when theres a general high risk of crashing, and to get to the front they had to take more risks

the back of the peloton is usually quite safe and it was also safe yesterday

and as they came late to the front , they were probably the team that added most hazard to the situation

 

[Libertine Seguros]

as backwards as it sounds there is some logic to it, in that I think you are safer at the front, than back in the pack, most riders who crash and injure themselves in a way that ends their race, usually are the ones back in the pack minding their own business and get taken down by someone elses crash happening in front of them and they cant react in time.

whether then you increase your risk, above the risk of staying back in the pack, to get to the front of having a race ending crash, well yes thats always likely too.

but I get what theyre saying, they wanted to be on the front because thats the safest place to be when theres a general high risk of crashing, and to get to the front they had to take more risks

It does make sense in certain contexts, but so does fighting for peace. The idea is obviously in that they take one risk to avoid another which they perceive as worse - because while you increase the chance of yourself causing an accident, you reduce the risk of being inadvertently caught up in one.

The problem is that it relies on others not perceiving the risks in the same way, because if you then have multiple teams all doing the same thing, of course you're just going to end up with the same risks if not worse, since everybody is fighting for space on the front on the same roads that everybody perceived as dangerous and needing to take that action to get to the front to avoid.