Froome stays in yellow, the right decision?

Page 13 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.

Froome stays in yellow, the right decision?

  • Yes.

    Votes: 147 51.6%
  • No.

    Votes: 76 26.7%
  • Idc but it was hilarious!

    Votes: 24 8.4%
  • Vino would have ran past Mollemma

    Votes: 38 13.3%

  • Total voters
    285
  • Poll closed .
Re:

Poursuivant said:
Maybe Quintana was holding on because he had slowed and had to keep his balance. It would be OTT to punish him for something after the crash, when essentially everything was neutralised up to that point, although I agree he got lucky he was looking at a 30"!deficit. Doesn't bode well for the rest of his Tour.
agree
 
While the bigger issue is that the Tour organizers have total egg on their face, once again, and this is looking like one of the worst Tour ever, hence their decision I think. But it brings up questions:

If Froome hadn't been in yellow, but DeGendt was before the day, would the ruling have stood?

If this had happened to DeGendt, Pauwels and Navarro, what would the organizers have done?

Bertjan Lindeman finished 2:52 back of DeGendt, but was ahead of the crash. What if this would have happened to him instead of Porte?

Pierre Roland, Geraint Thomas and Ilnur Zakarin were about a minute behind the Quintana group. What if this had happened to them?

I agree with whomever said it would have been a better story if they would have apologized for the chaos, but let the results stand (and waive punishing Froome for running without the bike). Having Froome take back yellow would have added drama. As is, he's going to easily win by over 5 minutes unless something happens.
 
Re:

Alpe d'Huez said:
While the bigger issue is that the Tour organizers have total egg on their face, once again, and this is looking like one of the worst Tour ever, hence their decision I think. But it brings up questions:

If Froome hadn't been in yellow, but DeGendt was before the day, would the ruling have stood?

If this had happened to DeGendt, Pauwels and Navarro, what would the organizers have done?

Bertjan Lindeman finished 2:52 back of DeGendt, but was ahead of the crash. What if this would have happened to him instead of Porte?

Pierre Roland, Geraint Thomas and Ilnur Zakarin were about a minute behind the Quintana group. What if this had happened to them?

I agree with whomever said it would have been a better story if they would have apologized for the chaos, but let the results stand (and waive punishing Froome for running with the bike). Having Froome take back yellow would have added drama. As is, he's going to easily win by over 5 minutes unless something happens.
Of course they wouldn't have adjusted the time, if it were a lesser known rider. Same thing will happen with Quintanas DQ. (or in this case won't happen) From now on i am totally on Mollemas side this Tour. I normally don't really care about him, but he was treated extremely unfair.
 
Re: Re:

ppanther92 said:
Alpe d'Huez said:
While the bigger issue is that the Tour organizers have total egg on their face, once again, and this is looking like one of the worst Tour ever, hence their decision I think. But it brings up questions:

If Froome hadn't been in yellow, but DeGendt was before the day, would the ruling have stood?

If this had happened to DeGendt, Pauwels and Navarro, what would the organizers have done?

Bertjan Lindeman finished 2:52 back of DeGendt, but was ahead of the crash. What if this would have happened to him instead of Porte?

Pierre Roland, Geraint Thomas and Ilnur Zakarin were about a minute behind the Quintana group. What if this had happened to them?

I agree with whomever said it would have been a better story if they would have apologized for the chaos, but let the results stand (and waive punishing Froome for running with the bike). Having Froome take back yellow would have added drama. As is, he's going to easily win by over 5 minutes unless something happens.
Of course they wouldn't have adjusted the time, if it were a lesser known rider. Same thing will happen with Quintanas DQ. (or in this case won't happen) From now on i am totally on Mollemas side this Tour. I normally don't really care about him, but he was treated extremely unfair.

I don't see why it brings up any of those questions to be honest. The rules allow for the panel to assess the situation and make what they believe is the best decision. Why do we need to endlessly speculate about things that didn't happen?
 
Jun 15, 2015
7
0
0
This sport should, from now on, be followed in the same fashion as pro wrestling. It's simply ridiculous. Merci Festina, USPS, Sky...
 
I think Froome, Quintana, and Aru all deserve to be DQ'd if you ask me... you have one guy running up a hill, another one getting a ride from a motor bike, and a third receiving the magic spanner.

I get that some degree of cheating is allowed, but if it gets too blatant and the rules applied too inconsistently, it's not as fun to watch.
 
Jul 20, 2015
653
0
0
I do like people are using the rule about using a bicycle throughout the course in a very literal sense. Ignoring the fact it is clearly written about riding in a motor vehicle ala Sepveldia last year and even mentions vehicles. Froome running up Ventoux isn't what they would have in mind as it is actually slower
 
Nov 29, 2010
2,326
0
0
Re:

DanielSong39 said:
I think Froome, Quintana, and Aru all deserve to be DQ'd if you ask me... you have one guy running up a hill, another one getting a ride from a motor bike, and a third receiving the magic spanner.

I get that some degree of cheating is allowed, but if it gets too blatant and the rules applied too inconsistently, it's not as fun to watch.
I think next year all the cyclists will be running when they realise they can get away with it !

Stupid rule is stupid and needs to be removed.
 
Nov 29, 2010
2,326
0
0
Re:

SafeBet said:
What happened with Aru?
Guy got unlucky with a puncture and had to change bikes like 3 or 4 times while the race was hammering in the crosswinds. He did real well yesterday considering what energy he spent. He was drafting a car a teensy bit to get back in though the commissar was pretty on. He shouldn't be penalised imo. The amount of muppets on here who want every race decided on crashes and punctures is getting real stupid.

Stop trying to screw over riders who just got screwed over. Geeeeeez, like they literally already got screwed, just stop.
 
Re: Re:

King Boonen said:
ppanther92 said:
Alpe d'Huez said:
While the bigger issue is that the Tour organizers have total egg on their face, once again, and this is looking like one of the worst Tour ever, hence their decision I think. But it brings up questions:

If Froome hadn't been in yellow, but DeGendt was before the day, would the ruling have stood?

If this had happened to DeGendt, Pauwels and Navarro, what would the organizers have done?

Bertjan Lindeman finished 2:52 back of DeGendt, but was ahead of the crash. What if this would have happened to him instead of Porte?

Pierre Roland, Geraint Thomas and Ilnur Zakarin were about a minute behind the Quintana group. What if this had happened to them?

I agree with whomever said it would have been a better story if they would have apologized for the chaos, but let the results stand (and waive punishing Froome for running with the bike). Having Froome take back yellow would have added drama. As is, he's going to easily win by over 5 minutes unless something happens.
Of course they wouldn't have adjusted the time, if it were a lesser known rider. Same thing will happen with Quintanas DQ. (or in this case won't happen) From now on i am totally on Mollemas side this Tour. I normally don't really care about him, but he was treated extremely unfair.

I don't see why it brings up any of those questions to be honest. The rules allow for the panel to assess the situation and make what they believe is the best decision. Why do we need to endlessly speculate about things that didn't happen?
Exactly!

Also I doubt those who wrote the rules about not traveling on your bike had in mind to penalize a method of transport that is slower than a bicyle and still propelled by own effort. Who would bother to even write such a rule? It's self evident. And if one comes up with some fantastic scenario that no one has thought about, the jury has leeway to restore fairness to the race.

You cant make rules that encompass every scenario that can happen. The rules would be a phone book, and totally useless.
 
Re: Re:

deValtos said:
SafeBet said:
What happened with Aru?
Guy got unlucky with a puncture and had to change bikes like 3 or 4 times while the race was hammering in the crosswinds. He did real well yesterday considering what energy he spent. He was drafting a car a teensy bit to get back in though the commissar was pretty on. He shouldn't be penalised imo. The amount of muppets on here who want every race decided on crashes and punctures is getting real stupid.

Stop trying to screw over riders who just got screwed over. Geeeeeez, like they literally already got screwed, just stop.
And here's what really happened: He had a puncture and quickly got on Fuglsang's bike and came back to the peloton in no time. He then decided to change bikes again at a very bad time and when he realized his mistake he blatantly rode in the slipstream of his team car, hang on to the team car when all of a sudden they had to fix something with his saddle, and then had a sticky bottle or two.
 
Nov 29, 2010
2,326
0
0
Re: Re:

Hugo Koblet said:
deValtos said:
SafeBet said:
What happened with Aru?
Guy got unlucky with a puncture and had to change bikes like 3 or 4 times while the race was hammering in the crosswinds. He did real well yesterday considering what energy he spent. He was drafting a car a teensy bit to get back in though the commissar was pretty on. He shouldn't be penalised imo. The amount of muppets on here who want every race decided on crashes and punctures is getting real stupid.

Stop trying to screw over riders who just got screwed over. Geeeeeez, like they literally already got screwed, just stop.
And here's what really happened: He had a puncture and quickly got on Fuglsang's bike and came back to the peloton in no time. He then decided to change bikes again at a very bad time and when he realized his mistake he blatantly rode in the slipstream of his team car, hang on to the team car when all of a sudden they had to fix something with his saddle, and then had a sticky bottle or two.
He changed his bike 3 times. Also those sticky bottles were the weakest sticky bottles of all time cause the commissar was about 2 metres away the entire time. No way he deserves a penalty for any of that. That it's even a conversation is absurd.

I can't wait for when they finally get puncture resistant wheels so all this stupid nonsense can stop ...
 
Re: Re:

deValtos said:
Hugo Koblet said:
deValtos said:
SafeBet said:
What happened with Aru?
Guy got unlucky with a puncture and had to change bikes like 3 or 4 times while the race was hammering in the crosswinds. He did real well yesterday considering what energy he spent. He was drafting a car a teensy bit to get back in though the commissar was pretty on. He shouldn't be penalised imo. The amount of muppets on here who want every race decided on crashes and punctures is getting real stupid.

Stop trying to screw over riders who just got screwed over. Geeeeeez, like they literally already got screwed, just stop.
And here's what really happened: He had a puncture and quickly got on Fuglsang's bike and came back to the peloton in no time. He then decided to change bikes again at a very bad time and when he realized his mistake he blatantly rode in the slipstream of his team car, hang on to the team car when all of a sudden they had to fix something with his saddle, and then had a sticky bottle or two.
He changed his bike 3 times. Also those sticky bottles were the weakest sticky bottles of all time cause the commissar was about 2 metres away the entire time. No way he deserves a penalty for any of that. That it's even a conversation is absurd.

I can't wait for when they finally get puncture resistant wheels so all this stupid nonsense can stop ...
He did change bikes three times, but the bike change in question was the second one. I think he should be penalized for sure. I do agree that puncture resistant wheels would be great!
 
Re: Re:

deValtos said:
DanielSong39 said:
I think Froome, Quintana, and Aru all deserve to be DQ'd if you ask me... you have one guy running up a hill, another one getting a ride from a motor bike, and a third receiving the magic spanner.

I get that some degree of cheating is allowed, but if it gets too blatant and the rules applied too inconsistently, it's not as fun to watch.
I think next year all the cyclists will be running when they realise they can get away with it !
This exactly, now they will all think it is legal when even the Jury President of the TdF says it is not.

viewtopic.php?p=1973302#p1973302
 
Jun 28, 2015
133
0
0
This was the wrong decision. The UCI interfered only because it was all about a British rider . UCI is corrupt and have been corrupt for years and will stay corrupt as long Mr. Cookson is at the wheel. Why would Froome run away from his service car instead of wait for it? It would just take that much longer for him to get the correct bike. Well well...
 
Jul 20, 2015
653
0
0
Re:

bikinggirl said:
This was the wrong decision. The UCI interfered only because it was all about a British rider . UCI is corrupt and have been corrupt for years and will stay corrupt as long Mr. Cookson is at the wheel. Why would Froome run away from his service car instead of wait for it? It would just take that much longer for him to get the correct bike. Well well...
Yeah a British rider was involved as was Dutch, Australian, Then Colombian, Spanish and American. Because he wanted to be closer to the line, probably panicked slightly, especially as the crowds would be hard for a car to get through.
 
Re:

bikinggirl said:
This was the wrong decision. The UCI interfered only because it was all about a British rider . UCI is corrupt and have been corrupt for years and will stay corrupt as long Mr. Cookson is at the wheel. Why would Froome run away from his service car instead of wait for it? It would just take that much longer for him to get the correct bike. Well well...
Based on today's result, it matters little now. Which makes you wonder why Brailsford & Froome were so insistent on getting the bonus.
 
Jul 23, 2010
1,695
0
0
Re:

Alpe d'Huez said:
While the bigger issue is that the Tour organizers have total egg on their face, once again, and this is looking like one of the worst Tour ever, hence their decision I think. But it brings up questions:

If Froome hadn't been in yellow, but DeGendt was before the day, would the ruling have stood?

If this had happened to DeGendt, Pauwels and Navarro, what would the organizers have done?

Bertjan Lindeman finished 2:52 back of DeGendt, but was ahead of the crash. What if this would have happened to him instead of Porte?

Pierre Roland, Geraint Thomas and Ilnur Zakarin were about a minute behind the Quintana group. What if this had happened to them?

I agree with whomever said it would have been a better story if they would have apologized for the chaos, but let the results stand (and waive punishing Froome for running without the bike). Having Froome take back yellow would have added drama. As is, he's going to easily win by over 5 minutes unless something happens.
Can't help but feel that the yellow jersey holder is being protected. I could be wrong though.
 
Re: Re:

thehog said:
bikinggirl said:
This was the wrong decision. The UCI interfered only because it was all about a British rider . UCI is corrupt and have been corrupt for years and will stay corrupt as long Mr. Cookson is at the wheel. Why would Froome run away from his service car instead of wait for it? It would just take that much longer for him to get the correct bike. Well well...
Based on today's result, it matters little now. Which makes you wonder why Brailsford & Froome were so insistent on getting the bonus.
It matters for his popularity. And commissaires were there to ensure he loses that battle.
 
Re:

Alpe d'Huez said:
...

I agree with whomever said it would have been a better story if they would have apologized for the chaos, but let the results stand (and waive punishing Froome for running without the bike). Having Froome take back yellow would have added drama. As is, he's going to easily win by over 5 minutes unless something happens.
Nope, not enough. Gross injustice.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
H Professional Road Racing 43

ASK THE COMMUNITY