Porte Penalised 2 minutes for getting Clarkes Wheel -Fair?

[hrotha]

Re: Re:

My point was that while many rules (magic water bottle, pretending mechanical assistance from a car) are usually unenforced so this one should have been.

So far, no one has managed to put forward a verified example of a rider getting a wheel or similar mechanical assistance from a rider in another team who wasn't punished as per the rules. This rule, it would seem, is systematically enforced. You're asking for a particular rider to escape the specified penalty for which there is plenty of precedent just because it kinda sucks to get the penalty.

How can you not see how fundamentally unfair what you're asking for would be?

 

[HiroAntagonist]

Most laws are enforced selectively, but flagrantly posting pics of the indiscretion while your teammate is in the pic is absurd, and utterly indefensible. What is it about the situation that people don't get? The mind reels yet again.

 

[IndianCyclist]

Re:

Well, we should see new tactics in racing then
Every time a GC contender punctures, teammates of his opponents stay behind and start pacing him whether he likes it or not
All involved riders get 2' penalty, and more if they catch the same guy twice

Or teammates of his opponents stay behind and block the chase to get to terms

 

[IndianCyclist]

Re: Re:

My point was that while many rules (magic water bottle, pretending mechanical assistance from a car) are usually unenforced so this one should have been.

So far, no one has managed to put forward a verified example of a rider getting a wheel or similar mechanical assistance from a rider in another team who wasn't punished as per the rules. This rule, it would seem, is systematically enforced. You're asking for a particular rider to escape the specified penalty for which there is plenty of precedent just because it kinda sucks to get the penalty.

How can you not see how fundamentally unfair what you're asking for would be?

When was this rule established? If the racing style then were entirely different from now, the reasons for the application of the rule might be entirely different

 

[movingtarget]

Re:

Not all rules are equally straight-forward to enforce. Identifying who exactly crossed when the barriers were down is not comparable to something like this.

Just come out and say you think the rules shouldn't apply to riders who are too important.

Don't try and put words into the mouths of others. I agree with the penalty but I disagree with the inconsistencies and the riders at the level crossing could have been identified quite easily. But I also think that 2 minutes is a stiff penalty for an illegal wheel change. An individual breach or a group breach of the rules should be treated the same and if it ruins the race so be it. Sky's ineptitude and a panic situation for Porte has ruined his race even if Clarke acted instinctively to help someone out. But the Paris Roubaix riders did not have their race ruined for a more serious action.

 

[oncehadhair]

Re: Re:

My point was that while many rules (magic water bottle, pretending mechanical assistance from a car) are usually unenforced so this one should have been.

So far, no one has managed to put forward a verified example of a rider getting a wheel or similar mechanical assistance from a rider in another team who wasn't punished as per the rules. This rule, it would seem, is systematically enforced. You're asking for a particular rider to escape the specified penalty for which there is plenty of precedent just because it kinda sucks to get the penalty.

How can you not see how fundamentally unfair what you're asking for would be?

So far there has only been one cited example of the rule being enforced. Do you mean to tell me that since 2009 there has been no incidences of wheel exchange between cyclists?

One example is not systematic.

No problem with the rule or the penalty, just with consistency - with this rule and others (holding the car, draughting, sprinting, pushing).

There are hundreds (thousands?) of examples of commissaires turning a blind eye.

 

[HiroAntagonist]

Sky fans whinging on about Porte getting caught after breaking a straightforward rule. Shocking I say, shocking!

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

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

In a typical stage race the rulebook is usually treated like toilet paper especially for riders who crash and puncture. I think thats why this penalization has seemed so shocking.

I am curious about the legal definition of pushing. Does that include doing that madison slingshot move?

These are road race rules, not track races rules.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Re: Re:

My point was that while many rules (magic water bottle, pretending mechanical assistance from a car) are usually unenforced so this one should have been.

So far, no one has managed to put forward a verified example of a rider getting a wheel or similar mechanical assistance from a rider in another team who wasn't punished as per the rules. This rule, it would seem, is systematically enforced. You're asking for a particular rider to escape the specified penalty for which there is plenty of precedent just because it kinda sucks to get the penalty.

How can you not see how fundamentally unfair what you're asking for would be?

When was this rule established? If the racing style then were entirely different from now, the reasons for the application of the rule might be entirely different

Well the rule has existed for quite some time although I'm not sure for how long. It was in force when UCI first published rules on the Internet in around year 2000 although the sanctions list has been updated / modified a few times since. I'd guess it's at least a generation (~30 years) old.

 

[MacRoadie]

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

Some of these UCI regulations seem unenforceable.

Course
2.4.002 The course shall be safe and perfectly signposted.

Sprints
2.3.036 Riders shall be strictly forbidden to deviate from the lane they selected when launching
into the sprint and, in so doing, endangering others.

Except that the most common and loudly argued penalty in Grand Tours is the sprint relegation for deviating from a line...

Yeah its argued because its enforced selectively.

Your point was that it was unenforceable. I was merely pointing out that it is probably the most enforced rule, regardless of how selectively it might be applied.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Re: Re:

My point was that while many rules (magic water bottle, pretending mechanical assistance from a car) are usually unenforced so this one should have been.

So far, no one has managed to put forward a verified example of a rider getting a wheel or similar mechanical assistance from a rider in another team who wasn't punished as per the rules. This rule, it would seem, is systematically enforced. You're asking for a particular rider to escape the specified penalty for which there is plenty of precedent just because it kinda sucks to get the penalty.

How can you not see how fundamentally unfair what you're asking for would be?

So far there has only been one cited example of the rule being enforced. Do you mean to tell me that since 2009 there has been no incidences of wheel exchange between cyclists?

One example is not systematic.

No problem with the rule or the penalty, just with consistency - with this rule and others (holding the car, draughting, sprinting, pushing).

There are hundreds (thousands?) of examples of commissaires turning a blind eye.

This particular rule has been enforced numerous times at national/conti level when commissaires were aware/witnessed the transgression.

The fact that it's not so common at world/pro tour level given the better neutral and team car coverage on hand or lower level races not reported in press coverage doesn't mean it's not been enforced before.

I've listened to numerous examples over past day of the same rule being applied in many races. One was mentioned last night on SBS coverage with Henk Vogels winning a race after another rider was penalised for same offence.

Keep in mind commissaires can only act on what they know and have clear evidence of and when received in a timely manner. I'm not sure about this case, but normally when a rider stops in a race for such things, one commissaire vehicle hangs back to check on the incident when there are enough commissaires to do so (at least that's how it works in races I've been comm driver for).

 

[joe_papp]

Re: Re:

...
I've listened to numerous examples over past day of the same rule being applied in many races. One was mentioned last night on SBS coverage with Henk Vogels winning a race after another rider was penalised for same offence.

That was a good roundtable. It just showed up in my FB feed and it was nice to see both Henk and Macca lead off their contributions by putting the blame squarely on Team SKY for allowing this debacle to happen in first place.

Keep in mind commissaires can only act on what they know and have clear evidence of and when received in a timely manner. I'm not sure about this case, but normally when a rider stops in a race for such things, one commissaire vehicle hangs back to check on the incident when there are enough commissaires to do so (at least that's how it works in races I've been comm driver for).

I mentioned an incident from Vuelta a Cuba previously, and wanted to share a couple of the photos since they support your explanation of what usually happens - even in lowly 2.2 races. A high profile participant like the GC leader or any of his rivals would definitely merit this scrutiny, and in the images you can see the chief commissaire actually exited his vehicle to directly observe the situation (and warn the B-rider of the potential penalty). The UCI man is in khakis and light blue shirt, already walking back to the car after the national team mechanic arrived and began the service:

http://imgur.com/a/p61hB

We weren't at full-flight and it was the final stage, hence the slightly more relaxed atmosphere, but had PPP taken the Cuba B wheel instead of waiting for service from the team car, he'd've been penalized. Mildly amusing though that PPP - an Olympian (road, Sydney, iirc) knew not to take the wheel, but Porte, a purported GT contender, didn't.

OH, and yeah, the B-team rider absolutely had to push off and head down the road and couldn't simply stand there to begin pacing PPP back as if he was a surrogate A-team rider. lol

 

[Master50]

I usually look at these from the eyes of an official. I spent more than 25 years as a commissaire. the jury had no choice. twitter had it everywhere and the rules have no wiggle room at least for the jury. all that said I appreciate the warm and fuzzy with regard to fellow countrymen but what other sport tolerates assistance from their opponents to beat them? at worlds we have national teams and there is often complaints of team affiliations corrupting the result? How can we have it both ways?
this is not a fondo, it is a race where Orica and sky are opponents. an Orica rider forgets his team affiliation and contract. he puts friendship ahead of his team. I get that but it is not the spirit of competition. To me it is a clear violation of the rules but even more so the spirit of competition. Maybe not the spirit if sportsmanship which is really related to sport but not with intent to win but to play as gentlemen. Cycling by its nature is very complex in this relationship simply because it is one of the few sports where your chance of victory often depends on cooperation of opposing teams. all that said it is clear there was a Sky rider present to provide Porte with a wheel. Of course I also get that at Paris Roubaix a lot of riders crossed the barrier and from all the video that was a sever violation. the jury there could not identify all the culprits so they gave them all a pass? Is it fail to penalize 1/2 of them because they are high ranked riders who are more easily identified?

As an official I have certainly been aware that the race should as much as possible not be decided by penalties.
I like the editorial in Velo titled the giro shoots itself in the foot. it speaks well to the challenges officials face. UCI takes another hit but that is the organization that provides the training and assigns the commissaires. I know one as a friend. A bottle hand up in the last 20 km of a race can earn a 2000 Swiss frank fine but seldom is a bottle worthy of that fine and I have never applied that penalty mostly because the riders are not in contention. the team gets a 200 franc fine for irregular feeding a rather broad description. My point is officials try to look at rule violations in terms of the effect on a race and not just the act. PR they eventually nullified an advantage the riders that crossed had gained over the group that stopped. In this case nationalism overcame team affiliation but it was done such that the jury could not take it in context or any spirit of sportsmanship. they applied the rule as emotionlessly as they could simply because they only had 1 decision they can defend regardless of popularity. either way there was going to be angry emails.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Consider the case if the rule wasn't in place.

Aside from the collusion aspect, the rule protects other teams and their riders from any obligation/pressure to render such mechanical assistance (other than what they might be expected to do in emergency circumstances).

If the rule didn't exist, then we'll have everyone claiming all these riders and teams that don't offer assistance to a key GC contender in such a scenario are acting in an unsporting manner. That's an unfair obligation (real or perceived) on everyone other than the team and neutral support. Do a race with 60 Italians and 1 from Upper Timbuktu and the guy from UT punctures, well you can see the problem.

Simple fact is Porte should have had team mates behind him on hand to help out immediately, and not Clarke behind him. There was at least one Sky rider there (he's in a photo at the wheel change).

There are marginal gains in knowing the rules.

There are also marginal gains in practising equipment swap processes (team have practised such things as bike swaps in the past for TTs with variable terrain). Think about how much time goes into pit stops for motor racing (drivers and crew). Or triathlon transitions. Sure the domain such things happen is more variable in a road race than in each of those examples, but there are still some things that need to happen each time. One of the options is to perform a professional foul and risk the penalty as you judge it to be worth it overall.

 

[DBotero]

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

http://www.cyclingnews.com/blogs/robert-millar/robert-millar-clarkes-behaviour-in-handing-porte-a-wheel-should-be-applauded

 

[coppino]

Re:

I usually look at these from the eyes of an official. I spent more than 25 years as a commissaire. the jury had no choice. twitter had it everywhere and the rules have no wiggle room at least for the jury. all that said I appreciate the warm and fuzzy with regard to fellow countrymen but what other sport tolerates assistance from their opponents to beat them? at worlds we have national teams and there is often complaints of team affiliations corrupting the result? How can we have it both ways?
this is not a fondo, it is a race where Orica and sky are opponents. an Orica rider forgets his team affiliation and contract. he puts friendship ahead of his team. I get that but it is not the spirit of competition. To me it is a clear violation of the rules but even more so the spirit of competition. Maybe not the spirit if sportsmanship which is really related to sport but not with intent to win but to play as gentlemen. Cycling by its nature is very complex in this relationship simply because it is one of the few sports where your chance of victory often depends on cooperation of opposing teams. all that said it is clear there was a Sky rider present to provide Porte with a wheel. Of course I also get that at Paris Roubaix a lot of riders crossed the barrier and from all the video that was a sever violation. the jury there could not identify all the culprits so they gave them all a pass? Is it fail to penalize 1/2 of them because they are high ranked riders who are more easily identified?

As an official I have certainly been aware that the race should as much as possible not be decided by penalties.
I like the editorial in Velo titled the giro shoots itself in the foot. it speaks well to the challenges officials face. UCI takes another hit but that is the organization that provides the training and assigns the commissaires. I know one as a friend. A bottle hand up in the last 20 km of a race can earn a 2000 Swiss frank fine but seldom is a bottle worthy of that fine and I have never applied that penalty mostly because the riders are not in contention. the team gets a 200 franc fine for irregular feeding a rather broad description. My point is officials try to look at rule violations in terms of the effect on a race and not just the act. PR they eventually nullified an advantage the riders that crossed had gained over the group that stopped. In this case nationalism overcame team affiliation but it was done such that the jury could not take it in context or any spirit of sportsmanship. they applied the rule as emotionlessly as they could simply because they only had 1 decision they can defend regardless of popularity. either way there was going to be angry emails.

Very well put.

 

[coppino]

ANyway really this is not a case of selective enforcement of an unjust rule, but a case of enforcement of a rule rarely enforced because rarely violated by a group of individuals that rightly consider such an act as one AGAINST sportmanship. We rarely (if never) see such situations because riders are competing for winning or for helping their teammates winning, they are not competing for helping rivals to win and in the process losing minutes in gc. The rule is perfectly coherent with the spirit of the game. It is so much that is rarely violated.

 

[pastronef]

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

Many were wondering why Sky was not better protecting Porte’s flanks. As Clarke explained, Porte’s puncture came in a roundabout, and his teammates sped up the road not realizing their captain had punctured. In one photo, a Sky rider is visible at the edge of the frame just as Clarke is tightening down the wheel.

“That’s one thing you cannot tell from that photo. I was already finished changing the wheel when the Sky rider came back. The Sky guy was only arriving, and it was at least 20 or 30 seconds by the time a Sky rider came, and by then, the wheel was already in,” Clarke explained. “Richie didn’t ask help from me. He was shouting to his teammate, but they didn’t hear him. It was just fortunate that I saw the problem. All the Australians are really good friends, and we look out for each other.”


http://velonews.competitor.com/2015/05/news/clarke-no-regrets-over-decision-to-help-porte-in-giro_370975#QoQHjXgTBzGQvq4x.99

 

[dubexcalibur]

Re: Re:

[quote="
Well the rule has existed for quite some time although I'm not sure for how long. It was in force when UCI first published rules on the Internet in around year 2000 although the sanctions list has been updated / modified a few times since. I'd guess it's at least a generation (~30 years) old.[/quote]

I dont have any specific information about when the rule was established , but Coppi lost Omloop in 1948 due to this rule ( or a previous version of it ) so it is atleast 67 years old.

 

[coppino]

Yes wiki source and others say he was penalised and relegated to second place

 

[Jaunty Monty]

Re:

Consider the case if the rule wasn't in place.

Aside from the collusion aspect, the rule protects other teams and their riders from any obligation/pressure to render such mechanical assistance (other than what they might be expected to do in emergency circumstances).

If the rule didn't exist, then we'll have everyone claiming all these riders and teams that don't offer assistance to a key GC contender in such a scenario are acting in an unsporting manner. That's an unfair obligation (real or perceived) on everyone other than the team and neutral support. Do a race with 60 Italians and 1 from Upper Timbuktu and the guy from UT punctures, well you can see the problem.

Simple fact is Porte should have had team mates behind him on hand to help out immediately, and not Clarke behind him. There was at least one Sky rider there (he's in a photo at the wheel change).

There are marginal gains in knowing the rules.

There are also marginal gains in practising equipment swap processes (team have practised such things as bike swaps in the past for TTs with variable terrain). Think about how much time goes into pit stops for motor racing (drivers and crew). Or triathlon transitions. Sure the domain such things happen is more variable in a road race than in each of those examples, but there are still some things that need to happen each time. One of the options is to perform a professional foul and risk the penalty as you judge it to be worth it overall.

You argue a good case for the rule but IMO the punishment is too severe. The size of the time penalty could be discretionary and determined by the circumstances. 30s would have been adequate in this instance.

Rival teams could argue that they can't stop to give assistance in case their own rider had a mechanical. I don't think they would be accused of unsportsmanlike behaviour.

I don't agree with the criticism of Sky for not having a rider behind Porte. The puncture happened when the race was full on and at a roundabout where its easy for teammates to get separated. Its difficult to have someone right behind your team leader at all times and the rider in the picture could have arrived on scene just as the wheel change was completed. Had Porte had a teammate right behind him and there was a crash they could have both gone down and needed new bikes. Its better to keep someone at the rear of the peloton to be on scene soon after any incident but if said incident happens at a roundabout there is the danger the riders take different directions.

What I do find odd is that neither Kiryienka, Nieve or Viviani dropped back to help with the pacing. They didn't all need to stay with Konig. If Viviani stayed in the peloton because of the unlikley chance of a stage win or points for the red jersey then he could have been the one to stay with Konig (at least to the 3k mark). But both of the other two? Its not as if Sky have shown much interest in non-podium top 10 GC placings in the past.

 

[VO2 Max]

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

Many were wondering why Sky was not better protecting Porte’s flanks. As Clarke explained, Porte’s puncture came in a roundabout, and his teammates sped up the road not realizing their captain had punctured. In one photo, a Sky rider is visible at the edge of the frame just as Clarke is tightening down the wheel.

“That’s one thing you cannot tell from that photo. I was already finished changing the wheel when the Sky rider came back. The Sky guy was only arriving, and it was at least 20 or 30 seconds by the time a Sky rider came, and by then, the wheel was already in,” Clarke explained. “Richie didn’t ask help from me. He was shouting to his teammate, but they didn’t hear him. It was just fortunate that I saw the problem. All the Australians are really good friends, and we look out for each other.”


http://velonews.competitor.com/2015/05/news/clarke-no-regrets-over-decision-to-help-porte-in-giro_370975#QoQHjXgTBzGQvq4x.99

Let's hope he means 'came back up to the group' rather than 'came back (returned) to the scene' because there's another DQ offence

 

[veji11]

Re: Re:

Just remind me how many times this has been an issue in the past? I understand these are the big issues for the sport!

Look what do you want me to say ? Is this rule "a key issue for the sport" ? No I don't think so no, but it exists and it exists for a reason. It is damn unfortunate Porte put himself in such a situation by just panicking and acting completely braindead in the face of what is classic cycling occurence : a flat tire as the peloton rides fast away from you. It has happened to all greats but they haven't made a total mess out of it like HE did. HE parked on the left side so was missed by his car. HE took his mate's wheel, forgetting for a while that "hey maybe I should take my teammate's rather than my homie's from another team". HE made a mess out of something so mundane and ordinary.

Had he managed that with a modicum of intelligence, he would have lost 30 seconds and be done with it. He lost close to 3 minutes because of his blunders. Let's not make the rules the culprit here ok ? Sometimes rule are not very clever or very fair or whatever, but they are there and as other and I have said, there have been examples in the past of that rule being applied in the exact same way (Tour de l'Avenir 2009, Romain Sicard). That it doesn't happen that often is a testament to riders' intelligence and ability to PROPERLY do a wheel change when need be. For Porte to mess up such a trivial incident is in itself inexcusable when you pretend to be a GT winner.

No need to delve into a meta debate about fairness and the spirit of the law.

All right expert so why aren't the same penalties applied when a cyclist from another team takes food or water (or rain vest) as has happened in this race.

No one is arguing about the flat - which is part of racing, or banging on about Porte's stupidity (apart from you), or the fact that the rule is there.

The upset is due to the inconsistent application of the rules. The fact that you have to go back to 2009 to find the last recorded application of the rule proves it.

Because it is not the same thing at all to give someone a mars bar or a bottle, which does you no harm, than to stop and give someone who is not your teammate your wheel, which means you knowingly sabotage your result for the sake of a rider outside of your team !!!

And I am sorry but banging on about Porte's stupidity in this instance (I am not saying he is a stupid dude generally, I have no right nor reason to say so) is the very appropriate thing to do because to a significant extent he put himself in this situation. Even going lef on a roundabout and suffering a bad puncture straight away, it is his job to try to keep on cycling 20 meters to stop on the right hand side further down. Failing that it is his job to wait for a car or a teammate to help him out. failing to do both those things is his mistake and his only. That the cost is in the end disproportionnate compared to the original mistake is just very unfortunate, but the mistake is evident.

 

[veji11]

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

Many were wondering why Sky was not better protecting Porte’s flanks. As Clarke explained, Porte’s puncture came in a roundabout, and his teammates sped up the road not realizing their captain had punctured. In one photo, a Sky rider is visible at the edge of the frame just as Clarke is tightening down the wheel.

“That’s one thing you cannot tell from that photo. I was already finished changing the wheel when the Sky rider came back. The Sky guy was only arriving, and it was at least 20 or 30 seconds by the time a Sky rider came, and by then, the wheel was already in,” Clarke explained. “Richie didn’t ask help from me. He was shouting to his teammate, but they didn’t hear him. It was just fortunate that I saw the problem. All the Australians are really good friends, and we look out for each other.”


http://velonews.competitor.com/2015/05/news/clarke-no-regrets-over-decision-to-help-porte-in-giro_370975#QoQHjXgTBzGQvq4x.99

Funny quote because it perfectly underlines the legitimacy of the penalty, as withou Clarke's help Porte would have lost further time (those 20/30 seconds mentionned) before being able to go again, so Clarke's wheel had a very clear material consequence in the standings.

And second the excuse that Porte went left and ALL his teammates went right so "gee bad luck" is a lame excuse : It is the guardian angels' job to be there, at all times, ready. Porte stops for a leak ? You stop. Porte goes left on the roundabout, one of you goes left. Normally at least one teammate is behind such an important leader and stays on the very same trajectory. All his teammates going right might seem incidental but it is in itself a failure : those teammates failed their leader by abandonning him on a roundabout.

Again we go back to the central point : the symphony of errors played by Porte and his Sky teammates with very tough consequences. At least now all big teams will remember that and I am sure it was a wake up call for many riders who can sometimes take their "guardian angel" job a bit lightly : they have to be always ready and at hand because it is at that little moment when you left your leader to his own devices that sh** happens.

 

[neineinei]

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

Many were wondering why Sky was not better protecting Porte’s flanks. As Clarke explained, Porte’s puncture came in a roundabout, and his teammates sped up the road not realizing their captain had punctured. In one photo, a Sky rider is visible at the edge of the frame just as Clarke is tightening down the wheel.

“That’s one thing you cannot tell from that photo. I was already finished changing the wheel when the Sky rider came back. The Sky guy was only arriving, and it was at least 20 or 30 seconds by the time a Sky rider came, and by then, the wheel was already in,” Clarke explained. “Richie didn’t ask help from me. He was shouting to his teammate, but they didn’t hear him. It was just fortunate that I saw the problem. All the Australians are really good friends, and we look out for each other.”


http://velonews.competitor.com/2015/05/news/clarke-no-regrets-over-decision-to-help-porte-in-giro_370975#QoQHjXgTBzGQvq4x.99

Let's hope he means 'came back up to the group' rather than 'came back (returned) to the scene' because there's another DQ offence