Porte Penalised 2 minutes for getting Clarkes Wheel -Fair?

[richwagmn]

Re:

The one question that people have to ask is "what is ultimate purpose of the rules"
The answer being Safety and Fairness.
Crashes and Mechanicals are part of the sport but are considered unfortunate( I have never heard of anybody gaining anything due to mechanicals). There are rules like the 3 km rule designed to reduce crashes and give fair time to everybody.
Therefore it is utter stupidity to apply such a punishment of 2 min docking to Porte when he has clearly lost 47s already and not gained anything. 2min is an arbitrary time penalty. Assuming he took his teammates wheel, he would have lost additional ~10-15 s. That would be the correct penalty to be given if at all. What was important was that UCI could have shown the more sporting side of cycling but all it encourages is that people need to be more selfish and look into their own interests. IMO the puncture was unfortunate and unfair for Porte and the UCI rubbed salt into wounds by making it into complete disaster.

Say what? The MINIMUM penalty as spelled out in the rules is a loss of two minutes in a stage race. There's nothing arbitrary about the penalty Porte got. In what world do we have rules where penalties actually are arbitrary.?

 

[Master50]

Ask yourself this. what if Orica had a rider in top 5 or 10 in the GC? What if all the Spanish rider rode for Contador? what if Tinkoff had 2 teams in the race(actually prohibited to have two teams with he same paying agent).
What if it was a 1 day race? Porte only has 8 riders to help him not 9 or 18. this is exactly true for every GC rider. Would Clarke have helped Aru or Contador? what would Sky say to that?
We all understand friendship but his is a competition not a ride.

 

[Merckx index]

‪IndianCyclist wrote:

2min is an arbitrary time penalty. Assuming he took his teammates wheel, he would have lost additional ~10-15 s. That would be the correct penalty to be given if at all.

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.

If that were the case, then there would be nothing to lose by having someone on another team help you. If you aren’t caught (and let’s remember that Richie “I forgot in the heat of the moment” Porte might not have got caught if he hadn’t tweeted about this after the race), then you save some time. If you do get caught, you lose the same amount of time you would have lost if you had waited for your teammate.

It’s like having a penalty of $100,000 and no jail for robbing a bank of $100,000, with payment from the money you stole permitted. Of course the penalty has to be greater than the potential gain from the crime, or there is no deterrent value.

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.

I thought Porte said when he first punctured he continued riding, thinking he could make it to the three km mark? If that was the case, there was ample time to warn his teammates.

 

[Weapons of @ss Destruction]

Re:

I thought Porte said when he first punctured he continued riding, thinking he could make it to the three km mark? If that was the case, there was ample time to warn his teammates.

It's like the badzilla. Just keep changing your story from one interview to the next to best fit whatever position you are trying to pass off at that time. Standard MO for the Sky crew.

 

[MacRoadie]

Re:

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?

The thing that gets me about Paris Roubaix, is that, with some slight variations, IT'S ON THE SAME FLIPPIN' ROADS EVERY SINGLE YEAR! That railroad crossing has been an issue two or three times in recent memory alone. Everyone knows it's there and when it's coming up!

For the life of me I can't understand why ASO can't coordinate with the railroad (passenger and freight) to stop or alter rail traffic and schedules for 30 minutes or so, once a year. Just like every other inch of the course, the race bible and the organizers know within a handful of minutes either way just when the bunch will hit the crossing so it isn't a monumental task.

It's not like we're talking about an industrial park crit here, it's bloody Paris Roubaix. I'm sure rail traffic is slowed or stopped all the time for accidents, right of way maintenance, etc.

If that somehow proves to be a monumental task, with the history of shenanigans at the crossing, it wouldn't kill the UCI to post a commissaire at the crossing specifically to observe should the gates come down.

 

[carton]

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

+1

BTW, after today's time gaps, can all of the impartial unbiased observers screaming bloody conspiracy give me a good explanation for why the commisaires would want Contador to win? I'll grab the popcorn.

 

[VO2 Max]

Re: Re:

For the life of me I can't understand why ASO can't coordinate with the railroad (passenger and freight) to stop or alter rail traffic and schedules for 30 minutes or so, once a year. Just like every other inch of the course, the race bible and the organizers know within a handful of minutes either way just when the bunch will hit the crossing so it isn't a monumental task.

From what I've read they did tweak the rail timetable to avoid a clash but the strong tailwind in the early part of the race meant they arrived at Wallers much earlier than expected.

 

[IndianCyclist]

Re: Re:

[quote="

Say what? The MINIMUM penalty as spelled out in the rules is a loss of two minutes in a stage race. There's nothing arbitrary about the penalty Porte got. In what world do we have rules where penalties actually are arbitrary.?

Could u then give the logic of 2min. What is the justification of 2min. Why not 3 or 5 min or 30 s?
This rule is very old as some posters have already pointed out. Therefore the time penalty should be as per ancient times (People used to win GTs in >10 min and where the state to stage variation used to be in minutes) when 2 min was of little consequence. These days 2 min is huge when GTs are won by less than that margin

 

[Carols]

Re: Re:

[quote="

Say what? The MINIMUM penalty as spelled out in the rules is a loss of two minutes in a stage race. There's nothing arbitrary about the penalty Porte got. In what world do we have rules where penalties actually are arbitrary.?

Could u then give the logic of 2min. What is the justification of 2min. Why not 3 or 5 min or 30 s?
This rule is very old as some posters have already pointed out. Therefore the time penalty should be as per ancient times (People used to win GTs in >10 min and where the state to stage variation used to be in minutes) when 2 min was of little consequence. These days 2 min is huge when GTs are won by less than that margin

LOL in ancient times you were DQed. "Another Italian, Fausto Coppi won in 1948 but was disqualified for taking a wheel from the Belgian Walschott, who was not of his team."

EDIT: This was at Omloop!

 

[Weapons of @ss Destruction]

Re: Re:

Could u then give the logic of 2min. What is the justification of 2min. Why not 3 or 5 min or 30 s?
This rule is very old as some posters have already pointed out. Therefore the time penalty should be as per ancient times (People used to win GTs in >10 min and where the state to stage variation used to be in minutes) when 2 min was of little consequence. These days 2 min is huge when GTs are won by less than that margin

Note to all cycling fans; if there's any set penalty currently in the rules and you think it may negatively impact one of your preferred riders or your enjoyment of a race in the future, start lobbying with your local cycling governing bodies now and if you are really motivated maybe you can get it eventually rolled up with representatives of your federation to the appropriate UCI committee for review. Complaining after the fact that it may or may not have any basis in logic is too late. Of course, that would require fans to also read the rules which is probably far more effort than they are willing to invest, even though they are likely to spend even larger amounts of time complaining on discussion forums about it.

 

[oldcrank]

Re: Re:

[quote="

Say what? The MINIMUM penalty as spelled out in the rules is a loss of two minutes in a stage race. There's nothing arbitrary about the penalty Porte got. In what world do we have rules where penalties actually are arbitrary.?

Could u then give the logic of 2min. What is the justification of 2min. Why not 3 or 5 min or 30 s?
This rule is very old as some posters have already pointed out. Therefore the time penalty should be as per ancient times (People used to win GTs in >10 min and where the state to stage variation used to be in minutes) when 2 min was of little consequence. These days 2 min is huge when GTs are won by less than that margin

LOL in ancient times you were DQed. "Another Italian, Fausto Coppi won in 1948 but was disqualified for taking a wheel from the Belgian Walschott, who was not of his team."

The sanctions are different in today's rule book, my friend, depending on
whether the infraction occured in a one day race (as per your example)
or in a stage race, but I'm not sure about in the 1948 rules.

 

[Mr.White]

Re: Re:

[quote="

Say what? The MINIMUM penalty as spelled out in the rules is a loss of two minutes in a stage race. There's nothing arbitrary about the penalty Porte got. In what world do we have rules where penalties actually are arbitrary.?

Could u then give the logic of 2min. What is the justification of 2min. Why not 3 or 5 min or 30 s?
This rule is very old as some posters have already pointed out. Therefore the time penalty should be as per ancient times (People used to win GTs in >10 min and where the state to stage variation used to be in minutes) when 2 min was of little consequence. These days 2 min is huge when GTs are won by less than that margin

2 minutes are just fine...

 

[fatsprintking]

Back in 2002 Tour Down Under, when Michael Rogers accepted a bike from a spectator after an incident with one of the race motorcycles, the act was celebrated as a spontaneous reaction by both rider and spectator - it garnered a lot of positive media coverage within both the cycling and mainstream press.
There was a bit of creative interpretation and explanation of the rules by the officials ("taking" being essentially defined as "stealing" so "borrowing" being ok!)
http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/features/tdu02c40.shtml
Being an official is a tough gig at any level of the sport, and like any other group there is going to be variation in the ability to think creatively. But creativity has always been an endearing part of the sport.
The more I think about why I personally have been frustrated by this situation is perhaps in the realization that cyclists really are a bunch of pedantic rule followers 80% of the time and flagrant rule breakers the other 20. It seems to be easier to break the rules and to get away with it when you do it consciously with a specific advantage in mind - that does not seem right, but maybe that is just me getting caught up in the concept of social justice rather than understanding that this is about social order/control.
The rules, the rules the rules - my suspicion has always been that cycling is like a big classroom of 8 year olds, at a traditional school, being managed by a slightly incompetent teacher who is desperately trying to pretend that they have control. Fans are like parents, at times advocating on their childs behalf even in the face of clear evidence that they are wrong, or being jealous or suspicious of other families.
I have taken on board a lot of the points other have made on this issue and it has given a lot of food for though - unfortunately my school analogy seems to be holding up well.

 

[carton]

Re:

The rules, the rules the rules - my suspicion has always been that cycling is like a big classroom of 8 year olds, at a traditional school, being managed by a slightly incompetent teacher who is desperately trying to pretend that they have control. Fans are like parents, at times advocating on their childs behalf even in the face of clear evidence that they are wrong, or being jealous or suspicious of other families.
I have taken on board a lot of the points other have made on this issue and it has given a lot of food for though - unfortunately my school analogy seems to be holding up well.

Nice analogy.
Additional kudos for the understatement of the week.

 

[richwagmn]

Re: Re:

[quote="

Say what? The MINIMUM penalty as spelled out in the rules is a loss of two minutes in a stage race. There's nothing arbitrary about the penalty Porte got. In what world do we have rules where penalties actually are arbitrary.?

Could u then give the logic of 2min. What is the justification of 2min. Why not 3 or 5 min or 30 s?
This rule is very old as some posters have already pointed out. Therefore the time penalty should be as per ancient times (People used to win GTs in >10 min and where the state to stage variation used to be in minutes) when 2 min was of little consequence. These days 2 min is huge when GTs are won by less than that margin

All penalties for breaking laws are "arbitrary". Why 5 years in prison for stealing? Why not 3 years? Or 2 days. Because someone picked a value.

Do you know the penalty for breaking this rule in a single day race? Disqualification. Apparently the creators of the rule saw this as a pretty big deal.

Besides, all sporting regulations specify penalties. If they didn't the penalties would truly be arbitrary.

Yes, the rule is quite old and a good one in my opinion because all riders are treated the same.

Porte's team screwed up. Porte gained time by using a non-teammate's wheel that he should have lost.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Re:

Back in 2002 Tour Down Under, when Michael Rogers accepted a bike from a spectator after an incident with one of the race motorcycles, the act was celebrated as a spontaneous reaction by both rider and spectator - it garnered a lot of positive media coverage within both the cycling and mainstream press.
There was a bit of creative interpretation and explanation of the rules by the officials ("taking" being essentially defined as "stealing" so "borrowing" being ok!)
http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/features/tdu02c40.shtml
Being an official is a tough gig at any level of the sport, and like any other group there is going to be variation in the ability to think creatively. But creativity has always been an endearing part of the sport.
The more I think about why I personally have been frustrated by this situation is perhaps in the realization that cyclists really are a bunch of pedantic rule followers 80% of the time and flagrant rule breakers the other 20. It seems to be easier to break the rules and to get away with it when you do it consciously with a specific advantage in mind - that does not seem right, but maybe that is just me getting caught up in the concept of social justice rather than understanding that this is about social order/control.
The rules, the rules the rules - my suspicion has always been that cycling is like a big classroom of 8 year olds, at a traditional school, being managed by a slightly incompetent teacher who is desperately trying to pretend that they have control. Fans are like parents, at times advocating on their childs behalf even in the face of clear evidence that they are wrong, or being jealous or suspicious of other families.
I have taken on board a lot of the points other have made on this issue and it has given a lot of food for though - unfortunately my school analogy seems to be holding up well.

The chances that the spectator gave the bike up because it was Mick Rogers as opposed to to assist a random pro cyclist are quite slim though.
The chances that Simon Clarke gave his wheel up because it was Richie Porte as opposed to to assist a random fellow pro cyclist are quite high in comparison.

That's the problem. The fan's intentions in assisting a rider are hard to gauge, and the rulebook is silent on the issue of non-race material (Jens Voigt also once survived a Tour timecut using a spectator's bicycle to save time until his team car got to him with a spare).

Another element is that especially before it went World Tour, the Tour Down Under is a race of little consequence and the situation as you mention was a creation of the race organizers' own making so it would be harsh to penalize the rider (especially as the rulebook is less clear when regarding non-participants in the race). Here, the organizers did nothing wrong. Sky did. Orica did. The puncture and resulting situation were not of the organizers' making, therefore it's harder for them to show leniency when the rule - which is clear in its wording if not its intent - has been so publicly broken, and in such a high profile event.

 

[BigMac]

Public figure and fellow forumite durianrider opines:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAlLe4BCupA

Come back DR.

 

[oncehadhair]

Re: Re:

[quote="

Say what? The MINIMUM penalty as spelled out in the rules is a loss of two minutes in a stage race. There's nothing arbitrary about the penalty Porte got. In what world do we have rules where penalties actually are arbitrary.?

Could u then give the logic of 2min. What is the justification of 2min. Why not 3 or 5 min or 30 s?
This rule is very old as some posters have already pointed out. Therefore the time penalty should be as per ancient times (People used to win GTs in >10 min and where the state to stage variation used to be in minutes) when 2 min was of little consequence. These days 2 min is huge when GTs are won by less than that margin

LOL in ancient times you were DQed. "Another Italian, Fausto Coppi won in 1948 but was disqualified for taking a wheel from the Belgian Walschott, who was not of his team."

EDIT: This was at Omloop!

You are still DQ'd today. If its a one day race as the omloop is.

 

[IndianCyclist]

Re: Re:

[quote="

Say what? The MINIMUM penalty as spelled out in the rules is a loss of two minutes in a stage race. There's nothing arbitrary about the penalty Porte got. In what world do we have rules where penalties actually are arbitrary.?

Could u then give the logic of 2min. What is the justification of 2min. Why not 3 or 5 min or 30 s?
This rule is very old as some posters have already pointed out. Therefore the time penalty should be as per ancient times (People used to win GTs in >10 min and where the state to stage variation used to be in minutes) when 2 min was of little consequence. These days 2 min is huge when GTs are won by less than that margin

All penalties for breaking laws are "arbitrary". Why 5 years in prison for stealing? Why not 3 years? Or 2 days. Because someone picked a value.

Do you know the penalty for breaking this rule in a single day race? Disqualification. Apparently the creators of the rule saw this as a pretty big deal.

Besides, all sporting regulations specify penalties. If they didn't the penalties would truly be arbitrary.

Yes, the rule is quite old and a good one in my opinion because all riders are treated the same.

Porte's team screwed up. Porte gained time by using a non-teammate's wheel that he should have lost.

Really! Stealing an apple will get you 5 years in prison????
I thought stealing an apple will get you a kick up the backside while stealing a billion $ will probably be 40+ years in prison. The sentence is according to the severity of the crime committed and not arbitrary as u are posing here.
Just because a rule is old or applied equally to everybody doesn't mean that it is good. e.g In ancient times stealing meant cutting off one of ur hand - not a good rule in any sense even if applied equally to everybody. In a similar way the rule applied to Porte has simply destroyed any possibility of competition for him. No way for him to comeback.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Re: Re:

[quote="

Say what? The MINIMUM penalty as spelled out in the rules is a loss of two minutes in a stage race. There's nothing arbitrary about the penalty Porte got. In what world do we have rules where penalties actually are arbitrary.?

Could u then give the logic of 2min. What is the justification of 2min. Why not 3 or 5 min or 30 s?
This rule is very old as some posters have already pointed out. Therefore the time penalty should be as per ancient times (People used to win GTs in >10 min and where the state to stage variation used to be in minutes) when 2 min was of little consequence. These days 2 min is huge when GTs are won by less than that margin

All penalties for breaking laws are "arbitrary". Why 5 years in prison for stealing? Why not 3 years? Or 2 days. Because someone picked a value.

Do you know the penalty for breaking this rule in a single day race? Disqualification. Apparently the creators of the rule saw this as a pretty big deal.

Besides, all sporting regulations specify penalties. If they didn't the penalties would truly be arbitrary.

Yes, the rule is quite old and a good one in my opinion because all riders are treated the same.

Porte's team screwed up. Porte gained time by using a non-teammate's wheel that he should have lost.

Really! Stealing an apple will get you 5 years in prison????
I thought stealing an apple will get you a kick up the backside while stealing a billion $ will probably be 40+ years in prison. The sentence is according to the severity of the crime committed and not arbitrary as u are posing here.
Just because a rule is old or applied equally to everybody doesn't mean that it is good. e.g In ancient times stealing meant cutting off one of ur hand - not a good rule in any sense even if applied equally to everybody. In a similar way the rule applied to Porte has simply destroyed any possibility of competition for him. No way for him to comeback.

No way for him to come back? It's TWO MINUTES, not ten. It can easily be won in a stage if raced hard enough. Is the 2005 Vuelta really so long ago that we can't remember it? What about the 2006 Tour? The 2010 Giro? The 2011 Tour? The 2012 Vuelta?

Don't be so melodramatic. There is a clear precedent on this rule in recent years, and the precedent is a 2 minute penalty. That penalty has previously settled GCs by kicking the leader out of the jersey on the final day. At least Porte has the chance to fight to get his time back. He's not out of it yet. And the rule violation was clear, and the wording of the regulation is clear, and the punishment is clearly defined AND supported by precedent, therefore the decision was correct.

 

[Steve H.]

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/4977/Jens-Voigt-avoids-abandoning-Tour-de-France-with-help-from-kids-bike.aspx

 

[Stelvio]

Re:

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/4977/Jens-Voigt-avoids-abandoning-Tour-de-France-with-help-from-kids-bike.aspx

There are a couple of differences to the Porte situation. He didn't get the bike from another team (anyone know if this is in the rulebook?), and all (team and neutral) support were in front of him which also might lead to leniency.

I don't think he would have complained about being docked two minutes though, as he finished 3h22 behind ... Schleck.

 

[ferryman]

There is a very simple question to be answered on this. And that is, was there any discretion allowed in making the 2 mins penalty. I might look into it tomorrow but probably won't because the answer in such a high profile breach going by the letter of the UCI law is no.

 

[Master50]

I want to ask what do you think we would say if this happened during stage 4? My take is the DS for Orica would send Brailsford a bill for Clarke's airfare back to Australia.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

Let´s face it:
The nitpickers decided the Giro... For the 2nd year in a row.
2 mins for a wheel?
And no difference between the guy who is 2 hrs behind (who doesn´t care at all about a 2 mins pen), and a GC contender? Double
But if 30 sprinters finish OTL, ofc the rules are bent. Those inconsequent "commissars" shall get their fat asses away, and let the riders decide.
That ladies and gentleman is common sense. Not rule 3.11.B/XII.315 on page 1.725 of a rule book from the year 1871.
Not only Porte got robbed, but the millions of fans, you and I. Only because 5 guys reading a rule book want their satisfaction to...