Lesser Known Race Results 2016

[PeterB]

It is not uncommon that sprinters gradually move to one side in their sprint and I think it is tolerated as long as they leave enough space along the barrier. Here it was on the edge for me as Naesen stopped sprinting at the moment others would probably still try to push through the gap. I can understand him however because Groenewegen did not show any intention to leave that space to him before he eventually changed his direction towards the centre again. Tough decision but I wouldn't mind dq-ing the winner this time just to teach him to sprint straight. Or even better just exchange their positions if that's possible.

 

[jens_attacks]

To me, it looks just fine.

Naesen is too strong. When you feel invincible, you do and say stupid stuff.

 

[Red Rick]

Aight. Drop it, surely you can figure out what I mean by 'it'

 

[GuyIncognito]

Re:

Nacer Bouhanni (Cofidis) wins Tour de Vendée.
Samuel Dumoulin (AG2R-La Mondiale) wins Coupe de France.

What on earth is Dumoulin doing?

 

[Ricco']

Re: Re:

Nacer Bouhanni (Cofidis) wins Tour de Vendée.
Samuel Dumoulin (AG2R-La Mondiale) wins Coupe de France.

What on earth is Dumoulin doing?

Celebrating the victory in the Coupe de France.

 

[Cannibal72]

...celebrating?

Edit: eh, ninja'd. It's a justifiable thing to celebrate, imo.

 

[BigMac]

Re:

Is this kindergarten or what?

 

[Kwibus]

Re: Re:

Is this kindergarten or what?

I think Groenewegen went too far today, but the reaction of Naesen is really childish and sad.
Actually because of his reaction I really feel a big dislike toward him now while I liked him, instead of liking Groenewegen less he made himself look like an idiot which totally took away my attention from Groenewegens sprint.

 

[BigMac]

I totally agree. Very cringy display there from Naesen.

 

[TourOfTexas]

lol, what is the point of a race jury if they can't get something like this right?

 

[Jagartrott]

Re: Re:

I think Groenewegen went too far today, but the reaction of Naesen is really childish and sad.
Actually because of his reaction I really feel a big dislike toward him now while I liked him, instead of liking Groenewegen less he made himself look like an idiot which totally took away my attention from Groenewegens sprint.

Guy is mad after nearly crashing (he was forced in the gutter) at 60 km/h, and was full of adrenaline.
I'm sure you would react totally rationally afterwards. Whatever.

Pretty clear from the top view that it was dangerous and that the swerving was not caused by overtaking the Lotto guy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPJ3p-U37X0 (around 1:11)

 

[Echoes]

When you are a fan of Sagan ou should keep from judging Naesen on the podium...

Yes, it's childish. It can occur but when you are the victim of an injustice, it's understandable. I certainly won't judge him. I don't know Naesen too much but what I read about him seems like he's a nice guy, I like the camaderie within his band of training mates: "De Parelvissers" ("Pearl Fishers") which includes a named Greg Van Avermaet who was instrumental in his win in Plouay.

Who are you not to tolerate such reaction? A saint?

Dylan should have been DQ'd. Like Flamin I won't judge him either, it can happen to the most correct sprinters but then the jury should do their duties.

And I'm in to denounce the Hollandophobia of one particular poster who was quick to judge Dylan while still think that Nys shouldn't have been DQ'd in 2011 Koksijde against Kevin Pauwels.

 

[GuyIncognito]

Re: Re:

Nacer Bouhanni (Cofidis) wins Tour de Vendée.
Samuel Dumoulin (AG2R-La Mondiale) wins Coupe de France.

What on earth is Dumoulin doing?

Celebrating the victory in the Coupe de France.

Thanks. I was under the impression Planckaert had a safe lead

 

[veji11]

To be honest I don't understand how can not get DQed.... I mean Bouhanni's 2 DQing this year were as clear cut as this one to me... Was Naesen going to get past him ? not sure. Was he clearly deprived of the opportunity by Groenewegen clearly going left until Naesen has no option but to ride into the gutter, stop pedalling and just try to stay upright ? Very much so. This is a clear case for DQ.. I really don't understand and this is the type of non decision that will then feed conspirationists later about why such rider gets DQed and not another one for similar offenses...

I can perfectly understand Naesen's frustration. Sure he bears some responsability because they blew it in the end, But he was fighting for the win, almost being able to get it and then while going full speed, just trying to stay upright while going in the gutter because of Groenewegen's line change... I would blow a casket in that situation !

 

[F e r o x]

Naessens reaction wasn't the most politically correct, but what Groenewegen did was totally unacceptable. What are Bouhanni and Zakarin thinking now? And Debusschere who had the same situation against Groenewegen last year, but did get DSQ even when moving less from his line.

 

[veji11]

Re:

Naessens reaction wasn't the most politically correct, but what Groenewegen did was totally unacceptable. What are Bouhanni and Zakarin thinking now? And Debusschere who had the same situation against Groenewegen last year, but did get DSQ even when moving less from his line.

yep, keeping the result standing made no sense. consistency is the key in those rulings. There was none here.

 

[Kwibus]

Re: Re:

I think Groenewegen went too far today, but the reaction of Naesen is really childish and sad.
Actually because of his reaction I really feel a big dislike toward him now while I liked him, instead of liking Groenewegen less he made himself look like an idiot which totally took away my attention from Groenewegens sprint.

Guy is mad after nearly crashing (he was forced in the gutter) at 60 km/h, and was full of adrenaline.
I'm sure you would react totally rationally afterwards. Whatever.

Pretty clear from the top view that it was dangerous and that the swerving was not caused by overtaking the Lotto guy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPJ3p-U37X0 (around 1:11)

Ofcourse you can make things worse then they are. Naesen almost crashed because their was a gutter on the side of the road and also some kind of obstacle on the finishline. Thats why he almost crashed.
Groenewegen shouldve been dqd yes because he swirved to the left way too long closing naesen down. The thumbs down on the podium was 1 thing, but also saying Groenewegen is an imbecile and what not certainly does show Naesen has a lot to learn.

 

[Jagartrott]

I'd rather have someone say what they mean than some media-trained hogwash. Words don't cause crashes.

 

[Kwibus]

Re:

I'd rather have someone say what they mean than some media-trained hogwash. Words don't cause crashes.

Certainly, so do I. It's just that some people are clearly better off with a mediatrainer. It's entertaining though.

Dont get me wrong, the fault is on Groenewegen.

 

[Jagartrott]

For me it's part of cycling. I can understand him - fuming not only because of the sprint, but also because he knew he sort of blew it in the kilometer before. Now it's up to him to take revenge on the road - to turn his anger into something positive.

 

[Netserk]

I'd just like to stress that it is not against the rules to deviate from your line during a sprint. It is only against the rules if you endanger others while doing so, which of course is up to interpretation. I think it's important to look at how much the rider is in front of the other when he closes the door, as it is only dangerous if they are too close to each other. If you are upset that a rider closed the door on you and you then try to force yourself through a gap that isn't there, then it is your own fault if you crash by doing so.

In this particular case, Naesen had his shoulders beside Groenewegen's hips when the two had contact (http://i.imgur.com/Sd0gAys.jpg), but if it wasn't for the gutter, there was still enough room and Groenewegen does move towards the center after that (sure at that point that Naesen wouldn't come around him). While I don't think this is absolutely clearcut, I do think a relegation could be defended, but only because of the gutter and the fact that it was wet.

Still, the most important thing to remember when sprinting: you can't have the door closed for you if you are leading.

 

[veji11]

Re:

I'd just like to stress that it is not against the rules to deviate from your line during a sprint. It is only against the rules if you endanger others while doing so, which of course is up to interpretation. I think it's important to look at how much the rider is in front of the other when he closes the door, as it is only dangerous if they are too close to each other. If you are upset that a rider closed the door on you and you then try to force yourself through a gap that isn't there, then it is your own fault if you crash by doing so.

In this particular case, Naesen had his shoulders beside Groenewegen's hips when the two had contact (http://i.imgur.com/Sd0gAys.jpg), but if it wasn't for the gutter, there was still enough room and Groenewegen does move towards the center after that (sure at that point that Naesen wouldn't come around him). While I don't think this is absolutely clearcut, I do think a relegation could be defended, but only because of the gutter and the fact that it was wet.

Still, the most important thing to remember when sprinting: you can't have the door closed for you if you are leading.

You know very well that what matters in deviating from your line in a sprint is that you cause your opponent to either stop pedaling, brake, or just lose some momentum so that their speed is broken. Here the move achieves exactly that. And yes the Gutter was dangerous and is an obstacle : deviating so as to force your opponent towards an obstacle (barriers, gutter, side of the raod, embankment) is putting your opponent in danger. To me the case for DQ was clear. I don't understand the decision.

 

[Bolder]

Re:

For me it's part of cycling. I can understand him - fuming not only because of the sprint, but also because he knew he sort of blew it in the kilometer before. Now it's up to him to take revenge on the road - to turn his anger into something positive.

Yep. Blowing a hard-earned breakaway in the last k was pretty embarrasing. Especially because he clearly had enough juice at the end.

To me that should have been a clear DQ, but what do I know? I only saw it from 3 angles...

 

[Netserk]

Re: Re:

I'd just like to stress that it is not against the rules to deviate from your line during a sprint. It is only against the rules if you endanger others while doing so, which of course is up to interpretation. I think it's important to look at how much the rider is in front of the other when he closes the door, as it is only dangerous if they are too close to each other. If you are upset that a rider closed the door on you and you then try to force yourself through a gap that isn't there, then it is your own fault if you crash by doing so.

In this particular case, Naesen had his shoulders beside Groenewegen's hips when the two had contact (http://i.imgur.com/Sd0gAys.jpg), but if it wasn't for the gutter, there was still enough room and Groenewegen does move towards the center after that (sure at that point that Naesen wouldn't come around him). While I don't think this is absolutely clearcut, I do think a relegation could be defended, but only because of the gutter and the fact that it was wet.

Still, the most important thing to remember when sprinting: you can't have the door closed for you if you are leading.

You know very well that what matters in deviating from your line in a sprint is that you cause your opponent to either stop pedaling, brake, or just lose some momentum so that their speed is broken. Here the move achieves exactly that. And yes the Gutter was dangerous and is an obstacle : deviating so as to force your opponent towards an obstacle (barriers, gutter, side of the raod, embankment) is putting your opponent in danger. To me the case for DQ was clear. I don't understand the decision.

Yeah, and as long as you can achieve that without endangering your opponent (too much?) then it is completely legit.

I also agree that forcing your opponent in an obstacle is dangerous, what I tried to say was that if it wasn't for the gutter, then I don't think there was anything (too) dangerous about the move, since he didn't force him in the barriers and still left a small gap on his left (that probably would be big enough to move into if it wasn't for the gutter, especially if you nudge your opponent a bit, after all you are just defending your line).

When I write that it wasn't clearcut, then it is because of the gutter and the fact that it can (I guess) be difficult to judge just how dangerous it was for the jury. If the barriers had been where the gutter was, then it would be absolutely clearcut.

 

[veji11]

Fair enough, but the gutter makes it clear cut as it is an obstacle : Naesen is being funneled into the gutter by Groenewegen's changing line, ergo DQ. To me it is that simple.