Fairplay in cycling

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
LaFlorecita said:
The problem with that stage is that no attacks were allowed on the descent. The others didn't give up, they took it easy because they had heard via race radio that the descent was neutralized. That stage is still a big mark against Nairito for me.
That descent wasn't (officially) neutralized...
 
Netserk said:
No they weren't. The word neutralized was never used. Some teams thought it meant something it didn't, and they didn't bother asking beforehand if it meant what they thought it meant.
In the English translation they were told no attacks were allowed. Anyway, I don't feel like having the same discussion all over again.
 
LaFlorecita said:
In the English translation they were told no attacks were allowed. Anyway, I don't feel like having the same discussion all over again.
If you don't want to discuss it, don't discuss it, but don't reply and then shut it down after that.

No attacks =/= Neutralization

I'm also quite sure that they weren't told that attacks were forbidden in Italian.
 
Netserk said:
If you don't want to discuss it, don't discuss it, but don't reply and then shut it down after that.

No attacks =/= Neutralization

I'm also quite sure that they weren't told that attacks were forbidden in Italian.
What I meant is that this has been discussed at length at the time, and it's useless to go through the same arguments again.

But you're right, you win the discussion, clap clap. Chapeau to you sir.
 
Dec 14, 2009
468
0
0
Also depends if the rider ahead knows about the incident behind. If you don't have a radio you may not be aware.

Was bemused to see in stage 7 of this years tour Oss and Van Avermaet go for the line when behind Van Garderen had a mechanical and was losing time. Surely the guys up ahead didn't know.
 
Didn't the Stelvio neutralization on/off query also hang on the context of "what is an attack?" in that several riders stopped for rain gear and some continued through the summit? i.e. Quintana, Hesjedal and Rolland did not leave their group per se, they just continued to ride, whereas those that stopped voluntarily left their group out the back of it?

Ultimately, what was ok and what was not was not clarified by the race directors, and some people played to the whistle and got an advantage they perhaps shouldn't have had, and others stood around like a defender sticking their hand up waiting for an offside flag that should come but doesn't and were stuck with a disadvantage they shouldn't have had.

In my eyes, this one's on the race organisers for botching the handling of it, badly, creating a situation where nobody can be happy with the end product. Taking an arbitrary amount of time away from Quintana is meaningless and artificial (after all, where did the faux-neutralization end, and what was the time gap then?), but leaving it as it is disadvantages Urán who can justifiably feel wronged. However because the organizers were not clear enough, Quintana hasn't been adjudged to have broken any rules, hence they can't eject him. So we're left with sticking with the results that were prejudiced by the organizers' poor handling of the matter, or introducing a highly artificial additional variable to attempt to right that error which produces a result which only has tangential relation to what happened on the road.

Basically, Quintana keeps the race, Quintana has one of those dubious GT wins that forever goes in the annals of time, like Moser's Giro with the helicopter or The Stolen Vuelta, but if they penalize Quintana and Urán takes it, the GT win comes with the same dubiousness, because he only would have won due to an artificial and arbitrary time penalty applied by the organizers to cover up their own error.
 
Libertine Seguros said:
In my eyes, this one's on the race organisers for botching the handling of it, badly, creating a situation where nobody can be happy with the end product. Taking an arbitrary amount of time away from Quintana is meaningless and artificial (after all, where did the faux-neutralization end, and what was the time gap then?), but leaving it as it is disadvantages Urán who can justifiably feel wronged.
I understand the teams, including Movistar, came to an agreement to deduct something like 1:30 minutes. The solution was right there but it wasn't accepted. There was enough information to make a fairer decision than leaving things unchanged.

Arbitrary: "based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system"
 
Jul 22, 2011
695
0
0
Libertine Seguros said:
Basically, Quintana keeps the race, Quintana has one of those dubious GT wins that forever goes in the annals of time, like Moser's Giro with the helicopter or The Stolen Vuelta
It really shouldn't be among them, and it'll be unfortunate if ends up seen as such in the eyes of history.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY