Dewulf said:
Ehh, i think you oversimplify your comparioson here. Two players, one at opposing ends of a pitch (be it soccer, aussie rules etc), cannot communicate with ease if at all. They need to be closer, or alternatively the message (likely from the captain could be passed on by the various members. Pre-radio days, this is how cycling worked.
And again, you're way off mark to suggest that without radio, riders have to "soldier on blindly with no concept of score" - what do you think that dude on the motor bike holding up a board with the time gap is? Just out there to look pretty? What do you think the domestique going back to the car for bottles also does? Yes, he TALKS to the DS, and can pass on that message to the rest of the team....
You also think "if the technology exists, why shouldn't we use it?". Without going off on a tangent, there are quite a few technologies in our world now that whilst having some benefits, we would likely be better off without.
As for the heart of the riders, on this website Cedric Vasseur, ex-prez of the CPA clearly stated in their surveys over the last few years, riders barely responded to this issue, and when they did it was 50 - 50. But now they care? It's being driven by team management, if safety rather than controlling the race was the main issue they'd be asking for a neutral race radio (but only a couple have even mentioned it), and riders also may be keen to avoid the responsiblity of making their own decisions, plus potential consequences from the DS if they make a mistake....but those are all things every player on the field of the sports mentioned must deal with too.
Last but not least, Omloop was a damn exciting race last night, and team suggesting the boycott actually won - end of story, ja.
OK... you got me... I've oversimplified my comparison. Do you think that is why you completely missed the point? I'm sure that I can take responsibility for that as well... if you need me to.
Since I don't want to miss your point, let me just check with you that I've got it right. You're making a direct comparison between moving information less than 100 meters across a soccer pitch to riders communicating over several kilometers on the road... do I have that right? Not that I can really think of any highly detailed or complex message that needs to be communicated during a match, certainly not at the pro level. But I can imagine, even remember those necessary details making a difference in crucial stage of a grand tour. I'll bet you can too if you try.
As to being "way off the mark" I guess you could be right there as well. I can see how taking a second to glance at the scoreboard in a stadium is comparable to being alone and out of touch in the wasteland, while trying to bridge from the chase group to the break for several kilometers. No moto, no chalkboard, no TV cameraman... I actually have spent some time in a team car at the Giro. Luckily that team had the Maglia Rosa at the time so our position in the caravan was prime, and yes riders do come back for bottles and info. But navigating back in the team cars is some dangerous sh!t, and if you don't have a top 10 GC rider you're pretty well screwed. Carrier pigeons deliver reliable information too... if they can actually get there.
Which brings us to technology. The point you missed there is about communication, not technology. If the technology exists to afford pro riders the same level of communication that pro footballers enjoy, then why shouldn't they have it? They have had it for years. If you take it away from them are you advocating limited communication on the soccer pitch?... ear plugs maybe?
As to the Vasseur issue, please scroll back a few pages. That one has already been covered. Yes 23% of the Pros polled bothered to respond, and the results were 50 - 50. But really... why should they give a sh!t? A poll is not a vote. Vasseur was not everybody's favorite representative, and pro riders are not generally politically astute (read self absorbed) and couldn't be bothered. But they can sure make a stink on the day you tell them to turn them off.
And on to the safety issue... I actually agree with their "safety" concerns, but it is a matter of semantics. Safety to a rider means that he needs the information that helps him do his job better, which helps his team win more often, which helps attract sponsors, which gets him a better contract, which brings him money and fame, with which he can afford a better "program", which helps him do a better job, which... you get the point . It's about
safety
As to Omloop Het Nieuwsblad, while I know first hand that it is high on the competitive cycling radar in Belgium. I can't say it makes the meter bounce with the vast majority of cycling fans. Yes, sad but true, there are fans for whom that race, along with Sebastian Langeveld, holds little name recognition. While a considerably higher number of "real" fans who would like you want to see radios gone, were paying attention to it, they will be drowned in is a sea of "those" fans at Paris Roubaix or Flanders or any grand tour, who simply don't care.
You are obviously a real fan of cycling, as am I, for almost forty years. I don't like to admit it either, but the powers in control of cycling today care a lot more about them, than they do about us. The interests of the teams, their management, and sponsors are all tied to the same things... control and results. It is in their best interests financially to keep radios in place, and I predict they will be successful.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram