Should Sky have waited when Valverde fell?

Page 8 - 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 .
Feb 23, 2011
618
0
0
Maybe I am missing something but people have suggested that SKY upping the pace caused Nikki Sorensen to crash.

Thats a bit of a stretch isnt it? On that logic you could blame every crash on a team going on the front and sticking the hammer down.

Valverde is a cry baby and his team think nothing of pushing it on when somebody else crashes.
 
B_Ugli said:
Maybe I am missing something but people have suggested that SKY upping the pace caused Nikki Sorensen to crash.

Thats a bit of a stretch isnt it? On that logic you could blame every crash on a team going on the front and sticking the hammer down.

Valverde is a cry baby and his team think nothing of pushing it on when somebody else crashes.
Apparently they suddenly swerved to the right with their entire train. I can understand that that could cause crashes. Those trains are dangerous as hell anyway.
 
Jul 30, 2009
1,621
0
0
LaFlorecita said:
Apparently they suddenly swerved to the right with their entire train. I can understand that that could cause crashes. Those trains are dangerous as hell anyway.
Yes they are, which is a good reason not to do this..

 
The implication from what I've read from the Sky replies is that had they known the race leader was involved in the crash they would've waited. With modern technology in communications I find it hard to fathom that the Sky management in their team cars weren't tapped into the race radio and aware that the red jersey was in fact involved in the crash. Maybe they chose not to communicate this with their riders to facilitate the continuation of their attack but they really can't say they (Sky management) weren't aware that the race leader had crashed.
 
argyllflyer said:
The railway crossing thing in the Tour de Suisse really summed Movistar up. Ran the red lights as the peloton got to it and then were not at all happy about the race being neutralised once the commissaire's car got through. Karma.
If I recall correctly the peloton was in motion over the tracks when the gate came down and the red lights began flashing. To abruptly slam on the brakes at the front with hundreds of riders trailing you is a recipe for disaster especially at a railway crossing. Did the commissaires deem them in violation of any race rules at the time and thus relegate them to the end of the stages results or worse disqualify them altogether?

My memory may not serve me correctly though.:(
 
LaFlorecita said:
Apparently they suddenly swerved to the right with their entire train. I can understand that that could cause crashes. Those trains are dangerous as hell anyway.
Well, the video shows that this clearly wasn't the case. Besides which, Sorenson can be seen moving to the peloton's left.

Interesting hypothetical is where do you draw the "sitting up and wait", line.
What happens if the race leader suffers a puncture while the race is full on?
Or is there a distinction between a mechanical and racing incident, in folk's opinion?

Talking of attacking while someone is having a pee.
Remember Jaja losing Tour yellow, when ONCE got attacked while he was enjoying a natural break?
 
Jul 10, 2010
2,906
1
0
Yeah, where do you draw the line for "sitting up and waiting"? Not here, imo. Nae problemo for me with this action. This is quite a lot different from the tack scene, and different from the ice on the downhill where Canc slowed the peloton. Those were incidents beyond the rider's control. If Sky had actually done something stupidly outlandish that caused the crash, maybe - but neh.
 
Mellow Velo said:
Well, the video shows that this clearly wasn't the case. Besides which, Sorenson can be seen moving to the peloton's left.
It isn't clear from the video.

The debate shouldn't be about Movistar (Valverde) vs Sky, but did Sky disrespect the red jersey of the leader of the Vuelta by not riding at a normal pace to allow getting back.
 
Mellow Velo said:
Well, the video shows that this clearly wasn't the case. Besides which, Sorenson can be seen moving to the peloton's left
This is pure BS. The footage is not conclusive enough to go either way. I'd stick with comments by neutral parties: Terpstra and Hansen.

Re: Waiting or not. SKY should NOT have waited since they attacked and the crash happened right afterwards, even if the crash is an indirect consequence of the attack. Now, if it was directly caused by a SKY rider's negligence as witnesses mentioned above have claimed, then SKY team should be DQ'ed.
 
http://gerard.cc/2012/08/22/grow-some-balls/

Vroom's blog reads well:

I would say there was no reason to wait for Valverde, the pace had already picked up, the race was on and echelon riding is a skill that some haven’t mastered and which regularly involves crashes. It’s as fair to lose time there as it is in the mountains or in time trials.

But whatever you decide to do, just freakin own up to it afterwards. Don’t insult the fans by coming up with some idiotic story that you didn’t know what was happening*. Insult your rider-colleagues all you want, but take the fans seriously.

Just get off your bike and say:

We saw Valverde crash and yes, he’s the race leader, but he’s also an whiner** and a doper***. And remember how Movistar didn’t wait for Levi at Paris-Nice? Not that we minded, because that was good for us and we don’t like Levi either. But anyway, when we saw him crash we thought “payback time” and so we hit it.

But I have to say, those Movistars were bloody strong, I mean they had been on the front already for hours but they still managed to pull back from 1min15 to 30 seconds. So we made a quick call to BMC, they agreed on the price and helped us get the gap back to close to a minute. Good thing too, because after all that effort Valverde didn’t lose anything on that last climb, so he’s super-strong and a real threat and we need some cushioning.
 
hrotha said:
While I agree with pretty much everything Vroomen says in his blog, he neglects to mention the possibility that a Sky rider caused the crash by pulling a Ferrari of sorts.
Yes that I agree with.

Who knows what will occur in the rest of the race but if I was Froome I’d go the heaver tires for the rest of the race. No one is going wait if he punctures.
 
Nick Roche in his Irish Independent column:
" It was a pretty boring stage for a long time, until Sky put us in the gutter with about 40km to go.

It was a great move by them in a strong crosswind. They just went flat out and gave nobody shelter but their own team, forcing a mad scramble for cover in the bunch.
"

That is what echelon riding does: it forces the opposing riders (and especially those closest behind the team at the front, doing the work, taking the responsibility) to decide quickly on the balance of risk of running out of space on the leeward side, and the risk of losing time and contact by starting a new thread of the echelon.

Sky rode aggressively (exactly what they were criticised for not doing in the TdF), but not violently. Shame they didn't have the courage in their actions to assert that post-race.
 
cineteq said:
This is pure BS. The footage is not conclusive enough to go either way. I'd stick with comments by neutral parties: Terpstra and Hansen.
Did they (Terpstra and Hansen) say that the entire Sky team swerved (in the wrong direction) into the bunch?
It was my understanding that they said Sky caused the crash, how, they are not specifying.
I'm not not disputing their apportioning blame, just the above.

What the video shows, is Flecha, Stannard +1 some way ahead of the incident.

It is also my understanding that Flo is relayed this comment, from a second hand source, not the two mentioned riders.

I therefore go with what I can see and judge, not an uncredited comment.

If you think this unreasonable BS, then there is not likely that we will find any common ground.
 
Oct 15, 2009
34
0
0
The UCI is to blame for this emerging behavior in the peleton because of their damnable UCI Pro Tour points system. OK, so maybe the behavior isn't entirely "new" but the system has certainly made it worse. No one is going to jeopardize their chance to earn points by playing "fair" for anything other than sabotage. The riders themselves may not be actively thinking it during the race, but the team managers certainly are. If the race commisairs aren't calling the riders back, why should they?

This sets a new and dangerous precedent for the peleton. Sky and Movistar have earned themselves no friends. I also highly doubt anyone whill hold up for Contador either after his attack a few TDFs ago when Andy Schleck had mechanical difficulty. Fair Play is now an endangered act of kindnesss.

Valverde, however, needs to shut up. No apology was necessary by Sky. If you are that upset, go out and get the Red Jersey back. Stop crying into your burner mobile phone to Dr. Fuentes, get back in the saddle and earn it back.
 
Jul 5, 2010
943
0
0
Mellow Velo said:
Did they (Terpstra and Hansen) say that the entire Sky team swerved (in the wrong direction) into the bunch?
It was my understanding that they said Sky caused the crash, how, they are not specifying.
I'm not not disputing their apportioning blame, just the above.
Terpstra said Sky crashed into Movistar. That sounds like swerving in the wrong direction to me.

And besides even Valverde doesn't seem to complain about them riding on after he crashed. He is upset about them causing the crash. Or that is how I read his comments.
 
Oct 4, 2011
905
0
0
Dutchsmurf said:
Terpstra said Sky crashed into Movistar. That sounds like swerving in the wrong direction to me.

And besides even Valverde doesn't seem to complain about them riding on after he crashed. He is upset about them causing the crash. Or that is how I read his comments.
This is getting annoying now with people saying sky caused it without seeing the incident. Sky were in front....it was a rider behind who swerved into movistars group, possibly from a gust of wind.

That gust of wind may have hit him because sky jumped forward no longer providing him with shelter, that is the only way it was skys fault which is not even there fault.

Watch it, when they go the put distance between themselves and the rest. They perform their move at speed and have the distance to move safely.The riders behind panic and in doing so crash.It was not the fault of Sky .
 
pkreed71 said:
I also highly doubt anyone whill hold up for Contador either after his attack a few TDFs ago when Andy Schleck had mechanical difficulty.
QUOTE]

When will this falsehood ever be dispensed with? Andy did Not have a mechanical; he mis-shifted. His Own Error and no one to blame except himself....
 
Oct 16, 2010
379
0
0
la corsa è corsa
echelon is part of the game
if you fall after an echelon has been formed , you do not have to complain.

it is time to stop all this politically correct bulls++t about fair play.
that is cycling, it ois run on the road not on a golf course.

i am not in favour of directly damaging another rider, but if you fall because there is bagarre in the peloton because of echelon, well, this is just the race
 
Feb 23, 2011
618
0
0
noddy69 said:
This is getting annoying now with people saying sky caused it without seeing the incident. Sky were in front....it was a rider behind who swerved into movistars group, possibly from a gust of wind.

That gust of wind may have hit him because sky jumped forward no longer providing him with shelter, that is the only way it was skys fault which is not even there fault.

Watch it, when they go the put distance between themselves and the rest. They perform their move at speed and have the distance to move safely.The riders behind panic and in doing so crash.It was not the fault of Sky .
I actually blame mother nature I mean how dare she allow the wind to blow on a section of road thus provoking racing tactics panic and ensuing crashes. I mean who does she think she is, its an outrage if anyones to blame its her. In actual fact she should be hauled before the CAS to explain her actions. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::D
 
Oct 16, 2010
379
0
0
did valverde stop when cadel evans punctured in the vuelta 2010 and the aussie lost incredible amount of time because of neutral assistence not helping him and tv motorcycles being obstacle?

el imbatido won the vuelta by 1min 32 sec, exactly the time cadel lost.
 
Oct 4, 2011
905
0
0
Even in the article where 7 out of 8 ex pros said sky were right to continue there was no mention of any wrong doing by sky.

The only one who said they should have waited had this to say
Only one, 2006 Tour winner Oscar Pereiro argued that Sky should have stopped, saying “Sky, as well as other teams, waited for Cadel Evans (BMC) in the Tour this year [when hooligans flung tacks on the course on a stage through the Pyrenees – ed.] so there is a precedent.”

Comparing deliberate sabotage to natural race conditions with tactics......clutching at straws I would say.
 
Mar 4, 2010
1,826
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.
How is that different from crashing through no fault of your own?
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
M Professional Road Racing 80

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS