You use a lot of words to say nothing.VeloFidelis said:No, What will affect those lesser names of the sport is not having well sponsored teams to move up to. Sponsors want radios. They want as little as possible left to freak misfortune. They are looking for good investments, not risky opportunities.
As far as debating goes; you're telling me that you want to debate with a Pro, from the comfort of your couch, whether or not he feel's safer on the road and moving in the peloton, and the caravan with radios rather than without. Is that what I hear you saying? Because that was the original question. It has nothing to do with you ability post your opinion like the rest of us, and whether you're right or wrong, so please curb your dogma on that issue, and save the self righteous BS for another day.
Who are they to say? They are the guys with their asses on the line, they are the only ones that should have a say. If Coppi or Anquetil, or Merckx could have had this technology they would have. And they would say "F@ck Off" louder than anyone if you tried to take it away.
If you could somehow prove statistically this lame argument about their opinion of safety; who gives a sh!t! They don't feel a need to give this up and they shouldn't have to, any more than any other technology introduced into the sport in the last twenty years.
As far as disregarding their fans; they're not. Half of the fans posting here are against radios, the other half is not. Collectively we are less than a statistical rounding error. If you take a global poll, this is a non issue for the majority of fans, so unfortunately old school in this case, does not rule.
And asking VDV if radio contact might have kept him from crashing makes about as much sense as asking if you'd still have an opinion without the internet. If you want to debate the issue with intelligent comment, be my guest. Don't label an argument weak just because you have run out of things to say. That, my friend is Chicken Sh!t. You can do better.
There are riders who didn't think the radio ban was dangerous at all. Who are you to argue with them? See, the whole debate thing exists on more than one level for the both of us.
As to sponsorship, I guess you don't understand that they sponsor for marketing purposes. They don't spend money on riders, they spend money on human billboards. Without consumers to watch, you get no money. They couldn't care less about the health and welfare of the riders. If this was all a race off of a cliff into a sea of razorblades, and people would watch, they would sponsor it. They care fuck all about anything but a return on their investment.
Add to that the ridiculous idea that not being able to talk to the DS in the car endangers their lives, and what you have is an argument that merely allows you to think you are backed by all of the riders in the peloton, and therefore are part of them. You are just a fan. You and I have an equal amount of actual experience riding GT's. None. There are years upon years of cycling history that suggests that riding without radios is safe. You have much fewer that in no way show things are safer because of them unless you know of some study we don't know about. If so, its put up or shut up time, post it. Otherwise, all any of us (fans and riders) have is OPINION. Only my opinion is backed by far more historical evidence than is yours. Call it "chicken shit" if you want, but that is just tough guy talk, and I have little to no respect for it.