Teams & Riders Everybody needs a little bit of Roglstomp in their lives

[theyoungest]

Come on… Nothing is going on right now… What are we expected to just lay low until March? 🤣 Why can’t we just hate Visma and look for controversy? 😁

But seriously - how often do you hear a team discuss stuff like that in public about their former members? I don’t follow that many sports but I did follow F1 passionately and you would never hear a senior team member disclosing any internal discussions like that. I stand by by my assessment that this sort of thing is unprofessional because it achieves nothing…

How often did a situation like this occur in cycling? Literally never, or maybe once when the Vuelta was still a race mainly for Spaniards. The reason that you are so obsessed with it is because there's nothing else to talk about, the rest of the teams didn't matter in the story of this Vuelta so it's only Jumbo's intra-team dynamics that the cycling media focus on. Normally you don't get discussions like this at a team's dinner table, "guys, stop attacking each other and let's just ride hand-in-hand to Madrid".

 

[bNator]

How often did a situation like this occur in cycling? Literally never, or maybe once when the Vuelta was still a race mainly for Spaniards. The reason that you are so obsessed with it is because there's nothing else to talk about, the rest of the teams didn't matter in the story of this Vuelta so it's only Jumbo's intra-team dynamics that the cycling media focus on. Normally you don't get discussions like this at a team's dinner table, "guys, stop attacking each other and let's just ride hand-in-hand to Madrid".

Of course, I was not referring to this exact same situation but any situation in the past where a team boss would come out and say “our former rider said this and that (where this and that is not very flattery) while he was still on our team”. The only examples I can come up with is Movistar with Carapaz and BMC with Dennis but I’ll admit I’m weak in this area…

 

[AmRacer]

Of course, I was not referring to this exact same situation but any situation in the past where a team boss would come out and say “our former rider said this and that (where this and that is not very flattery) while he was still on our team”. The only examples I can come up with is Movistar with Carapaz and BMC with Dennis but I’ll admit I’m weak in this area…

Caleb

 

[Oldermanish]

Of course, I was not referring to this exact same situation but any situation in the past where a team boss would come out and say “our former rider said this and that (where this and that is not very flattery) while he was still on our team”. The only examples I can come up with is Movistar with Carapaz and BMC with Dennis but I’ll admit I’m weak in this area…

Chris Horner has an entire conspiracy scenario on one of his broadcasts. Says it was intended to cast doubt among the Bora riders so they won't support Primoz. Yeah....that would be so Junior high mean.

 

[Hugh Januss]

Chris Horner has an entire conspiracy scenario on one of his broadcasts. Says it was intended to cast doubt among the Bora riders so they won't support Primoz. Yeah....that would be so Junior high mean.

Chris Horner is a putz.

 

[Rackham]

Everything was 'fine' until Bejes on stage 16. That's when sh*t hit the fan. But Zeeman won't talk about that because he wants Vingegaard to be leader & loyal to the team next season, so of course any 'candid' so-called truths coming from Jumbo about the inner workings of the failed team harmony at the Vuelta will conveniently protect Vingegaard & throw Rog under a bus.

But one thing we've seen time & time again is how Roglič comes back stronger & better whenever people doubt him. If the social media outcry over the Fred Wright incident didn't bother him, then he's sure as hell not going to lose sleep over Merijn Zeeman's subjective fantasies about what really happened in week 3 of the Tour of Spain 2023.

And from what we've heard, he's already made a good impression at Bora's October skiing camp in Austria.

 

[Froome]

Everything was 'fine' until Bejes on stage 16. That's when sh*t hit the fan. But Zeeman won't talk about that because he wants Vingegaard to be leader & loyal to the team next season, so of course any 'candid' so-called truths coming from Jumbo about the inner workings of the failed team harmony at the Vuelta will conveniently protect Vingegaard & throw Rog under a bus.

But one thing we've seen time & time again is how Roglič comes back stronger & better whenever people doubt him. If the social media outcry over the Fred Wright incident didn't bother him, then he's sure as hell not going to lose sleep over Merijn Zeeman's subjective fantasies about what really happened in week 3 of the Tour of Spain 2023.

And from what we've heard, he's already made a good impression at Bora's October skiing camp in Austria.

What was the problem on stage 16 sierra de bejes?

 

[RedheadDane]

But one thing we've seen time & time again is how Roglič comes back stronger & better whenever people doubt him. If the social media outcry over the Fred Wright incident didn't bother him, then he's sure as hell not going to lose sleep over Merijn Zeeman's subjective fantasies about what really happened in week 3 of the Tour of Spain 2023.

But he should have been bothered about the outcry over the "Fred Wright incident". Because he was the one making those faulty claims.

 

[Rackham]

What was the problem on stage 16 sierra de bejes?

Vingegaard attacking his teammates & taking a minute out of them, including leapfrogging Rog in GC.

No amount of post-stage public relations could fix that one. The Angliru was the result of Bejes. Aka cause & effect.

But he should have been bothered about the outcry over the "Fred Wright incident". Because he was the one making those faulty claims.

That's like... your opinion. It doesn't matter whether your view was shared by others, it didn't bother Roglič. So there's no way Zeeman's behind the scenes (& very selective) 'disclosure' will bother him either.

 

[RedheadDane]

That's like... your opinion. It doesn't matter whether your view was shared by others, it didn't bother Roglič.

Guess the important bit would be if he apologised to Wright. Because, as I recall, Wright was a bit bothered by being falsely accused like that.
And the fact that Wright didn't cause the crash isn't my opinion, it's a view held by most people.

 

[Froome]

Vingegaard attacking his teammates & taking a minute out of them, including leapfrogging Rog in GC.

No amount of post-stage public relations could fix that one. The Angliru was the result of Bejes. Aka cause & effect.

What do you think Jumbo should have done on sierra de bejes?

 

[Hugh Januss]

Everything was 'fine' until Bejes on stage 16. That's when sh*t hit the fan. But Zeeman won't talk about that because he wants Vingegaard to be leader & loyal to the team next season, so of course any 'candid' so-called truths coming from Jumbo about the inner workings of the failed team harmony at the Vuelta will conveniently protect Vingegaard & throw Rog under a bus.

But one thing we've seen time & time again is how Roglič comes back stronger & better whenever people doubt him. If the social media outcry over the Fred Wright incident didn't bother him, then he's sure as hell not going to lose sleep over Merijn Zeeman's subjective fantasies about what really happened in week 3 of the Tour of Spain 2023.

And from what we've heard, he's already made a good impression at Bora's October skiing camp in Austria.

If Horner wants a more believable conspiracy theory it could be that the other contenders didn't chase Vingo because they 1. Wanted Roglic to do it. Or. 2. Wanted to somehow muddy the Jumbo team hierarchy even more. Of course they also may not have been able. At any rate Jumbo's teamwork was still superior to UAE on the stage.

 

[kn0s]

What was the problem on stage 16 sierra de bejes?

I wouldn't bother with this if I where you. I have been down that rabbit hole a few times and there is nothing at the bottom.

That Bejes made just a little sense in a tactical way and Angliru didn't and was just straight up infighting, is ignored round these parts.

Remember there was a pinky swear at the morning briefing, it was stomp time! Jonas and Kuss should have pulled the last 4km after Walter dropped, only thing that makes sense you know.

 

[Blanco]

Yeah, I guess there were no problems at all at Jumbo the whole Vuelta...

 

[Carols]

Yeah, I guess there were no problems at all at Jumbo the whole Vuelta...

None except a domestic was Gifted a GT win! Stages are gifted often. But, in my 60+years watching never has a GC GT title been gifted by team management, overlooking 2 stronger riders.

 

[Red Rick]

None except a domestic was Gifted a GT win! Stages are gifted often. But, in my 60+years watching never has a GC GT title been gifted by team management, overlooking 2 stronger riders.

The 2012 Tour though.

 

[VayaVayaVaya]

I don’t even remember seeing this when the domestique was stronger (Hinault and Lemond, Froome and Wiggins).

 

[Carols]

The 2012 Tour though.

Wiggins wasn't a domestique.

 

[Rackham]

That Bejes made just a little sense in a tactical way and Angliru didn't and was just straight up infighting, is ignored round these parts.

'Bejes made tactical sense' according to who? Benji Naesen? lol almost immediately after stage 16 there was a barrage of spin on social media from accounts with certain links to Plugge & Jumbo attempting to explain why Vingegaard attacking his teammates was good tactics (something to do with it's "okay for a rider over a minute down to put more time into the team's rivals").

Yet Rog himself was over a minute down on the Angliru stage & his attack was against Bahrain & Landa (some revisionism would have us believe they didn't exist in that stage). I guess when Roglič puts time into everyone it's not good for the team eh.

In any case, he left. That's Jumbo's loss. They certainly won't win all 3 GT's next season, i.e. that's for certain. Kuss doesn't even want to do the Giro (as per his latest interviews).

 

[kn0s]

'Bejes made tactical sense' according to who? Benji Naesen? lol almost immediately after stage 16 there was a barrage of spin on social media from accounts with certain links to Plugge & Jumbo attempting to explain why Vingegaard attacking his teammates was good tactics (something to do with it's "okay for a rider over a minute down to put more time into the team's rivals").

Yet Rog himself was over a minute down on the Angliru stage & his attack was against Bahrain & Landa (some revisionism would have us believe they didn't exist in that stage). I guess when Roglič puts time into everyone it's not good for the team eh.

In any case, he left. That's Jumbo's loss. They certainly won't win all 3 GT's next season, i.e. that's for certain. Kuss doesn't even want to do the Giro (as per his latest interviews).

It made sense in the mind of people who have seen it done many, many times before. Was it your preferred tactic, obviously not, but sending a rider on the offence when the last dom is done is just textbook.

Regaining control of the situation, so you don't have to close down attacks or pace hard with leading riders, is this not normal tactics? Now, group two dynamics made this look much worse for people like you that don't agree, I get that.

What if Roglic was feeling frisky and started his stomp a little early that day, at 1km even and put in 30sec on the others with bonus that would be fine right? Or do we not agree that he would have attacked at the top?

As I see it, Jonas attacking was fine if you are all in for the team, if he wins, great, if not, Roglic probably does. That's a good team situation. Now butt-hurt fans and possibly Roglic (don't actually know this for sure) that is a different beast.

 

[Ilmaestro99]

It made sense in the mind of people who have seen it done many, many times before. Was it your preferred tactic, obviously not, but sending a rider on the offence when the last dom is done is just textbook.

Regaining control of the situation, so you don't have to close down attacks or pace hard with leading riders, is this not normal tactics? Now, group two dynamics made this look much worse for people like you that don't agree, I get that.

What if Roglic was feeling frisky and started his stomp a little early that day, at 1km even and put in 30sec on the others with bonus that would be fine right? Or do we not agree that he would have attacked at the top?

As I see it, Jonas attacking was fine if you are all in for the team, if he wins, great, if not, Roglic probably does. That's a good team situation. Now butt-hurt fans and possibly Roglic (don't actually know this for sure) that is a different beast.

If it was Roglic who attacked early on Bejes and put a minute into everyone, Rackam wouldn't have a problem with it. It was a good move by Jonas, one that roglic was not capable of.

It's also funny that, according to Rackam, apparently when jonas attacked on stage 16 he was 'attacking his teammates', but when roglic attacked in stage 17 he was 'attacking Bahrain and landa'. Both attacks were the same, a rider over a minute down attacking to get time back. Both times those teammates were in the group.

I don't see roglic as a bad guy, and just as I didn't have a problem with Jonas attack on stage 16, I don't have a problem with roglic attack on stage 17. I wish they were always free to race instead of pulling for kuss.

 

[kn0s]

If it was Roglic who attacked early on Bejes and put a minute into everyone, Rackam wouldn't have a problem with it. It was a good move by Jonas, one that roglic was not capable of.

It's also funny that, according to Rackam, apparently when jonas attacked on stage 16 he was 'attacking his teammates', but when roglic attacked in stage 17 he was 'attacking Bahrain and landa'. Both attacks were the same, a rider over a minute down attacking to get time back. Both times those teammates were in the group.

I don't see roglic as a bad guy, and just as I didn't have a problem with Jonas attack on stage 16, I don't have a problem with roglic attack on stage 17. I wish they were always free to race instead of pulling for kuss.

I agree, but I can understand why some raised an eyebrow on stage 17, I didn't mind that much.

To be honest I think the biggest factor for Roglic to move, was not being able to assert himself compared to Jonas in the Vuelta. If he wasn't much better than a "sick in the first week/post tour" Jonas, then he would never be anything but second fiddle in the team. It was his chance to change that or be around equal, but he couldn't. Some of that was definitely how the race panned out tactically.

 

[Rackham]

The fact Roglič attacked on the Angliru when Bahrain was pulling the group (& Landa attempted to close him down) is the whole point, i.e. it blows a hole through the hypocrisy peddled by Benji Naesen & co whereby Vingegaard's attack on Bejes was good team tactics whereas Rog's attack on the Angliru supposedly wasn't (& was in fact some sort of 'treason').

Vingegaard on Bejes was over a minute down on Kuss & attacked the bunch. On the Angliru, Rog was over a minute down on Kuss.. & attacked the bunch. The difference between both situations is simply a question of "who started the battle between teammates", i.e. at which point the answer is clear: Jonas Vingegaard on stage 16. Nothing Roglič did on the Angliru was any different (or worse). That's why Zeeman is very wrong when he singles out Rog for criticism after the Angliru when Vingegaard had flipped his teammates the middle finger on Bejes.

In any case it's his birthday today (happy birthday @Rog) & I suspect all of this is now ancient history in his mind. Next season is a new adventure.

 

[kn0s]

The fact Roglič attacked on the Angliru when Bahrain was pulling the group (& Landa attempted to close him down) is the whole point, i.e. it blows a hole through the hypocrisy peddled by Benji Naesen & co whereby Vingegaard's attack on Bejes was good team tactics whereas Rog's attack on the Angliru supposedly wasn't (& was in fact some sort of 'treason').

Vingegaard on Bejes was over a minute down on Kuss & attacked the bunch. On the Angliru, Rog was over a minute down on Kuss.. & attacked the bunch. The difference between both situations is simply a question of "who started the battle between teammates", i.e. at which point the answer is clear: Jonas Vingegaard on stage 16. Nothing Roglič did on the Angliru was any different (or worse). That's why Zeeman is very wrong when he singles out Rog for criticism after the Angliru when Vingegaard had flipped his teammates the middle finger on Bejes.

In any case it's his birthday today (happy birthday @Rog) & I suspect all of this is now ancient history in his mind. Next season is a new adventure.

Well Angliru had very little to do with Kuss, but was a battle for dominance between Jonas and Roglic and I'm happy we got that, good on Rog for having the balls to do it. How else was he going to fight for his place within the team, I don't know anyway.

But of course there is a big difference between stage 16 and 17, it was definitely not the same. They where 3 guys up the road, there where only each other to attack, that's the difference and why the team see's it differently and shut it down.

 

[VayaVayaVaya]

Well Angliru had very little to do with Kuss, but was a battle for dominance between Jonas and Roglic and I'm happy we got that, good on Rog for having the balls to do it. How else was he going to fight for his place within the team, I don't know anyway.

But of course there is a big difference between stage 16 and 17, it was definitely not the same. They where 3 guys up the road, there where only each other to attack, that's the difference and why the team see's it differently and shut it down.

Roglic didn’t attack when it was the 3 of them; he attacked when there was a group, including Landa et al. Unlike on stage 16, when Roglic let Vingegaard fly, Kuss and Vingegaard chased Roglic down. Then Roglic didn’t ease off when Kuss popped. However, he was very far back from Kuss at that point, unlike Vingegaard, who looked back, saw Kuss dropping, and continued on with Roglic. Vingegaard did a great job of shaping the narrative after the fact, I have to say.