Cyclingnews are cowards when it comes to Cavendish

[Newgymshoes]

Why is cyclingnews treating Cavendish different than other cyclists? Writing that "While both riders deviated from their line before running into each other, Cavendish was given a 30-second penalty by the race jury". By this insinuating that both was equally wrong and that Cavendish unjust was penalised. Why do they write stuff like that? What about the fact that Cavendish also was penalised with -20 points and 200 swiss francs? How about the point that everyone who has eyes that work could see that Cavendish was drifting WAY more than anyone else.

What are they afraid of? The Cav is gonna boicot cyclingnews? Cyclingnews is a newssite and should write what happens and not interpret anything. The same with Armstrong. Why are they so carefull with what they write about him and sometimes sensures their articles? If I go out and call Armstrong a cheat and a liar and cyclingnews write about that, armstrong can take me to court and not cyclingnews. What are they so afraid of?

I hope one day to see Thor Hushovd slap Cav over the face and tell him to start to act like an adult!

 

[auscyclefan94]

Totally agree. I those reports it should be a presentation of the facts of the stage and NO opinions. Have that in another piece.

I guess DB is british so he will defend his countrymen.

 

[workingclasshero]

If I go out and call Armstrong a cheat and a liar and cyclingnews write about that, armstrong can take me to court and not cyclingnews.

i believe you could be wrong (it depends on the country and its laws).

i used to go to uni in england and was taught that it is the publisher who has to check facts. So even if it is you who says "armstrong is a doper", it would be The guardian or whoever who would have to be able to back it up if Armstrong sued them for libel

however i do agree with you that it is painfully obvious that cavendish is the one to blame.

 

[python]

i have a solution: they should make tff a staff writer and a moderator.

problem solved !

 

[Roland Rat]

Jesus wept. I don;t know why I'm bothering, but here goes.


Both DID deviate from their lines. Cav more than Haussler, but Haussler was by no means entirely innocent.

But don't let your irrational hatred of Cav get in the way of a good forum lynching.

 

[M Sport]

So even if it is you who says "armstrong is a doper", it would be The guardian or whoever who would have to be able to back it up if Armstrong sued them for libel

I will let you in on a secret, Armstrong won't be sueing anyone in any country, anytime soon.

Likewise, Cav has two instances of dangerous riding now, the action should be called as it's seen, not invented to suit your audience or market share. CN should call a spade a spade when it sees one. Just soft that's all.

 

[workingclasshero]

I will let you in on a secret, Armstrong won't be sueing anyone in any country, anytime soon.

thanks for the insight now you're free to pat yourself on the back

 

[Newgymshoes]

It is just a very strong feeling i have from reading numerous articles on Cyclingnews that they are a bit afraid of upseting some big riders, especially Cavendish and Armstrong. With Cavendish being such a loose cannon with words they might be afraid that he is gonna say something bad about Cyclingnews.

I totally agree whith the person who said that they should call "spade a spade" (eller "spade en spade", sier man det andre steder enn norge altså???)

I remember the very first article that was posted after Landis had his big day of blurting out everything. Cyclingnews did like a newspaper should and just quoted him, later the same day they had sensored the article MASSIVLY. That is what I am talking about. (Not trying to start a debate on Armstrong, I'm new here, but I guess that topic has been debated to death in here...)

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

CN won't bite the hand that feeds them. This is the same reason why they are so uncritical of the Hog and Uniballer. If they were to be critical then the likelihood is that Uniballer, Hog and Frodo will stop granting them 'headline grabbing' exclusive interviews.

Those interviews mean hits and views, and this is what they sell to the likes of Trek when begging for advertising.

Don't expect integrity or honesty from CN when it comes to reporting on the misdeeds of english speaking riders - especially those with rich and powerful sponsors who advertise on this site.

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

MOving this to the appropriate sub-forum.

Susan

 

[Newgymshoes]

i can very vividly imagine who uniballer is hehehe, but who is hog and frodo. Guessing one of them is Cav, but who is who?

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Hog is Bruyneel - a name dating back to his riding days - and Frodo is Cav because he looks like a Hobbit.

But you are right - look at how in the live feed the only 'tweets' being reported are the pro-Frodo ones, and then compare that to the discussion on the forum... fair and balanced in a Fox News stylee.

 

[cycledan]

Nonsense. Cav veered a bit and I am OK if the race jury penalized him but what he did was not so egregious. In nearly all sprints, racers go to the side a bit. When you come around a guy at the end of a race, you have to know to give him a little distance to either side. They were tired men going all out and sometimes that results in taking things right to the edge. Haussler also was coming into Cav a bit. I just hope he recovers fast from his injuries.

 

[rhubroma]

Why is cyclingnews treating Cavendish different than other cyclists? Writing that "While both riders deviated from their line before running into each other, Cavendish was given a 30-second penalty by the race jury". By this insinuating that both was equally wrong and that Cavendish unjust was penalised. Why do they write stuff like that? What about the fact that Cavendish also was penalised with -20 points and 200 swiss francs? How about the point that everyone who has eyes that work could see that Cavendish was drifting WAY more than anyone else.

What are they afraid of? The Cav is gonna boicot cyclingnews? Cyclingnews is a newssite and should write what happens and not interpret anything. The same with Armstrong. Why are they so carefull with what they write about him and sometimes sensures their articles? If I go out and call Armstrong a cheat and a liar and cyclingnews write about that, armstrong can take me to court and not cyclingnews. What are they so afraid of?

I hope one day to see Thor Hushovd slap Cav over the face and tell him to start to act like an adult!

In a word: news is biased. Facts are to be interpreted. Moreover usually there are always special interests behind how certain events are interpreted in certain ways and often to mystify what has really taken place, so that often fiction is exchanged for fact and vice versa.

And where money is to be involved one usually reads the most vile and spineless type of reports, by so-called journalists, who are bent on nothing short of covering their jobs.
.

 

[Dewulf]

Jesus wept. I don;t know why I'm bothering, but here goes.


Both DID deviate from their lines. Cav more than Haussler, but Haussler was by no means entirely innocent.

But don't let your irrational hatred of Cav get in the way of a good forum lynching.

Hmm, Roland you agreed with me in the other thread: Cav's movement was approaching Abdou proportions.

Hausler's movement, I'll maintain, was minimal and as 'safe' as we can expect within a bunch sprint. It was Cav jumping across that resulted in the crash. This much is painfully obvious.

I don't think saying "oh x% Cav, y% Hausler" really works. Without Cav doing a good Terror from Tashkent impersonation, this wouldn't have happened.

And my hatred of Cav is far from irrational ha - do i really need to repeat the list of ways he disrespects pretty much everyone around him lol? It's not just having a mouth; he disregards dentist post-op advise, this results in infection and wasted opportunities for his team who are routinely sacrificed so that he can have chances...but there's already a thread for that anyway.

That said, he's as bad at admitting he's wrong, as Vino is at admitting he doped!

I mean get this:

"I'm not going to say that I'm not at fault, but I don't think I should have been held as the sole responsible." - well then just say it! Read the bouncing ball Frodo! "It....was...my...fault...I'm.....sorry"

...and as for being held sole responsible? Oh, you fvcked up and can't handle it so have a winge about the other guy too yeah, why not, he's out of the race, and oh, there are others hurt worse than you?! You don't say, sheesh, the least you could do is apologise, but you're not even man enough to do that are ya.

Back to topic tho, yeah, harsh editorial is something we're not likely to see on this site. I thought Delgado's comments re Piti were innacurate and would have like to see those corrected, but with any advertising-driven website, this is unlikely to say the least. Have also seen it in entertainment web-sites. It's the nature of the beast, and you know, with CN you get race reports etc so it's just a matter of finding the right blog for the other stuff i guess.

 

[Newgymshoes]

Just look at the live commentaries today, when asking people to send in their thoughts on the crash. DB (or is it DN) ONLY quoted the ones who were pro Cav.

Every other newspaper I've seen so far has been absolutelly clear in who was to blame for the incident. Also other cyclists show their repulsion for the way he acts after been given the fault. Today when the riders protested against his attitude, he just spat on the ground. CLASSY!

 

[BroDeal]

Did I miss the part in the Cav protest article that mentioned Cav spitting? It was in articles on other sites. That should have been a juicy addition.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Given that CN has spun the story to minimise Frodo's fault, and that all of the 'tweets' reposted in the liveticker were pro-Frodo, it is unlikely that they would report the two spitting incidents as in both cases they make Frodo look worse.

If you can't spin it, omit it, seems to be the CN attitude.

 

[Martin318is]

Did I miss the part in the Cav protest article that mentioned Cav spitting? It was in articles on other sites. That should have been a juicy addition.

I did find it very weird that although I had already read the Cavendish specific articles, the first I heard of Cavendish spitting was in the Robbie McKewen article on him getting into the TdF.....