ElChingon said:And no pure African countries represented... (South Africa the odd one out as I hope I don't need to explain that).
Sorry, what exactly do you mean?
The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
ElChingon said:And no pure African countries represented... (South Africa the odd one out as I hope I don't need to explain that).
"Let's say we've got 8 in that five," Millar said enthusiastically. "Wiggins and Froome just finished first and second in the Tour de France so they're worth four guys. We've got Cav who is worth two guys in the sprint and then we've got Stannard, who when on a great day, is worth a few more. We'll be alright.
ElChingon said:And no pure African countries represented... (South Africa the odd one out as I hope I don't need to explain that).
avanti said:I'm not sure what your point is (sorry).
From the start list there were no riders from South Africa but one from Namibia (#162 Dan Cravens). I'm surprised there were no riders from South Africa.
ElChingon said:And no pure African countries represented... (South Africa the odd one out as I hope I don't need to explain that).
Caruut said:So 204 Olympic nations, how many riders should each have?
Caruut said:So 204 Olympic nations, how many riders should each have?
Caruut said:So nation number 51 is completely ****ed over in comparison to nation 50?
DominicDecoco said:As Matti Brechel had his 230th meal of pasta this season just hours before the race, Denmark team should have been automatically permitted to field a larger team to assist Matti...
tammy25636 said:''We could have done with a couple more guys'' thus spoke David Millar with the British teams inability and frustration in not bringing the breakaway back. Cavendish had 4 domestiques while NZ rider Greg Henderson had 1. The formulae used to determine each countries number of elegible riders is really quite bizaar. As i understand it the countries number of world ranking points determines this. I have also read somewhere that some countries do not have enough experienced riders to ensure this inexperience doesn't lead to accidents in the bunch...absolute rubbish..any such riders would soon be left behind. There are a number of other factors which present questions. It may well be that a country has 2-3 extremely highly ranked riders but absolutely no depth below that. Does that mean that they will qualify with 2 extra domestique riders who have all the inexperience they're so concerned about. Road cycling is a team sport, pure and simple and teams in every other sport take the field with equal numbers...and surely thats the Olympic spirit. To use this convoluted logic outside the confines of cycling, how about the next time the All Blacks take the field against the British Lions, the All Blacks have 15 players to the British Lions 6?...as reflected in World rankings....the whole things an absolute nonsense and countries like NZ should boycott the games until there's some form of level playing field...3 riders per country...period.
Armchair cyclist said:As happens in most other sports: yes. Non-qualifiers don't qualify.
Fowsto Cope-E said:Really, the top nations are already the best. They don't need any MORE of an advantage by having more riders now, do they? I propose that the top nations should only get one get one rider while countries like Eritrea should get full 9-man teams. Then, everything will be nice and fair.