Crashes, what can be done?

[jmdirt]

@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.

When did I call you a name?

 

[CyclistAbi]

@jmdirt

You just started saying i am twisting all the time. Hard to have a discussion when the opposite site results to that. But note that i don't blame you. We where in the middle of some discussion where things where still pretty much twisted. You likely saw me in the middle and believed i am twisting when actually what i was doing was straightening things out as they where already twisted.

Anyway good thing you asked. As on today's stage there was a person with an umbrella and the darnedest thing happened. Just when a cyclist was approaching wind threw that umbrella in the middle of the rode and one cyclist had to avoid it not to crash. It could have been the peloton. This happened only days after we have rubbed some salt under that woman nails and she had to wash bicycles ... Point being making that woman an example had exactly 0 effect in preventing such safety related incidents in the peloton. It was all to no avail.

We must think of better ways on how to address the fan issue in regards to lowering the amount of safety related issues. I would start with educating as educating stupid people makes them just people. I guess.

 

[jmdirt]

@jmdirt

You just started saying i am twisting all the time. Hard to have a discussion when the opposite site results to that. But note that i don't blame you. We where in the middle of some discussion where things where still pretty much twisted. You likely saw me in the middle and believed i am twisting when actually what i was doing was straightening things out as they where already twisted.

Anyway good thing you asked. As on today's stage there was a person with an umbrella and the darnedest thing happened. Just when a cyclist was approaching wind threw that umbrella in the middle of the rode and one cyclist had to avoid it not to crash. It could have been the peloton. This happened only days after we have rubbed some salt under that woman nails and she had to wash bicycles ... Point being making that woman an example had exactly 0 effect in preventing such safety related incidents in the peloton. It was all to no avail.

We must think of better ways on how to address the fan issue in regards to lowering the amount of safety related issues. I would start with educating as educating stupid people makes them just people. I guess.

That's not name calling. If I pointed out that you have brown eyes is that name calling?

 

[CyclistAbi]

That's not name calling. If I pointed out that you have brown eyes is that name calling?

Is that all you have to say? That was exactly the point i was trying to make.

 

[CyclistAbi]

Cancel a 21-day event because of possible safety issue on parts of one stage? LoL!

If you as a sport event organiser agreed but after backed out of implementing agreed upon safety measures. Then yes. Cancel the event or take the responsibility if that resulted in predicted injuries and damages due to safety measures not being implemented.

As ASO is unlikely to do this anytime soon. Cancel event. Basically as nobody is ever making them take the responsibility. IMHO after the safety related fiasco on stage 1 and 3 riders themselves should at minimum refuse to ride one stage. That minute stop they took on stage 4 was a joke and had no effect whatsoever. Authorities indeed likely LOLed. I have a feeling that eventually this will happen. Nobody is taking safety serious and something will happen at some point that will make them do it. Currently they are treated more or less as livestock. When it comes to their safety and they know it.

Right, let's imagine ASO decides to sue UCI.
Or, you know, some of the riders decide to sue the responsible party (UCI!)

In the case we are discussing both have slim chances to succeed. Riders can sue the race organisers, hence ASO. ASO in this case has no real case suing UCI. As why would ASO sue UCI for ASO not doing their job?

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?

Why wouldn't it be? This is a rather normal thing. Event participant to sue event organiser regarding safety related incidents and for damages. As for arbitration court. This is something ASO and UCI could use if they would have different opinion on for example contract content. And would let such court decide the contents of the contract for them and both would after respect it.

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.

Because ASO is responsible.

 

[CyclistAbi]

@all

I am out for now. We would only go in circles. If you agree fine if not i won't lose sleep over it.

 

[jmdirt]

Let me be very clear as to not 'go in circles': ultimately it is the racers' responsibility to protect themselves and their peers. That might mean meeting, protesting, boycotting, riding slower, having on the road 'agreements', etc.

Yes, we all want promoters and governing bodies to put on the safest races possible.
-should the challenges of the road be eliminated from road cycling?
-should all races be on perfect, smooth, wide roads? Just GTs? Just flat stages?
-should host towns be expected to resurface the road in order to be a host town? Widen it too?
--it could get tough to tie together a route around France without long transfers
-no more Paris-Roubaix? No more Strade-Bianche?
-one day races are OK on unsafe roads, but not stage races/GTs?
-no more difficult descents?
-no racing in the rain?
-no racing in strong winds?

Yes, we want 'crowd control/enforcement'.

EDIT: Reduce the number of motos.

 

[RedheadDane]

@CyclistAbi

Sure... sure... ASO "didn't do their job"... BECAUSE. UCI. PREVENTED. THEM. FROM. DOING. SO!

UCI does have the power to overrule decisions made by race organisers.
Or do you think decisions made by the UCI are merely suggestions? Things race organisers can accept or ignore as they see fit?

Right. I know it's not crash-related, but remember a few years ago when there was this whole situation in the Giro with Simon Clarke giving Ritchie Porte a wheel, despite them being on different teams?
RCS actually thought it was a pretty cool show of sportsmanship, and didn't do anything. Then UCI overruled that and docked them both two minutes. Should RCS just have given them the time back, since race organisers can apparently just ignore decisions made by the UCI.

 

[the delgados]

Let me be very clear as to not 'go in circles': ultimately it is the racers' responsibility to protect themselves and their peers. That might mean meeting, protesting, boycotting, riding slower, having on the road 'agreements', etc.

Yes, we all want promoters and governing bodies to put on the safest races possible.
-should the challenges of the road be eliminated from road cycling?
-should all races be on perfect, smooth, wide roads? Just GTs? Just flat stages?
-should host towns be expected to resurface the road in order to be a host town? Widen it too?
--it could get tough to tie together a route around France without long transfers
-no more Paris-Roubaix? No more Strade-Bianche?
-one day races are OK on unsafe roads, but not stage races/GTs?
-no more difficult descents?
-no racing in the rain?
-no racing in strong winds?

Yes, we want 'crowd control/enforcement'.

That reinforces the fact that at the end of the day, the riders determine how hard a stage is going to be ridden. Ideally they would form a union with legally binding collective bargaining rights --just like pretty much every other professional sport on the planet -- but until then it seems the riders have managed to gain a lot of ground in terms of safety.
Note that at least two examples of incentives cited above could be used to put more money in the pocket of the riders who deserve it, but I guess that's a topic of discussion for another day.
As a spectator who likes watching the drama of treacherous descents and hair-raising sprint finales, I would be disappointed if further safety measures were introduced into the sport.
That's not to say I want to see a crash. Far from it. I get way more excitement watching them do seemingly impossible things without crashing. I used to race at a fairly high level and am still amazed to see the things that these guys do that I still cannot imagine.

 

[King Boonen]

For those who many wish to have an informed discussion:

https://www.uci.org/docs/default-source/rules-and-regulations/part-ii-road/2-roa-regulations-e.pdf

Just in case people missed this…

 

[the delgados]

Just in case people missed this…

Unless I'm getting paid to do so, I'm not going to spend time reading hundreds of pages of UCI rules and regulations.
We're on a cycling message board where pretty much anything goes, and hopefully people share thoughts and ideas in good faith. I like nothing more than a healthy debate in good faith with some digs thrown in along the way. I'm a big boy and can take it on the chin if I said something stupid. It's all good.
But until everyone here is expected to refer to every section and sub-section of UCI regulations, maybe you can help by referring to relevant aspects of the UCI code without expecting everyone else to know them. Perhaps you have a step up on us, and if so, that's awesome. Please tell us what we don't know.

 

[King Boonen]

Unless I'm getting paid to do so, I'm not going to spend time reading hundreds of pages of UCI rules and regulations.
We're on a cycling message board where pretty much anything goes, and hopefully people share thoughts and ideas in good faith. I like nothing more than a healthy debate in good faith with some digs thrown in along the way. I'm a big boy and can take it on the chin if I said something stupid. It's all good.
But until everyone here is expected to refer to every section and sub-section of UCI regulations, maybe you can help by referring to relevant aspects of the UCI code without expecting everyone else to know them. Perhaps you have a step up on us, and if so, that's awesome. Please tell us what we don't know.

there are two pages that relate to the protocol for extreme weather and rider safety. If you can’t be bothered to educate yourself about something you’re discussing (and I have no idea if it’s relevant to what you’ve said but it is relevant to what others have been posting) why would someone else want to do it?

 

[RedheadDane]

there are two pages that relate to the protocol for extreme weather and rider safety. If you can’t be bothered to educate yourself about something you’re discussing (and I have no idea if it’s relevant to what you’ve said but it is relevant to what others have been posting) why would someone else want to do it?

Unfortunately it's PDF, so... can't open it.
Anyway, what I'd like to know is if there's anything about UCI being able to overrule decisions made by race organisers, yet still not being held responsible for any safety issues that might result in.
Or... I guess since it's matters related to rules and regulation in general, and not just for the Tour, UCI is always responsible when it comes to matters such as whether or not to take the time at a different point.

 

[King Boonen]

Unfortunately it's PDF, so... can't open it.
Anyway, what I'd like to know is if there's anything about UCI being able to overrule decisions made by race organisers, yet still not being held responsible for any safety issues that might result in.
Or... I guess since it's matters related to rules and regulation in general, and not just for the Tour, UCI is always responsible when it comes to matters such as whether or not to take the time at a different point.

You can’t open a PDF?

 

[RedheadDane]

You can’t open a PDF?

It just took forever to load... and honestly, I hadn't been bothered to making sure I had the right software installed since I dropped out of Uni.

 

[the delgados]

there are two pages that relate to the protocol for extreme weather and rider safety. If you can’t be bothered to educate yourself about something you’re discussing (and I have no idea if it’s relevant to what you’ve said but it is relevant to what others have been posting) why would someone else want to do it?

Ah, gotcha. Understood. No relevance to what I was saying.
Carry on. Nothing to see here, folks.

 

[CyclistAbi]

@RedheadDane

Just a small remark. In the case we discussed it could have been the pope himself and that still wouldn't make any difference. When it comes to liability of ASO as an organiser of the sport event.

P.S. Again if you want to double check that ask a friend that has some knowledge or background in law.

 

[Unchained]

I think no matter how many steps back you take,giant leaps back or forward there is no real solution. Trust me there is plenty of carnage on the velodrome and there are no fans running in the way. The uniform of pro cycling is a colored top and shorts made out of thick panty hose( look it up!!) And somehow the cycling industry has a convinced,that the pavement,guard rails,rocks,trees ,cars and cattle all know the difference between falling off a bicycle at 40mph vs a motorcycle,skateboard or car..that same industry has no s strapping on $200 dollar polystyrene swim buoys on our skulls, convinced of protection...?
there are 2 or 3 obvious solutions to this years Tour crashes..completely closed, fenced off race course..like NASCAR or F1,football,basketball..and add a lead car that neutralizes the race each time it's judged too scary sketchy to continue..and my guess is that there will still always be crashes..
after seeing the efforts put in by these professional bike racing stallions in the rain..both up and down hill..I always want bike racing like this..Pogocar is putting on a show!!! This is a great race

 

[CyclistAbi]

Who knows. Maybe some day there will be a GT race with no crash involved at all. And for Rogla and Pogi to go all in.

P.S. I would likely still buy a ticket to witness that.

 

[IndianCyclist]

I think a lot of the crashes are like Mcnulty's or touch of wheels. Riders looking behind to see where their teammates are and losing tracking of what's on the front and sides. I doubt much could be done to prevent these type of crashes as this is clearly rider issue. The 2nd crash in stage 1 caused by rider touching wheels was just as bad as the first one but the spectator one is preventable and receives the max attention. Yet the max number of crashes is due to riders doing stuff as in this tdf. You can put the max effort in preventing spectator related crashes but it is not going to reduce crashes significantly. Data on crashes would be helpful to analyse the cause and potential solutions(UCI's job).

 

[RedheadDane]

@RedheadDane

Just a small remark. In the case we discussed it could have been the pope himself and that still wouldn't make any difference. When it comes to liability of ASO as an organiser of the sport event.

P.S. Again if you want to double check that ask a friend that has some knowledge or background in law.

ASO is the organiser when it comes specifically to the Tour, and other races they organise.
UCI is the organiser when it comes to the sport as a whole, including stuff like where to take the time. Which, except for extreme circumstances is the finish line.

Imagine this:
A chain of stores always do things in a certain way (X).
Due to safety circumstances in a specific store, employees suggest they do it slightly differently (Y).
Store Manager agrees, but still has to ask the General Manager.
General Manager disapproves.
Everyone continues doing X.
Someone gets hurt.
Who is responsible?

(UCI is the General Manager.)

According to you, in which situation would UCI be responsible?
Think of it from a logical point of view.
How logical is it that the UCI could make a decision, and then just shrug, going: "Eh... not our responsibility if something happens."?
It doesn't make any sense!
UCI needs to be held responsible for THEIR decisions.

 

[CyclistAbi]

@all

Note that there are more discussions in this thread. And we basically agree that for the most crashes ASO would likely not be liable. But that doesn't automatically come down to saying there are no cases where they are liable.

@RedheadDane

If you don't want to ask a friend lawyer then one more analogy from my side. But i won't discuss this further for now as it would be pointless. Lets just agree we don't agree.

Imagine something happens in a church in France that is against the law and hence makes them liable. They started claiming but the Vatican made us do it. Some would say the obvious. Obviously you are responsible not the Vatican. And the story would end here.

P.S. Some would say obviously it's Vatican fault and they are responsible. They made them do it. And some would come in a debate and say for people that want to have an informed discussion read the Bible.

 

[Netserk]

I think a lot of the crashes are like Mcnulty's or touch of wheels. Riders looking behind to see where their teammates are and losing tracking of what's on the front and sides. I doubt much could be done to prevent these type of crashes as this is clearly rider issue. The 2nd crash in stage 1 caused by rider touching wheels was just as bad as the first one but the spectator one is preventable and receives the max attention. Yet the max number of crashes is due to riders doing stuff as in this tdf. You can put the max effort in preventing spectator related crashes but it is not going to reduce crashes significantly. Data on crashes would be helpful to analyse the cause and potential solutions(UCI's job).

While I believe that to be true, those kind of crashes don't happen as often everywhere. The denser the peloton is (and the faster it's going) while there's a continued battle for position, the more those crashes will happen. On a stage like last year's 2nd stage, the peloton was far more relaxed (until Èze at least) and position mattered far less.

 

[RedheadDane]

Note that there are more discussions in this thread. And we basically agree that for the most crashes ASO would likely not be liable. But that doesn't automatically come down to saying there are no cases where they are liable.

I'm not saying ASO is never liable. I'm saying they're not liable for the times not being taken at 5 Ks to go on stage three, including whatever crashes that decision might have resulted in, because it was UCI who made the final decision.
You, on the other hand, seem to think UCI is never liable. After all; if you don't think they're liable for a decision made by UCI commisaires which overruled both riders - for the rider lose "group" that is the riders - and the ASO, when the heck are they liable?

 

[Bolder]

Speaking of crashing, has McNulty been found yet?