Porte Penalised 2 minutes for getting Clarkes Wheel -Fair?

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Re: Re:

While I agree that the helmet rule should be enforced without that kind of leeway, the simple fact is that 1) there's ample precedent for allowing the removal of your helmet briefly to readjust it; the rule has really never be interpreted any other way, contrary to the rule about mechanical assistance, and 2) 99% of those who brought it up have no actual problem with it, they're just using it in a weak attempt to prove Porte's penalty was unfair.

Have people actually read the all the rules wrt helmets? People seem fixed on only a part of the rules.

The UCI rules also specifically state the rider must make sure the helmet is fitting correctly and straps adjusted as necessary. In order to comply with the UCI rule, it may occasionally be necessary to temporarily remove the helmet to make such adjustments. The removal rule relates to a situation of discarding the helmet, not adjusting it.

I've no idea what the helmet rule is but if it's deemed unsafe to ride without one then it is surely even more unsafe to be riding without one while adjusting it / replacing it. The obvious rule should be that the rider should have to stop in order to adjust / replace it

Well like a lot of discussions on these forums about rules, a lot of the time posts would be completely unnecessary if people simple RTFM.

Hands up everyone who's actually read all the UCI rules on helmets?

Had they done so, then the ill informed helmet DQ comments would not happen and perhaps they'd have to go searching for another reason to rub out their hated rider of choice.

 

[King Boonen]

Re: Re:

While I agree that the helmet rule should be enforced without that kind of leeway, the simple fact is that 1) there's ample precedent for allowing the removal of your helmet briefly to readjust it; the rule has really never be interpreted any other way, contrary to the rule about mechanical assistance, and 2) 99% of those who brought it up have no actual problem with it, they're just using it in a weak attempt to prove Porte's penalty was unfair.

Have people actually read the all the rules wrt helmets? People seem fixed on only a part of the rules.

The UCI rules also specifically state the rider must make sure the helmet is fitting correctly and straps adjusted as necessary. In order to comply with the UCI rule, it may occasionally be necessary to temporarily remove the helmet to make such adjustments. The removal rule relates to a situation of discarding the helmet, not adjusting it.

I've no idea what the helmet rule is but if it's deemed unsafe to ride without one then it is surely even more unsafe to be riding without one while adjusting it / replacing it. The obvious rule should be that the rider should have to stop in order to adjust / replace it

Well like a lot of discussions on these forums about rules, a lot of the time posts would be completely unnecessary if people simple RTFM.

Hands up everyone who's actually read all the UCI rules on helmets?

Had they done so, then the ill informed helmet DQ comments would not happen and perhaps they'd have to go searching for another reason to rub out their hated rider of choice.

Why don't you help people then and point out why they are wrong? These are the only rules I can find that mention helmets that have to do with racing, and most of them are not relevant to the discussion, only 1.3.031 is so I've quoted that first. These are all verbatim from the UCI rules and regulations:

1.3.031

1. Wearing a rigid safety helmet shall be mandatory during competitions and training sessions in the following disciplines: track, mountain bike, cyclo-cross, trials and BMX, para-cycling, as well as during cycling for all events.
2. During competitions on the road, a rigid safety helmet shall be worn.
During training on the road, the wearing of a rigid safety helmet is recommended. However, riders must always comply with the legal provisions in this regard.

3. Each rider shall be responsible for:
- ensuring that the helmet is approved in compliance with an official security standard and that the helmet can be identified as approved;

- wearing the helmet in accordance with the security regulations in order to ensure full protection, including but not limited to a correct adjustment on the head as well as a correct adjustment of the chin strap;
- avoiding any manipulation which could compromise the protective characteristics of the helmet and not wearing a helmet which has been undergone manipulation or an incident which might have compromised its protective characteristics;
- using only an approved helmet that has not suffered any accident or shock;
- using only a helmet that has not been altered or had any element added or removed in terms of design or form.

1.3.004

Except in mountain bike racing, no technical innovation regarding anything used, worn or carried by any rider or license holder during a competition (bicycles, equipment mounted on them, accessories, helmets, clothing, means of communication, etc.) may be used until approved by the UCI. Requests for approval shall be submitted to the UCI, accompanied by all necessary documentation.
Participation to the examination costs is to be paid by the applicant and is determined by the UCI Management Committee according to the complexity of the submitted technical innovation.

1.3.033

It is forbidden to wear non-essential items of clothing or items designed to influence the performances of a rider such as reducing air resistance or modifying the body of the rider (compression, stretching, support).
Items of clothing or equipment may be considered essential where weather conditions make them appropriate for the safety or the health of the rider. In this case, the nature and texture of the clothing or equipment must be clearly and solely justified by the need to protect the rider from bad weather conditions. Discretion in this respect is left to the race commissaires.
The use of shoe covers is prohibited during events on a covered track.
Equipment (helmets, shoes, jerseys, shorts, etc.) worn by the rider may not be adapted to serve any other purpose apart from that of clothing or safety by the addition or incorporation of mechanical or electronic systems which are not approved as technical innovations under article 1.3.004.

1.3.064

Without prejudice to paragraph 2 below, only the current world champion rider may wear rainbow piping on his equipment (such as bike, helmet, shoes) as per the technical specifications in the brochure which will be sent to him by the UCI. However, he may use the equipment bearing the rainbow piping only in events of the discipline, speciality and category in which he won the title and in no other event.
The current individual time trial world champion is authorised to use rainbow stripes on their time trial bicycle for individual time trial and team time trial events.
When he no longer holds the title of world champion, a rider may wear rainbow piping on the collar and cuffs of his jersey, to the exclusion of any other equipment, as per the technical specifications in the brochure which will be sent to him by the UCI. However, he may wear such a jersey only in events of the discipline, speciality and category in which he won the title and in no other event. In compliance with the provisions 1.3.056 and 1.3.059, he is not authorized to add the rainbow piping on his national team clothing.
Any equipment bearing the rainbow piping shall be submitted to UCI for approval before production.

 

[IndianCyclist]

Re: Re:

[quote="King Boonen

3. Each rider shall be responsible for:
- ensuring that the helmet is approved in compliance with an official security standard and that the helmet can be identified as approved;

- wearing the helmet in accordance with the security regulations in order to ensure full protection, including but not limited to a correct adjustment on the head as well as a correct adjustment of the chin strap;
- avoiding any manipulation which could compromise the protective characteristics of the helmet and not wearing a helmet which has been undergone manipulation or an incident which might have compromised its protective characteristics;
- using only an approved helmet that has not suffered any accident or shock;
- using only a helmet that has not been altered or had any element added or removed in terms of design or for
1.3.033

It is forbidden to wear non-essential items of clothing or items designed to influence the performances of a rider such as reducing air resistance or modifying the body of the rider (compression, stretching, support).
Items of clothing or equipment may be considered essential where weather conditions make them appropriate for the safety or the health of the rider. In this case, the nature and texture of the clothing or equipment must be clearly and solely justified by the need to protect the rider from bad weather conditions. Discretion in this respect is left to the race commissaires.
.[/quote]
Uran cracked his helmet in his crash. Did he get it replaced before he remounted?
Why is a little bit of discretion not given in the rules for certain cases. for eg. if the yesterday's crash happened inside the 3 km mark then it would have been no change in the GC.

 

[oncehadhair]

Re: Re:

While I agree that the helmet rule should be enforced without that kind of leeway, the simple fact is that 1) there's ample precedent for allowing the removal of your helmet briefly to readjust it; the rule has really never be interpreted any other way, contrary to the rule about mechanical assistance, and 2) 99% of those who brought it up have no actual problem with it, they're just using it in a weak attempt to prove Porte's penalty was unfair.

Have people actually read the all the rules wrt helmets? People seem fixed on only a part of the rules.

The UCI rules also specifically state the rider must make sure the helmet is fitting correctly and straps adjusted as necessary. In order to comply with the UCI rule, it may occasionally be necessary to temporarily remove the helmet to make such adjustments. The removal rule relates to a situation of discarding the helmet, not adjusting it.

I've no idea what the helmet rule is but if it's deemed unsafe to ride without one then it is surely even more unsafe to be riding without one while adjusting it / replacing it. The obvious rule should be that the rider should have to stop in order to adjust / replace it

Well like a lot of discussions on these forums about rules, a lot of the time posts would be completely unnecessary if people simple RTFM.

Hands up everyone who's actually read all the UCI rules on helmets?

Had they done so, then the ill informed helmet DQ comments would not happen and perhaps they'd have to go searching for another reason to rub out their hated rider of choice.

My hand is up.
The rule states: "3.3. Rider taking off the mandatory helmet during the race"

Nothing there saying its ok to take it off to adjust it, or for any other reason - unless I've missed something.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Re: Re:

Why don't you help people then and point out why they are wrong?

Normally I do, but this is just silly stuff, people looking for nonsense justifications to have a dig at riders for no really valid reason.

Besides why should I constantly spoon feed people that haven't bothered to do some basic research themselves. By pointing out that there are actually other rules beside narrow snippets people quote and considerations by race officials on how the rules are actually implemented, it encourages people to actually do some research. People learn more that way.

There are so many experts on rules and how to implement them - I wonder how many here have experience as a qualified commissaire for a road race?

We had fun here today - ran 10 road races in one day today.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Jesus wept, is this STILL going?

Like I said, the ONLY reason for taking a wheel from another team when your team does its job is collusion. The ONLY reason to give your wheel to a rider from another team is collusion, whether it be deliberately choosing who you help or just being a good Samaritan. If your team does its job, you take your teammate's wheel. Richie even admits to benefiting because he pointed out it was another 20 seconds or so until a teammate got there, so not only did he benefit from having a wheel 20 seconds earlier (20 seconds saved) but he also had an extra rider to help pace him back (that rider in normal circumstances would have been waiting for a wheel from the team car, having given his to Richie). If your team doesn't do its job, then it's their fault and they deserve to lose the time.

It sucks that it happens in such a situation that it affects the GC, but then incidents like this in theory would always affect the GC, because riders that aren't GC-relevant would just have to sit up and wait for the car or the neutral service vehicle. And the rule is pretty clear in its wording, and the violation of the rule is pretty obvious.

 

[the sceptic]

I guess we can close this thread now.

Or maybe skyfans will cry about Porte losing out on top 10 or something.

 

[NairoQ]

Re: Porte Penalised 2 minutes for getting Clarkes Wheel -Fai

Well, his moral was probably completely ruined and he already knew he couldn't win anymore because of those 2 minutes, so het obviously didn't care anymore. This Giro was stolen from him, and the winner will always be 'the winner of the 2015 Giro who shouldn't have won because Richie lost 2 minutes because of a mistake of the jury'.

I'm dead serious.

I'm not.

 

[Master50]

what if Sky paid a few other riders to help them out? Does a hockey player give up his stick to an opponent when they break it during a power play? it is fundamental in team sports that you defend your team's chance to win and you do not assist another team to beat yours. In stage 4 Clarke finished the stage in Pink. any thought of protecting his friend would have been met with rage from his team. That day in pink is very important for Orica. This conversation would be very different on that stage. the rule is there to cover all these situations. We all have heard the stories of the earliest days of cycling where a rider was DQ'd because he had a kid drive the air bellows on a forge while he was repairing his forks. At one time no outside help was permitted to a rider. he had to carry his own spares and even get his own food and water. No one is arguing it was not a great gesture from 1 friend to another but that it is not the principle of competition. On this stage Clarke probably only needed to finish in the time limit. on another stage he might have had a role to protect his teams sprinter and giving up his chance to win the stage or helping His teams chances. Clarke made a bad choice to protect a Sky rider and it is very understandable why Porte took the wheel but it is just as clear this is not permitted especially in front of of twitter.
Everyone loves to put this on the officials but they were doing the job as they must. In this case there was no room for interpretation and it is a fantastic example of how the rule was meant to be applied.

 

[Angliru]

Re: Re:

I don't think so. Even for riders with very friends when you calculate the net time loss relative to riders with more friends it is still beneficial for the unsociable riders. Sure they're friends won't come along often, but occasionaly they will. The only possible way the rule wouldn't make any difference to you is if you had no friends in the entire peloton.

This is absolutely ludicrous. The reason that you have teammates, a ds in the team car with wheels and an extra bike and neutral service vehicle is for situations such as this. If your team can't organize themselves well enough to support their gc contender they deserve whatever happens when mechanicals and flats occur. Also it's not unfair, it's a common part of the sport. There is no unfair advantage gained. Unfair would be someone getting one of their mates from another team to give up wheel in order to minimize your time loss.

I don't see it as unfair. In the same situation, would not another Spanish rider offer up a wheel for Contador or Italian rider for Aru? It's no different than say gifting a stage to other riders with the off-chance that they may be able to repay you later in another race when you need their help. Or riders of your same nationality pacing you back to the main peleton or to the finish line to minimize your losses. There is such a thing such as sportsmanship or camaraderie, which sadly the sport of cycling needs a lot more of rather than selective enforcement of the "rules".

That's not to say the Sky philosophy of marginal gains has been a complete farce at this Giro and if they were organized better then Porte should be down less time than he is now. I say this as a Sky fan.

So if there is a rider from let's say Canada or Ireland or Argentina who happens to be a gc contender, the opportunities in a world without this rule in place for assistance from his countrymen would be substantially limited if not non existent. How is that fair? As I stated that is why the rule exists to make it as fair as it can be. Support for these type of incidences are in place and available equally to all riders of all nationalities.

 

[Tim B]

There is a pretty simple solution to all of this so it is fair for everyone - anytime someone has a flat, mechanical, or any other reason they might need to stop, just stop the whole race and wait for them, then it will be fair.

But until then - would suggest that Professional teams on multi million dollar budgets try learing the rules and riding like a team.

 

[The Hitch]

Need to hear some mea culpas for those that suggested this Giro is now illegitimate and whoever wins will have an asterix next to their name.

 

[jaylew]

What a waste of a thread this turned out to be.

 

[The_Cheech]

Re:

Need to hear some mea culpas for those that suggested this Giro is now illegitimate and whoever wins will have an asterix next to their name.

Let it go dude.

It's a cycling competition.

It's bad enough their hero is not in shape... you want to put a Star of David on their foreheads because they came here to vent?

Come on...

 

[Master50]

Re:

What a waste of a thread this turned out to be.

it was a good discussion on the principle of competition and what the rule is about. I will bet there are a lot more people know it now.
Arguing the rule only because the application hurts your guy is not appreciating the why it is there. if it was two riders out of contention and did not generate discussion this thread was really about who it was and nothing to do with the rule?

 

[EuroCyclingFan]

Re:

Need to hear some mea culpas for those that suggested this Giro is now illegitimate and whoever wins will have an asterix next to their name.

Been away from the Forums for several years now, about the time UK Postal showed up on the scene!
Thought I'd return to see and read the comments this 2 minute penalty generated.

It's just incredible the amount of piss-poor attitude the Skybots seem to display over black and white international rules and regulations!

The whining and complaining...the intolerance and bigoted hatred...the nastiness...Some things never really change, except that Porte is going home, and this 2 minute penalty has had nothing to do with it.

Good to see the likes of The Hitch et al providing reasonable, logical , well articulated input.

I don't expect many mea culpas, don't hold your breath.

 

[carton]

Re: Re:

Let it go dude.

It's a cycling competition.

It's bad enough their hero is not in shape... you want to put a Star of David on their foreheads because they came here to vent?

Come on...

You could've gone scarlet letter first...but no, you took it straight down the aisle. Well, way to finally go full Godwin. Congratulations! Just when I though time was running out. Took this thread far longer than I estimated. Given the level of rhetoric this thread had plenty of potential right from it's youth. It flirted with it so many times. Some of the guys that came back in for more, I thought for sure someone was one of them was going to take the prize. But no, so much potential was going to fade into the night breeze like a beautiful flower about to slip out from its stem. But you came here and swept this thread off its feet. Mazel tov!