Should Sky have waited when Valverde fell?

Page 6 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.

Should Sky have waited?

  • Normally not but since they caused it, yes.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
  • Poll closed .
sartoris said:
Since you seem to have a trauma with that stage, let me clarify a few things for you .... here's my response to your moaning post on today's stage thread:

SEEMINGLY ROBBED??? You must be joking, dude. I remember that stage cause I SAW IT back in '85 (you probably hadn't been born yet). It was the 2nd time the Spanish TV broadcast the Vuelta live and I was riveted to the sofa for the whole race. That day they rode around the mountains in Madrid the last but one stage, under horrible weather conditions (snow, rain, wind). Millar lead the GC with more than 6 min over Delgado, who attacked on the Puerto de Cotos and caught Pepe Recio (riding for Kelme) and both took turns until the finish line. Back in the peloton, no one seemed very interested in closing the gap, not even Millar, more intent on marking Cabestany or Pacho Rodríguez, closer to him in the GC. When he realised that Delgado was getting away it was too late and Millar's team (Peugeot I think) failed miserably !!! Eventually Delgado finished around 7' before Millar, who lost the Vuelta. Of course he knew what was going on !! I remember his desperate look, almost begging anyone around for help to no avail.

So either you don't know what you're talking about, which is embarrasing, or you're intentionally "embellishing" your comment so that Spanish riders look like Froome & Co. on the 4th stage of Vuelta '12, that is, like a piece of s*it.

Anyway, for your viewing pleasure:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ye9Ny2JBz1U

Draw your own conclusions. Buenas noches.
If that is your view of it then that's fine , in 85 I had already had 2 children so I was born then , yes I will agree with you that his team let him down but you have to agree that the race officials never gave him time checks untill it was to late to do anything about it and the race was lost by the time he found out .
Just like today's events people will have different takes on what happen no matter what other people say.
 
Herman said:
Sorry was wrong , it was the rider 2 placeses behind Stannard the one that goes left after Sørensen falls. At least i think its somone from sky causing it if you first take a look at footage from the moto you can clearly see sørensen is being taked out from the right ( were sky train is coming ). And from the footage from the hely ( verry poor btw ) you can see Hansen bieng knocked over into sørensen causing him to fall. ( only sky riders nearby there ).
Marginal gains number 214: Muscle yourself towards the front. No matter the costs! Never look back. Just drive.
 
May 2, 2010
466
0
0
Captain Sensible said:
If that is your view of it then that's fine , in 85 I had already had 2 children so I was born then , yes I will agree with you that his team let him down but you have to agree that the race officials never gave him time checks untill it was to late to do anything about it and the race was lost by the time he found out .
Just like today's events people will have different takes on what happen no matter what other people say.
Thanks for reconsidering your opinion and dismissing the Spanish Complot theory. Only Millar was to blame for his loss. He shouldn't have let riders who threatened him on the GC leave him behind to begin with but, obviously, he wasn't strong enough and his team simply wasn't up to par. Everyone knew what the time checks were. I (for one) knew !! It was live on TV !! The radio stations were broadcasting it live !! So that's a pretty lame excuse. I understand Millar's frustration but hey, tough s*it. He learned his lesson the hard way.
 
Aug 13, 2010
3,317
0
0
sartoris said:
Thanks for reconsidering your opinion and dismissing the Spanish Complot theory. Only Millar was to blame for his loss. He shouldn't have let riders who threatened him on the GC leave him behind to begin with but, obviously, he wasn't strong enough and his team simply wasn't up to par. Everyone knew what the time checks were. I (for one) knew !! It was live on TV !! The radio stations were broadcasting it live !! So that's a pretty lame excuse. I understand Millar's frustration but hey, tough s*it. He learned his lesson the hard way.
Didn't Delgado and Recio attack Millar during a puncture?
 
Aug 13, 2010
3,317
0
0
sartoris said:
Help yourself, Don't be late Pedro and, please, form your own opinion before hearsay becomes your only source of information.
http://www.podiumcafe.com/2011/5/11/2162334/VueltaAEspana1985
I have read the link and it does mention the puncture. Millar was a great climber so I would be surprised if he could not make the time back unless he was either attacked or could not get a wheel quickly. Any idea of what happened?

The events are going to be skewed depending on who you ask but I think from Millar's face, when he is told about the attack, you can tell he has no idea of it and hence I doubt he had any time checks.


PS: I like your nick :)
Thanks. Delgado made the 89 Tour the classic it is imo.
 
Jun 22, 2009
10,645
2
0
well I dont mind if teams ride on, especially if the pace is already on. Yesterday it almost seemed like the pace was a reaction to the crash, which isn't great. I suppose if your team caused a rider to crash then yes you should wait, but in certain situations (like schleck-canc-neutralize fiasco a few years back at tour) I think teams should ride on.

but then again, practice what you preach.
 
This waiting nonsense has to stop. The point is to win the race. It needs to be a rare occurrence between leading riders late in races, and even then only under circumstances which couldn't be avoided. These do not include:

• Riding yourself off the road into a gully
• Dropping your chain while attacking
• Crashing out when the heat goes up and an echelon forms

They should include:

• untimely puncture of a race leader late in the race
• unavoidable mechanical or accident

And that's about it.

The headgames Armstrong played with Ullrich and Pantani, and that fact that he didn't really understand the nuance of the tradition have polluted this unwritten rule and turned it into a *****-fest. Waiting is NEVER expected. In rare cases it is to be appreciated. It's a bike race for high stakes.
 
red_flanders said:
This waiting nonsense has to stop. The point is to win the race. It needs to be a rare occurrence between leading riders late in races, and even then only under circumstances which couldn't be avoided. These do not include:

• Riding yourself off the road into a gully
• Dropping your chain while attacking
• Crashing out when the heat goes up and an echelon forms

They should include:

• untimely puncture of a race leader late in the race
• unavoidable mechanical or accident

And that's about it.

The headgames Armstrong played with Ullrich and Pantani, and that fact that he didn't really understand the nuance of the tradition have polluted this unwritten rule and turned it into a *****-fest. Waiting is NEVER expected. In rare cases it is to be appreciated. It's a bike race for high stakes.
Nice post Red.
+1
 
Fergoose said:
Love seeing Movistar complain about a lack of fair play towards Valverde without any hint of irony. Hard to be taken seriously when you complain about unwritten rules and fairness when you've broken a written rule.

I look forward to seeing this come back to bite Sky, Katusha and BMC on the backsides to give us something else to talk about in the future. All good fun.
Totally agree. They have short memories. Also some riders just don't know how to ride in crosswinds. That's why it gets dangerous. Sky did nothing wrong.
 
Mar 10, 2009
6,158
1
0
red_flanders said:
This waiting nonsense has to stop. The point is to win the race. It needs to be a rare occurrence between leading riders late in races, and even then only under circumstances which couldn't be avoided. These do not include:

• Riding yourself off the road into a gully
• Dropping your chain while attacking
• Crashing out when the heat goes up and an echelon forms

They should include:

• untimely puncture of a race leader late in the race
• unavoidable mechanical or accident

And that's about it.

The headgames Armstrong played with Ullrich and Pantani, and that fact that he didn't really understand the nuance of the tradition have polluted this unwritten rule and turned it into a *****-fest. Waiting is NEVER expected. In rare cases it is to be appreciated. It's a bike race for high stakes.
This is all true and known.

BUT!

When it goes wrong as it has the past years revenge is usually served by not waiting for those who broke rank (aka tradition) no matter the circumstance and which has led to what we have now. So it will take some effort by the riders to clear the air.
 
Mar 17, 2009
294
0
9,030
When we add Unwritten to the rule I understand this as:
If they wait it's cool and graceful
If they don't wait, it's a race for crying out loud
 
Oct 11, 2011
66
0
0
Libertine Seguros said:
A real shame that Beñat Intxausti couldn't have communicated that to a Sky rider. I saw him speaking to Juan Antonio Flecha, but maybe he couldn't get the point across - probably a problem with the language barrier.
If it's the instance I saw on television, that was quite some time after the crash - long after the echelons had formed. And if we are talking about the same instance, it begs the question, why did it take so much time for him to get up to talk to Flecha? With all those echelons on the road, Sky were hardly going to sit up at that point.
 
Jul 30, 2009
1,621
0
0
luckyboy said:
Why did Sky/Froome lie and say that they didn't know the race leader in the bright red jersey had crashed?

People go on about about anti-British bias but they make it incredibly easy to dislike them.
Probably a touch of irony. Wasn't that Movistar's excuse multiple times during the Tour?

Either way. Movistar had it coming to them :):):)
 
Oct 31, 2009
115
0
0
red_flanders said:
This waiting nonsense has to stop. The point is to win the race. It needs to be a rare occurrence between leading riders late in races, and even then only under circumstances which couldn't be avoided. These do not include:

• Riding yourself off the road into a gully
• Dropping your chain while attacking
• Crashing out when the heat goes up and an echelon forms

They should include:

• untimely puncture of a race leader late in the race
• unavoidable mechanical or accident

And that's about it.

The headgames Armstrong played with Ullrich and Pantani, and that fact that he didn't really understand the nuance of the tradition have polluted this unwritten rule and turned it into a *****-fest. Waiting is NEVER expected. In rare cases it is to be appreciated. It's a bike race for high stakes.

Thats about it nice Post.. Good Summary..
 
Jan 3, 2011
4,596
0
0
Quite interesting that the forum seems to be evenly diveded on this subject. almost 50/50 in the poll
 
I am not Sky's biggest fans but on this case I do not think they did anything wrong.

From looking at it they were pushing on at the front just before the crash with a view to forming an echelon. Racing on the flat is as much a part of cycling than a TT, hills or mountains. The crash occurred shortly after they hit the front but you cannot wait and neuter every stage after a crash; otherwise you get the farce which occurred in the TdF a couple of years ago.

I have not seen evidence that they caused the crash, other than reference to the fact that they actually caused the echelon in the first place, which is part of bike racing.

In any event Movistar have short memories. They actually took advantage of a crash by Leipheimer in Paris Nice.

I also get the feeling that some people who are criticising this, are doing so because it was Sky at the front.

For, example if Wiggins had crashed on stage 13 of the Tour and the others had ridden full gas costing him the yellow jersey, I suspect the forum reaction would be different.
 
Maybe this shouldn't be about the question of waiting or not but more about the accusation that Sky caused the crash by reckless riding midfield in the first place. Is there any footage of how the crash actually emerged???

Also all the "it's every teams responsibility to keep their captain save" talk is pretty much useless. Sure if you're riding in front that prevents you from being caught up behind a crash but never from directly being taken down.
 
Cimber said:
Quite interesting that the forum seems to be evenly diveded on this subject. almost 50/50 in the poll
Shows it's a pretty grey area.
Certainly, in recent years and definitely upon forums, attitudes have changed towards sit up and wait (the exception being Cancellara neutralising for the Schlecks stage) under a variety of circumstances.

The most prominent example that is similar to yesterday that I can remember was during the 2004 Tour; the Waterloo, to Wasquehal stage.
However, I can't find a video, though I am sure one is out there.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2004/jul/07/tourdefrance2004.tourdefrance

Approaching the first cobbled section, the pace went up as folks wanted the race front.
Almost immediately there was a crash that ended Iban Mayo's challenge, but also cost Thor Hushovd the leader's jersey.

A lot of looking around, (I remember George Hincapie for one) but USPS and Phonak kept the hammer down for 40kms or more.
 
sorry if stated earlier, but not going to read through 14 pages of the thread...

I find it hilarious and incredibly poetic that Valverde, an unrepentant convicted d0per, is complaining about fair play and unsporting behaviour...
 
red_flanders said:
This waiting nonsense has to stop. The point is to win the race. It needs to be a rare occurrence between leading riders late in races, and even then only under circumstances which couldn't be avoided. These do not include:

• Riding yourself off the road into a gully
• Dropping your chain while attacking
• Crashing out when the heat goes up and an echelon forms

They should include:

• untimely puncture of a race leader late in the race
• unavoidable mechanical or accident

And that's about it.

The headgames Armstrong played with Ullrich and Pantani, and that fact that he didn't really understand the nuance of the tradition have polluted this unwritten rule and turned it into a *****-fest. Waiting is NEVER expected. In rare cases it is to be appreciated. It's a bike race for high stakes.
+1. And I'd go further. It ought to be a very rare event that riders are actively waited for (as opposed to 'waiting' early on in a stage when the big guns aren't racing yet anyway.) Very rare events of extreme misfortune. There's a problem once almost any small normal misfortune means racing is automatically neutralised. And if in doubt then the only fair way is to keep racing - Rolland was right to take his chance on his attack because at that point the race was on and one rider just happened to have a puncture; once you learn it's sabotage then the situation changes, but riders puncture and crash all the time. The only fair way is to keep riding, let the commissaires rejig things or neutralise the whole stage afterwards if it really comes to it.
 
Sad way for Valverde to Lose Race Lead

obviously Valverde is going to be Angry

but He is WRONG to Blame Sky

while Sky Upped the Pace..............Other Riders Panicking to get on the Train Caused the Crash

and it was Not Just Sky Driving at the Front..............Katusha........BMC
also were Busting a Gut to Gain Advantage

if Members don't want to Discuss this Move On Don't Post Reply telling Others to do so
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS