Crashes, what can be done?

Page 85 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Libertine Seguros said:
I specifically mentioned that the crash was before the GC rider finish. Because, and here's the crazy thing, crashes can happen on other parts of the course too.
Click to expand...

I was referring to the part on where you wrote leaders jersey could sit up and cause issues to the organiser, making them wait with the ceremony. Note that i didn't take this too seriously but OK, if you really feel somebody would do such things, no problems. Simple rule determining appropriate time cut formula resolves it.

So you need to arrange two separate safe finishes, not just one. And include appropriate barriering for both, because fans will want to see the part of the stage that matters for the overall as well as the part of the stage that matters for the win for the day. Increasing organisatorial costs that you would already be driving up with your previous arguments that place all responsibility on race organisers for safety and abrogate all responsibility from riders for their own actions.
Click to expand...

You need to do all that yes. Peanuts.

There's no need to over-complicate the sport of cycling by introducing such gimmickry as duelling finishes. Just police rider behaviours better and put stricter regulation of what an acceptable stage finish is for races where a bunch finish is expected, to avoid things like that Women's Tour of Britain one with the progressively narrowing chicanes 300m from the finish or the dusty Neapolitan roads with a hairpin bend inside the final kilometre.
Click to expand...

I see, no need to change anything, just use some easy solution, blame the riders and that is that. And how is that one working out?
 
CyclistAbi said:
I see, no need to change anything, just use some easy solution, blame the riders and that is that. And how is that one working out?
Click to expand...
Well, nobody apart from you has proposed radically changing the start-to-finish racing protocol and the sport appears to still be in business after 140 years.
 
@Libertine Seguros

There where changes introduced in this 140 years or so, though. 1km rule originating in 1972, becoming official in 90s, extending to 3km in 2005 then up to 4 and now even up to 5 km. So in 2040 likely RB KM will be used as GC line just before returning and driving the elite sprinters into Venice.

Anyway, lets see on how it goes, this wasn't the first time when it was done like that, so likely the frequency will only increase. Most people didn't even notice it.
 

www.instagram.com

CPAwomen on Instagram: "Riders deserve safer races. #CpaWomen #WeAreTheRiders #StrongerTogether #SafetyFirst #Cycling"

112 likes, 1 comments - cpawomen on June 19, 2026: "Riders deserve safer races. #CpaWomen #WeAreTheRiders #StrongerTogether #SafetyFirst #Cycling".
www.instagram.com www.instagram.com

I agree. That is there seems to be so much talk, one would get perception safety in pro peloton is constantly improving. Reality being it's a sham.
 
carolina said:
They finally realized they were the ones creating unnecessary danger on sprint stages.
Click to expand...

First of all i see you got a like from @Libertine Seguros that basically argued for year this can't be done, by UCI, and now basically riders themself did it, separated goats from bulls. Secondly your comment shows on just how little should general fandom really be involved in this area, IMHO totally misplaced comment mocking safety. Thirdly i feel that it's the way to go forward, that is such rider emancipation must continue, not for mocking fandom, or some governing body, oh no, mostly for athletes to do it for themself, remain healthy. So in general i do agree with the sentiment, finally the riders themself are starting to realise it, moreover are starting to act on it. Hard to ask for more from their side. In the end they shouldn't get injured or worse for fandom or some governing body, totally not worth it. Such realisation is healing by itself so lets build on that.
 
Last edited:
CyclistAbi said:
First of all i see you got a like from @Libertine Seguros that basically argued for year this can't be done, by UCI, and now basically riders themself did it, separated goats from bulls. Secondly your comment shows on just how little should general fandom really be involved in this area, IMHO totally misplaced comment mocking safety. Thirdly i feel that it's the way to go forward, that is such rider emancipation must continue, not for mocking fandom, or some governing body, oh no, mostly for athletes to do it for themself, remain healthy. So in general i do agree with the sentiment, finally the riders themself are starting to realise it, moreover are starting to act on it. Hard to ask for more from their side. In the end they shouldn't get injured or worse for fandom or some governing body, totally not worth it. Such realisation is healing by itself so lets build on that.
Click to expand...
One: that’s not what LS was saying at all and you should go back to reread their posts.
Two: they weren’t mocking safety and highlighting a key area which one has ignored being riders don’t help the situation sometimes with the crashing.
Third: that’s what some have been asking for , riders taking their own safety into account too.
 
CyclistAbi said:

So in the end riders themself had to take action, to organise and prevent unnecessary crashes at bunch sprint finales, by self separating goats from the bulls.
Click to expand...

It wasn't in evidence on stage 5: as soon as there was a potential for advantage to be taken, UAE were looking for it, and only one rider wavering across the road kept Vingegaard from losing a lump of time even with the extended 3" rule.


And if the UCI want to encourage this, they could at least change the tiebreaker for riders on the same time to best placings rather than total. Make it thoroughly irrelevant whether you are 17th or 85th in the bunch. It is very rare that this makes a difference, but it sends some signal of "you don't need to try to be at the front on a sprint stage."
 
Last edited:
CyclistAbi said:
First of all i see you got a like from @Libertine Seguros that basically argued for year this can't be done, by UCI, and now basically riders themself did it, separated goats from bulls. Secondly your comment shows on just how little should general fandom really be involved in this area, IMHO totally misplaced comment mocking safety. Thirdly i feel that it's the way to go forward, that is such rider emancipation must continue, not for mocking fandom, or some governing body, oh no, mostly for athletes to do it for themself, remain healthy. So in general i do agree with the sentiment, finally the riders themself are starting to realise it, moreover are starting to act on it. Hard to ask for more from their side. In the end they shouldn't get injured or worse for fandom or some governing body, totally not worth it. Such realisation is healing by itself so lets build on that.
Click to expand...
As Shadow pointed out, my main issue has been that every solution put forward has been something that will take time and money to implement, but won't solve the problem of crashes caused by behaviours in the péloton, despite riders taking increasing risks. People have said that the UCI and race organisers have to adapt to allow for rider behaviour, but behaviour in the péloton can be changed much more easily than the geography of countries or the town planning of the locations being raced in, and the only cost of it is a little humility on the riders' part. I saw rider introspection as a more pressing and urgent need than most other changes, because of the ease of implementation and lack of cost and roll-out time.

The riders therefore looking at themselves and realising that they are not perfect victims, but that they are also part of the problem, and therefore agreeing to modify their behaviour and not take such liberties with their own and their peers' safety is, in fact, precisely what I have suggested should happen.
 
Divergence said:
3 out of 4 is not good enough
Click to expand...

Seems a pretty good statistic to me. Seems the GC riders' decision to stay off the front has worked for the most part.

Anyway, sprint stages are a part of road cycling. I know you want to act as if they aren't, but let's stick to facts.
 
RedheadDane said:
Seems a pretty good statistic to me. Seems the GC riders' decision to stay off the front has worked for the most part.

Anyway, sprint stages are a part of road cycling. I know you want to act as if they aren't, but let's stick to facts.
Click to expand...
You make It seam as if it is a mathematical theorem. An organizer might not include any flat stages. Seeing how the GC riders are quietly protesting them it is more and more likely
 
Divergence said:
You make It seam as if it is a mathematical theorem. An organizer might not include any flat stages. Seeing how the GC riders are quietly protesting them it is more and more likely
Click to expand...

They're not "quietly protesting them".
They've realised that there's no need for them to be up there near the front on sprint stages.
 
RedheadDane said:
Anyway, sprint stages are a part of road cycling. I know you want to act as if they aren't, but let's stick to facts.
Click to expand...
Yes. I look at them as entertainment during breaks in NBA games. And also they serve as rest days for GC. It would be impossible to have 3 week race without them.
 
RedheadDane said:
They're not "quietly protesting them".
They've realised that there's no need for them to be up there near the front on sprint stages.
Click to expand...
Yes, because it is dangerous and it sprint stages make no sense and there is no prestige.
 
Maybe no cars on popular climbs. Just some motorbikes as in the Monte Lussari TT.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

Back
Top