Froome stays in yellow, the right decision?

[PremierAndrew]

Re:

I see a lot of posts complaining about Froome getting special treatment pointing to similar incidents.

Could you perhaps post/link to a youtube clip of the similar situation?

I certainly cant remember anything similar happening. So if someone could give a refresher it would be nice.

Whether Merckx lost the Tour because of it, that's debatable. But when Merckx got punched, he didn't get any special consideration. There are so many examples of similar incidents being dealt with differently by the organisers.

Today's decision sets the right precedent if followed

 

[wwabbit]

Adam Yates was initially given his actual finishing time by the commisaires after his incident, only after OGE appealed did he get his time adjusted. Same happened for Froome, Porte and Quintana.

In those past cases mentioned where time wasn't adjusted, were there appeals? I would think in many cases, riders down the GC timings may not have bothered.

 

[deValtos]

Re: Re:

You make the time gaps stand, then you make a rule to make sure it doesn't happen again. They completely have themselves to blame for the chaos they created.

You do kind of admit that the rules need to change so I don't get why you are so against this decision.

They can basically change the rule whenever they like, to benefit the rider they like. That's because they can change the rules retroactively. They specifically did this because it was Froome (yellow jersey). What if it had been a nobody. They wouldn't have changed the rules. Rich man's justice, as Pistolero pointed out. In other words, arbitrary. In other words, they can do whatever the hell they want

Well then it's about trust really.

Because they should be able to do what they want in exceptional circumstances to ensure the riders have their efforts represented fairly. That is kind of why across nearly every sport there are "discretion" clauses in the rules.

You're essentially saying you don't trust they'll do the right thing in the future. Which is fair enough.

But in isolation, it still appears to be the right decision, and should be taken.

I don't think a single rider or team manger or staff member will complain, though we shall see later tonight when all the quotes come in.

 

[wwabbit]

"I wouldn’t really want to take the yellow jersey like that, so I’m happy with the decision. If I was in Froome’s position and I’d lost the jersey like that, I’d have wanted the same decision as him. It was pretty dangerous in the last kilometre but the fans make the sport and there’s not many sports where fans can get so close to the athletes. It is what it is. I wouldn’t have wanted to take the jersey like that. Froome is the rightful owner of the yellow jersey." - Adam Yates

 

[Fergoose]

If the transponders we are seeing for the first time this year that accurately give the time and distance gaps of each rider are a new addition then that completely changes matters compared to historic decisions. Now it is possible to precisely give the time of each rider at the time of a calamatous event. It massively helps to make this decision the least unfair of all available options and the least unrepresentative of where each rider would have ended up on the line.

In the past this option would not have been possible or as easy to calculate without the technology.

 

[Ramira]

Re: Re:

I see a lot of posts complaining about Froome getting special treatment pointing to similar incidents.

Could you perhaps post/link to a youtube clip of the similar situation?

I certainly cant remember anything similar happening. So if someone could give a refresher it would be nice.

Whether Merckx lost the Tour because of it, that's debatable. But when Merckx got punched, he didn't get any special consideration. There are so many examples of similar incidents being dealt with differently by the organisers.

Today's decision sets the right precedent if followed

I think that's the crucial part. Today's precedent needs to be taken and turned into a rule. One that will be followed consistently. If they used this only for today they made a massive error.

 

[djpbaltimore]

Re:

I see a lot of posts complaining about Froome getting special treatment pointing to similar incidents.

Could you perhaps post/link to a youtube clip of the similar situation?

I certainly can't remember anything similar happening. So if someone could give a refresher it would be nice.

Good point. 'Similar' is being used pretty loosely in this case. This was an incredibly unique set of circumstances. 2011 Contador really doesn't apply IMO. Or Evans waiting for a wheel change. This is most similar to the 1km balloon attack and was handled similarly.

 

[ToreBear]

Re: Re:

I see a lot of posts complaining about Froome getting special treatment pointing to similar incidents.

Could you perhaps post/link to a youtube clip of the similar situation?

I certainly cant remember anything similar happening. So if someone could give a refresher it would be nice.

Whether Merckx lost the Tour because of it, that's debatable. But when Merckx got punched, he didn't get any special consideration. There are so many examples of similar incidents being dealt with differently by the organisers.

Today's decision sets the right precedent if followed

Punched, but his bike wasn't destroyed by a moto preventing him from continuing?

 

[El Pistolero]

Re: Re:

I see a lot of posts complaining about Froome getting special treatment pointing to similar incidents.

Could you perhaps post/link to a youtube clip of the similar situation?

I certainly cant remember anything similar happening. So if someone could give a refresher it would be nice.

Whether Merckx lost the Tour because of it, that's debatable. But when Merckx got punched, he didn't get any special consideration. There are so many examples of similar incidents being dealt with differently by the organisers.

Today's decision sets the right precedent if followed

Punched, but his bike wasn't destroyed by a moto preventing him from continuing?

Punched super hard in the liver. Far worse than what happened to Froome. Lucien van Impe got hit by a TV car on Alpe Dhuez, and lost the Tour because of that. Some frenchie won. Actually, the same frenchie that won when Merckx got punched.

 

[ToreBear]

Re: Re:

I see a lot of posts complaining about Froome getting special treatment pointing to similar incidents.

Could you perhaps post/link to a youtube clip of the similar situation?

I certainly can't remember anything similar happening. So if someone could give a refresher it would be nice.

Good point. 'Similar' is being used pretty loosely in this case. This was an incredibly unique set of circumstances. 2011 Contador really doesn't apply IMO. Or Evans waiting for a wheel change. This is most similar to the 1km balloon attack and was handled similarly.

When/where was that Balloon attack? I think I remember something about tour of poland or something, but I'm not sure

edit. Arght it's the yates incident you were thinking about.

 

[SeriousSam]

The Yates 1km balloon incident is an instructive comparison. Does it warrant different treatment?

 

[ToreBear]

Re: Re:

I see a lot of posts complaining about Froome getting special treatment pointing to similar incidents.

Could you perhaps post/link to a youtube clip of the similar situation?

I certainly cant remember anything similar happening. So if someone could give a refresher it would be nice.

Whether Merckx lost the Tour because of it, that's debatable. But when Merckx got punched, he didn't get any special consideration. There are so many examples of similar incidents being dealt with differently by the organisers.

Today's decision sets the right precedent if followed

Punched, but his bike wasn't destroyed by a moto preventing him from continuing?

Punched super hard in the liver. Far worse than what happened to Froome. Lucien van Impe got hit by a TV car on Alpe Dhuez, and lost the Tour because of that. Some frenchie won. Actually, the same frenchie that won when Merckx got punched.

Froome didn't get hit, he got stopped. Anyway thankfully things change. The question might be how long Merckx was lying knocked out on the ground.

 

[kwikki]

Whichever way you look at this, Froome has lost out. A successful attack against Quintana neutralised by frankly pathetic race management.

 

[Arked]

Dangerous precedent

Good precedent.

 

[DFA123]

Re:

The Yates 1km balloon incident is an instructive comparison. Does it warrant different treatment?

It's somewhat instructive, but still a pretty different scenario. That was a pretty gentle run into a final kilometre - time gaps would have stayed quite static from that point.

There was still about 2km of 9% climbing to do on this stage. Some riders had attacked and burnt more matches, some where cracking, some were still looking relatively fresh. Extrapolating time gaps here takes a lot more guesswork - because there were sure to have been significant changes in one direction or another in those last couple of kms.

 

[Dazed and Confused]

It was the only possible decision. Besides Froome is the only quality GC rider in the field anyway.

 

[ToreBear]

Re: Re:

The Yates 1km balloon incident is an instructive comparison. Does it warrant different treatment?

It's somewhat instructive, but still a pretty different scenario. That was a pretty gentle run into a final kilometre - time gaps would have stayed quite static from that point.

There was still about 2km of 9% climbing to do on this stage. Some riders had attacked and burnt more matches, some where cracking, some were still looking relatively fresh. Extrapolating time gaps here takes a lot more guesswork - because there were sure to have been significant changes in one direction or another in those last couple of kms.

I think it was between 500-700 meters.

 

[PremierAndrew]

Bauke Mollema ‏@BaukeMollema 37m37 minutes ago
What's going on? Seems like everybody gets time bonuses. I wonder what would have happened if I would have been the only one to go down...

 

[spalco]

No.

*** happens in racing. And although this was a big ***, so to speak, and although I blame ASO, it was still an unfortunate race incident. An act of god you could say.

I want Froome to win the race, but I'm very uncomfortable with this.

 

[Walkman]

Re: Re:

You make the time gaps stand, then you make a rule to make sure it doesn't happen again. They completely have themselves to blame for the chaos they created.

You do kind of admit that the rules need to change so I don't get why you are so against this decision.

They can basically change the rule whenever they like, to benefit the rider they like. That's because they can change the rules retroactively. They specifically did this because it was Froome (yellow jersey). What if it had been a nobody. They wouldn't have changed the rules. Rich man's justice, as Pistolero pointed out. In other words, arbitrary. In other words, they can do whatever the hell they want

Sean Yates got hindered by the organizers when they fail to do their job and got the same time as everyone else, no?

 

[InterestedSpectator]

Hopefully Mollema would also have been reinstated, especially so near to the finish. The accident was the fault of the organisers. So a fair decision.

 

[SeriousSam]

Re: Re:

The Yates 1km balloon incident is an instructive comparison. Does it warrant different treatment?

It's somewhat instructive, but still a pretty different scenario. That was a pretty gentle run into a final kilometre - time gaps would have stayed quite static from that point.

There was still about 2km of 9% climbing to do on this stage. Some riders had attacked and burnt more matches, some where cracking, some were still looking relatively fresh. Extrapolating time gaps here takes a lot more guesswork - because there were sure to have been significant changes in one direction or another in those last couple of kms.

I agree that there is more uncertainty about what would have happened today, but it's still a precedent where the time gaps were adjusted, and no one complained, though complaints on principle would have been as justified as they are oday: Why adjust the time and considerably help Yates in his white jersey bid when other unfortunate incidents in the past went unadjusted?

As to the extrapolation, given that Mollema finished and that's the time they got, I think we can be very confident that Porte's and Froome's time gains are a lower bound of what they would have been. It's possible Froome or Porte would have burned out and been dropped by Mollema, but I think it's very, very unlikely.

 

[Flamin]

Maybe it's a dangerous precedent, but this was at what? 500m from the line? Problem of course is, where do you draw the line? From what point DON'T you neutralise the time gap if this happens again? At 3k? 5k? 10k?

But at just 500m, I think it's a 100% correct decision.

And to those who are screaming they didn't neutralise in the past, please point out one similar case to this one. Just one.

 

[Ataraxus]

Re: Re:

I don't have a massive problem with him staying in yellow. But they should have just cancelled the whole GC results from the stage, just pretended it never existed from a GC point of view. Taking times from splits three quarters of the way up a mountain is ridiculous.

Although given it looks like the reason he lost so much time was because his superlight, marginal gains bike failed big time, perhaps he should just have to suck it up.

Saying it is ridiculous to take times at 3/4 of the climb is similar to saying it's ridiculous of taking times at Chalet Reynard while the stage was planned till the top.

Dude, that's an awful analogy. I think we can all see the difference there.

Dude you cannot use subjective words without backing them up with facts and reasoning.
If a measurement of performance of todays stage is taken
Where would the most ideal and unbiased spot be?
Not measuring it at all is not the fairest decision to make IMO. Why did they put the finish at chalet reynard imstead of cancelling the stage at all.

Well, obviously the designated finish line at the start of the stage. The one that all of the riders were racing towards and timing their attacks with in mind.

Well guess what.
Nobody reached the designated line today.
Because they had to take measures due to unforeseen circumstances prior to the stage.
The same as the measures they had to take due to unforeseen circumstances during the stage.

 

[SeriousSam]

Re:

Bauke Mollema ‏@BaukeMollema 37m37 minutes ago
What's going on? Seems like everybody gets time bonuses. I wonder what would have happened if I would have been the only one to go down...

I'd bet Armstrong's remaining testicle that there'd be no adjustments