Porte Penalised 2 minutes for getting Clarkes Wheel -Fair?

[Flamin]

Good tip: read the comments below the article on Sky's facebookpage. Great entertainment I assure you.

 

[Netserk]

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

If you think it's a BS rule, blame the rule-makers, not the enforcers.

Can you blame the enforcers when they choose what rules to enforce though ?

Like I said most of the time they just ignore the rules.

So when they do randomly enforce a rule you think there should be a good reason for it.

I do blame enforcers for thinking Quintanas attack past neutralisation flags was not an issue but this is.

That wasn't a neutralisation flag. They didn't punish him, because they couldn't. Only the commission can neutralize a race, and it wasn't the commission who decided to have motorbikes with red flags.

 

[Metabolol]

Re:

They've got to be consistent though. Surely Nieve (Euskatel) pacing Contador (Tinkoff) up Ventoux in 2013 is a much worse example of this UCI rule, yet no action was taken there. Numerous examples of this, that's just one that comes to mind. I would love to see the UCI be consistent with it, but you can't just enforce it when mechanicals take place and then not enforce it in open racing when it's making it genuinely unfair

No, it would be foolish even to try applying such rules on the type of situations you mentioned. Maybe if it happens stage after stage.

 

[Campervan man]

Re: Re:

I wonder if the riders involved knew this rule existed? It seems to be a rather odd and obscure one, but still, not knowing about a rule cannot be an excuse... in that sense I kinda feel like this is on the riders or on the teams for not making sure the riders know the rules... on the other hand there are so many rules set by the UCI that it becomes almost impossible to remember them all, especially when you have a puncture with 7k to go in the Giro and your adrenaline starts pumping... the last thing you'll be thinking about at that moment is article 12.6, subsection 4, paragrapg 2 "wheel changes from other teams"...

What I would be interested to know though, is: why is this a rule? What is the reasoning behind it? To prevent several teams "ganging up" and thus creating unfair advantages or maybe even safety concerns (different material on different teams)?

Some teams might have an excuse.

Sky has 0 excuse. If marginal gains actually did exist and was not an amateur piece of fiction invented by Brailsford to pray on people of low intelligence, then devoting resources to making sure all their riders, especially their gt leaders, knew the rules better than anyone else in the peloton, should have been one of the first marginal gains attempted.

Fully agree - if marginal gains is your main philosophy, then knowing the rules should be the first marginal gain.

Exactly.

His team mates in the picture. This is just poor from Sky. Brailsford needs to shut his mouth. Learn some professionalism Dave. Joke team.

 

[etymology]

Re:

Look, collusion happens. A lot. People make alliances in races, and friendships are forged by riders across teams. Tiralongo and Contador is only one example. Something like this is one of the only ways they're actively able to enforce limitations on it. After all, Tiralongo could argue (implausibly) that he would beat Contador in a sprint and the break needed extra legs, therefore it's in his interest to carry him to the front and work together. Unrealistic, sure, but feasible.

If back then Contador had punctured, Tira had given up his wheel and Contador had rode off into the sunset... how many of you would have been irate if Alberto HADN'T been given the two minutes? Part of it is that this was an expected GC-irrelevant stage, so it doesn't seem like anything major has happened and it's just a nice gesture from Clarke rather than any real collusion. But the rule is there to prevent this kind of assistance affecting the GC. Ironically, the subsequent application of the rule has affected the GC more than the assistance did.

all good points, thank you for this post.

my "what IF" question/curiosity - the answer to which no one will ever know - is: would the time needed for porte to get a new wheel exceeded two minutes had clarke not given porte his wheel when he did?

perhaps (no one will ever know for sure) the two minute penalty is less than the time porte might have lost had the uci rule been followed??

 

[Broccolidwarf]

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

Completely against the spirit of a rule on fair play, to give Porte a 2 minute penalty.

That being said, one has to question why Sky does not have a rider on a nearly identically set up bike, travelling with Porte all day, in one of the 3 major tours - with a swift bike change, be wouldn't even have been out of the peloton (especially if he could remember to pull over on the right )..... unprofessionel really.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Re:

They've got to be consistent though. Surely Nieve (Euskatel) pacing Contador (Tinkoff) up Ventoux in 2013 is a much worse example of this UCI rule, yet no action was taken there. Numerous examples of this, that's just one that comes to mind. I would love to see the UCI be consistent with it, but you can't just enforce it when mechanicals take place and then not enforce it in open racing when it's making it genuinely unfair

The rule is worded like this:

2.3.012
All riders may render each other such minor services as lending or exchanging food, drink, spanners or accessories.
The lending or exchanging of tubular tyres or bicycles and waiting for a rider who has been dropped or involved in an accident shall be permitted only amongst riders of the same team. The pushing of one rider by another shall in all cases be forbidden, on pain of disqualification.

Therefore, there is no rule against sporting collusion within the boundaries of what is considered racing. Nieve theoretically benefits from working with Contador. Riding with somebody is not forbidden unless Nieve had actually stopped and waited for Contador. However, Clarke provided mechanical assistance, not racing assistance, and that is why it was against the rules whereas Nieve helping Contador in 2013 or Contador towing Tiralongo to the line in 2011 was not.

Hope that's cleared it up for you, so that the argument that others should be penalized for others riding with them need not detain us further in discussion of the application of today's penalty.

 

[TomasC]

Re: Re:

Well, König wanted to be in top 5. Maybe he can help him.

Maybe he could let him sleep on the floor of his camper.

Anyways, I don't like the rule. IMO there should be space for sportsmanship when a rider who has no stakes in current situation/race helps another.
But claiming that it's some form of Italian conspiracy against Porte is just silly.

 

[The Hitch]

Re: Re:

The funniest thing about this is it once again shows how disorganized Team Sky is. Its laughable that this is the team that claims to be the most organized, advanced, etc in the peloton.

They didn't make things easier by splitting the team in two...

One group for Viviani -and one for Porte...

Makes things more diffucult when issues arise...

So much for the all-in on Porte to win the Giro...

Yeah good point. You would think the first marginal gain would be to have a team dedicated entirely to your gc leader, which is the most obvious marginal gain anyone can think of and been used for decades.

But Sky often decided to deliberately handicap themselves (eg here or 2012 Tour) by bringing several riders for the sprints, then have the gall to claim they are maximising the legal gains

If you give Porte a full team and don't bring a sprint team, this doesn't happen.

 

[King Boonen]

Porte in breaks rules, gets penalised shocker!

 

[Carols]

Does anyone have an example in a WT race of someone from a different team giving their wheel to a rider on a different team where the rule was NOT enforced? The rule is specifically about equipment, not pacing someone or giving them food/drinks. It is giving them equipment.

I wish people would stop comparing apples to oranges, it just clouds the issue.

 

[PremierAndrew]

Re: Re:

They've got to be consistent though. Surely Nieve (Euskatel) pacing Contador (Tinkoff) up Ventoux in 2013 is a much worse example of this UCI rule, yet no action was taken there. Numerous examples of this, that's just one that comes to mind. I would love to see the UCI be consistent with it, but you can't just enforce it when mechanicals take place and then not enforce it in open racing when it's making it genuinely unfair

The rule is worded like this:

2.3.012
All riders may render each other such minor services as lending or exchanging food, drink, spanners or accessories.
The lending or exchanging of tubular tyres or bicycles and waiting for a rider who has been dropped or involved in an accident shall be permitted only amongst riders of the same team. The pushing of one rider by another shall in all cases be forbidden, on pain of disqualification.

Therefore, there is no rule against sporting collusion within the boundaries of what is considered racing. Nieve theoretically benefits from working with Contador. Riding with somebody is not forbidden unless Nieve had actually stopped and waited for Contador. However, Clarke provided mechanical assistance, not racing assistance, and that is why it was against the rules whereas Nieve helping Contador in 2013 or Contador towing Tiralongo to the line in 2011 was not.

Hope that's cleared it up for you, so that the argument that others should be penalized for others riding with them need not detain us further in discussion of the application of today's penalty.

Can't really argue with that

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Re: Re:

all good points, thank you for this post.

my "what IF" question/curiosity - the answer to which no one will ever know - is: would the time needed for porte to get a new wheel exceeded two minutes had clarke not given porte his wheel when he did?

perhaps (no one will ever know for sure) the two minute penalty is less than the time porte might have lost had the uci rule been followed??

Given there was a Sky rider in shot when Clarke was helping Porte, then you can argue that that Sky rider should have given up his wheel or his bike, Porte could have ridden off and maybe lost more than 47" owing to having one fewer helpers, but less than 2'47".

A logical stance to take after that, then, is that since Porte DID have domestiques there, Sky are ass-clowns for not following the usual protocol where a domestique yields to their leader (after all, surely Clarke would have helped pull in the group if he was willing to give up his wheel!) and therefore it's their own fault they got penalized.

 

[RedheadDane]

The problem, the way I see it, is that it wasn't as if it was Porte who told Matthews and Clarke to help him, and if he was panicking he probably couldn't think clear enough to go "No! Don't help me!"

 

[Cookster15]

Re: Re:

I suppose Sky felt they needed at least two riders - one to sacrifice his wheel and another to tow Porte back to the tail of the peloton. It seems Sky panicked. But normally when a GC team leader has a mechanical the whole team would stop. Why was there just one Sky rider around to help Porte?

Because the team were divided in two...

One two support Porte and one for Viviani..

They were also positioned differently...

They gambled for a stage win, and it cost them X100

and it was a bit more then one though..

You may well be right - but that is also a huge fail on Sky's part. Nobody will remember a Giro stage win by Viviani in a year or two. The publicity from a Giro podium and possibly competing for the Pink Jersey in Milan beats that hands down. And half the team should mean 4 riders to stop to support Porte. Even if there was another off camera looking on, where were the other 2 team mates?

Poor Richie, I hope he can do an awesome TT to at least put him back with good chance of podium.

 

[MatParker117]

Re:

Does anyone have an example in a WT race of someone from a different team giving their wheel to a rider on a different team where the rule was NOT enforced? The rule is specifically about equipment, not pacing someone or giving them food/drinks. It is giving them equipment.

I wish people would stop comparing apples to oranges, it just clouds the issue.

He was penalised for “non-regulation assistance to a rider of another team” by strict interpretation of that Valverde should of won the Vuelta in 2012.

 

[veganrob]

Hell yeah it is fair. Rules are very clear there.

 

[King Boonen]

Re: Re:

Does anyone have an example in a WT race of someone from a different team giving their wheel to a rider on a different team where the rule was NOT enforced? The rule is specifically about equipment, not pacing someone or giving them food/drinks. It is giving them equipment.

I wish people would stop comparing apples to oranges, it just clouds the issue.

He was penalised for “non-regulation assistance to a rider of another team” by strict interpretation of that Valverde should of won the Vuelta in 2012.

Why?

 

[MatParker117]

Re: Re:

I suppose Sky felt they needed at least two riders - one to sacrifice his wheel and another to tow Porte back to the tail of the peloton. It seems Sky panicked. But normally when a GC team leader has a mechanical the whole team would stop. Why was there just one Sky rider around to help Porte?

Because the team were divided in two...

One two support Porte and one for Viviani..

They were also positioned differently...

They gambled for a stage win, and it cost them X100

and it was a bit more then one though..

You may well be right - but that is also a huge fail on Sky's part. Nobody will remember a Giro stage win by Viviani in a year or two. The publicity from a Giro podium and possibly competing for the Pink Jersey in Milan beats that hands down. And half the team should mean 4 riders to stop to support Porte. Even if there was another off camera looking on, where were the other 2 team mates?

Poor Richie, I hope he can do an awesome TT to at least put him back with good chance of podium.

Publicity from doing a telekom 97 tour with Porte and Viviani is pretty good too.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Re: Re:

Does anyone have an example in a WT race of someone from a different team giving their wheel to a rider on a different team where the rule was NOT enforced? The rule is specifically about equipment, not pacing someone or giving them food/drinks. It is giving them equipment.

I wish people would stop comparing apples to oranges, it just clouds the issue.

He was penalised for “non-regulation assistance to a rider of another team” by strict interpretation of that Valverde should of won the Vuelta in 2012.

Why?

Because they're looking at the wording of the offence, not the wording of the rule it applies to.

 

[The Hitch]

Re: Re:

What I would be interested to know though, is: why is this a rule? What is the reasoning behind it? To prevent several teams "ganging up" and thus creating unfair advantages or maybe even safety concerns (different material on different teams)?

Would Clarke have stopped and given his wheel to Contador or Aru?

That's the reason for it. In a stage like today's it mattered little (but why wasn't there a Sky bike or rider to hand to change?) so 2' penalty seems overkill when he's already lost time by bad luck, but say that situation plays out in a mountain stage when a rider who is losing time receives mechanical assistance from another team, and is then able to limit their losses and defend a GC lead.

So when Nieve paced Contador up Ventoux in 2013, they should have got a 2 minute penalty as well, right?

True, Contador used to pull this shït all the time with Euskaltel

When? I hope you don't mean the 2 stages with Samuel Sanchez in 2011 when they both pulled equally- in fact Contador pulled more, because they found themselves alone trying to stay away from the chasers? On one of those stages Andy Uran Evans Frank also took turns pulling for eachother, should they have been penalized too?

 

[Carols]

Re: Re:

Does anyone have an example in a WT race of someone from a different team giving their wheel to a rider on a different team where the rule was NOT enforced? The rule is specifically about equipment, not pacing someone or giving them food/drinks. It is giving them equipment.

I wish people would stop comparing apples to oranges, it just clouds the issue.

He was penalised for “non-regulation assistance to a rider of another team” by strict interpretation of that Valverde should of won the Vuelta in 2012.

Why?

because someone gave someone else a wheel? I don't remember that happening.

 

[mrhender]

Re: Re:

Yeah good point. You would think the first marginal gain would be to have a team dedicated entirely to your gc leader, which is the most obvious marginal gain anyone can think of and been used for decades.

But Sky often decided to deliberately handicap themselves (eg here or 2012 Tour) by bringing several riders for the sprints, then have the gall to claim they are maximising the legal gains

If you give Porte a full team and don't bring a sprint team, this doesn't happen.

I could understand the tactic if they said out loud that there were betting on different fronts..

But I haven't heard any of that..

And just to add the Viviani bet is at best half-arsed.. They didn't even go full mantle on it..

If they had help in chasing the breakaway then things might have goone smoother at the end..

Bu no, they tried to benefit on all fronts having ohters do the work thus invested their energies accordingly...

They have no-one to blame but themesleves..

For the record I would have preferred Richie taking a beating on other fronts.
But I guess this is a massive shoot-down of Sky being superior in race approach..

 

[King Boonen]

Re: Re:

Does anyone have an example in a WT race of someone from a different team giving their wheel to a rider on a different team where the rule was NOT enforced? The rule is specifically about equipment, not pacing someone or giving them food/drinks. It is giving them equipment.

I wish people would stop comparing apples to oranges, it just clouds the issue.

He was penalised for “non-regulation assistance to a rider of another team” by strict interpretation of that Valverde should of won the Vuelta in 2012.

Why?

Because they're looking at the wording of the offence, not the wording of the rule it applies to.

This is why I wanted specifics.

Sucks for Porte but the rules are clear and there for a reason. Similar things have caused people to be disqualified in downhill races.

 

[el_angliru]

A Danish TV reporter talked to a Sky DS immediately after the stage (and before we knew of the two minute penalty). The Sky DS said the stage went according to Sky's plan. There were no issues. Sky had half their team with Viviani in order to get the stage win in case the breakaway got caught.

I don't know why so many are blaiming all the other teams, or the UCI, or the Jury for the outcome of this incident. When Sky don't care for their GC rider - why should anyone else? The 2 minute penalty is harsh and terrible for the race. But this is still a pretty light incident compared to what we've seen happen over the years when GT podium favourites crash out (Contador, Froome in TdF 2014, for instance. Not to mention Ocana or Beloki and many other greats in the past). Contador also lost 1:20 in stage 1 of the 2011 Tour because he was caught behind a crash 8 km from the finish (and Contador was particularly unlucky because his rivals were caught behind another crash which, however, happened within the 3 km zone, and therefore didn't give them any time deficits! Bertie crossed the finish line before Andy on stage 1 but still lost 1:14 to him!). Such things happens and are terrible for the race.

But hopefully today's result will force Porte to attack a bit earlier on the hilly or mountain stages. So this can still be a great giro - even for Porte. And his attacks don't have to be as spectacular as Andy's or Alberto's in the 2011 Tour in order to make this a great giro