Should the grupetto have been DQ'd on Stage 15?

[Trev_S]

They should punt the 90odd riders for the lack of effort, but it's also hard to DQ such a large number so they deduct points from the sprint jersey comp. Wow really, so that affects nobody as all the riders going for that jersey would be in the bunch so they retain a status quo and the rest won't give a hoot.

So in the scenario of such a vast number of riders missing the cut what is a realistic penalty?
Time/points/financial penalties don't really make any difference.
So if you can't cut them all then perhaps a team with 4 or more must cut 2 riders? the best placed on GC of those affected?
Something like that maybe?
or their GC & leading jersey riders loses a time/points percentage?

As it stands it's unfair to those teams and riders who put in their efforts and raced.
or at least ensured they made it within the cut.

 

[The Barb]

Re: Re:

I'm kinda curious about how it's so well known that they never even tried

Finishing 54 minutes back in a 118km stage is pretty strong evidence.

I'd like to support the case with this result. It's from the Giro Rosa, and it was the day after the women did the Mortirolo.

It's a stage of almost identical length to today's, and was actually significantly harder - here's the profile:

While it doesn't look too difficult, here are the last three climbs:
Colle di Nava 10,5km @ 6,6%
Colle Caprauna 8,3km @ 7,1%
Madonna della Guardia 11,5km @ 6,1%

So we're talking a more difficult stage that finished on a tougher climb, over the same distance (which is actually a fairly long stage for a women's stage as opposed to a short stage for the men, so the time limit rule would otherwise be stricter, however the % time needed is more forgiving in women's races to cover for the difference in péloton depth anyway - is more strin). Ah, but today's race was hard from the gun, I hear you say! Yes, but on the stage to which I refer, the best young rider, 7th on GC, went solo on the first climb of the day, and over 50km out the race leader and 3rd placed rider dropped everybody on the penultimate mountain to ride across to them. It's 6 minutes from the first finisher to the 10th, and this field includes almost all of the best climbers in the women's péloton - even super-strong riders like Elisa Longo Borghini were losing 17 minutes. So this was raced hard. And the gulf in quality between the strongest and weakest riders in top level women's races is typically noticeably more than in men's races because of the difference in budgets and financial capabilities, as well as the number of big names being concentrated into a small number of teams means you have quite a few very small Italian teams who exist around the chance to get some TV coverage in a short 15-minute summary of their breakaway antics in the Giro Rosa, for whom keeping hold of riders who show real talent is difficult because the bigger Italian teams like BePink or Alé-Cipollini will take them on if they aren't tempted overseas, and whose riders on the start are often very inexperienced and young.

But still, the stage took the strongest nearly an hour longer than the men at Formigal today, yet the absolute weakest riders on the day, on a harder stage, racing to meet a more lenient time cut than the men are given, were still seven minutes closer to the leaders than literally half the men's péloton, and including guys like Darwin Atapuma, Robert Gesink, Tejay van Garderen, Riccardo Zoidl, Alexandre Geniez, Leopold König and Peter Kennaugh. Guys who've top 10ed GTs, won mountainous stage races, won stages of this very race, and sat in the top 10 of the GC until today. That ought to show you that they didn't take the time cut seriously.

This is a fabulous post. Ends any argument about whether they were trying or not.

However, of course not surprising that the organisers made the decision that they did. It is disappointing though, both from a fairness perspective and because it would have been bat-bleep crazy fun to see 60 or so riders going at it in the mountains.

 

[StryderHells]

Re:

I'm actually amused to see anyone trying to seriously suggest that literally half the race should be DQed with a week to go. Are there any precedents for that?

Stage 2 of the 1998 Tirreno-Adriatico, 125 riders out of a field of 180 riders were kicked booted from the race for finishing outside the limit http://www.cyclingarchives.com/ritfiche.php?ritid=67&wedstrijdvoorloopid=2153#ucira

 

[spalco]

No, don't be stupid, they can't be ejected.

There should be other penalties though, money probably for best effect.

 

[Hakkie2]

How about getting rid of the current rule and replacing it with a new one, which would state that:

"Any rider who is over 3 hours* behind in the General Classification of a Grand Tour, is excluded from the race."

Such a rule would give injured riders like Haas more time to recover.
It would also force the sprinters to dig deeper in the mountains.

*Or 4 hours. Whatever.

 

[StryderHells]

Re:

No, don't be stupid, they can't be ejected.

There should be other penalties though, money probably for best effect.

Why not couldn't they be ejected from the race? What were the extraordinary circumstances on this stage that meant they couldn't finish within the time limit or even try and finish within the limit?

 

[StryderHells]

Re:

How about getting rid of the current rule and replacing it with a new one, which would state that:

"Any rider who is over 3 hours* behind in the General Classification of a Grand Tour, is excluded from the race."

Such a rule would give injured riders like Haas more time to recover.
It would also force the sprinters to dig deeper in the mountains.

*Or 4 hours. Whatever.

I don't we need a new rule as there really isn't anything wrong with the current rule, it's the way it's being enforced that's the issue

 

[Alexandre B.]

Even Geniez agrees he should have been DQ.

 

[veji11]

Re:

Even Geniez agrees he should have been DQ.

Yeah it really was disgraceful. Strength in numbers... And whent today a fresh rider from that group beats out dead tired guys like Moser and Bakelandts for a stage win... great moral victory indeed.

More seriously massive fines should have been doled out for willfully perverting the rules... But clearly the UCI has to come up with something to stop this from happening again, because it's just the most egregious case of something happening way too often now on GTs.. But whereas you get on the tour 70 or 80 riders not really pushing it and missing the cut by a few minutes where the can argue "come on, we tried to tempo but missed it by a few minutes, who cares". Here they completely and utterly disregarded the Time Limit.

 

[Jagartrott]

Of the remaining 85 km, when the chasing peloton 'gave up', how many were downhill?
You don't normally lose time downhill, so let's say this was 30 km or so, it means that they lost 50 minutes in 55 km, or roughly 1 minute per km - which is huge. No way they were trying - just, no way.

 

[SafeBet]

Re: Re:

Even Geniez agrees he should have been DQ.

Yeah it really was disgraceful. Strength in numbers... And whent today a fresh rider from that group beats out dead tired guys like Moser and Bakelandts for a stage win... great moral victory indeed.

Moreno Moser @MorenoMoser
What about the guys who went full gas, alone, until the finish line?

Say today ends in a sprint, Felline would have to battle with the likes of Meersman, Van Genechten, Sbaragli and Cort who had an additional rest day. Completely against anything a GT is meant to be.

 

[spalco]

Re: Re:

Why not couldn't they be ejected from the race? What were the extraordinary circumstances on this stage that meant they couldn't finish within the time limit or even try and finish within the limit?

The circumstances are not extraordinary (although the stage was raced quite hard), but it's ridiculous to compete a GT with 70 riders.
It's a business in the end and there's too much at stake here to make an example like that, funny as it would be for Froome to be sole survivor of Team Sky it's just not realistic.

Also precedent is against it.

However I wouldn't be opposed to GT organisers to make it clear from the start that there won't be any leniency anymore with the time limit from here on out.

 

[StryderHells]

Re: Re:

Why not couldn't they be ejected from the race? What were the extraordinary circumstances on this stage that meant they couldn't finish within the time limit or even try and finish within the limit?

The circumstances are not extraordinary (although the stage was raced quite hard), but it's ridiculous to compete a GT with 70 riders.
It's a business in the end and there's too much at stake here to make an example like that, funny as it would be for Froome to be sole survivor of Team Sky it's just not realistic.
U
Also precedent is against it.

However I wouldn't be opposed to GT organisers to make it clear from the start that there won't be any leniency anymore with the time limit from here on out.

Well if so much was at stake at the business end of the race then maybe the riders in question should of put in more of an effort to make the time cut, it's not like they just missed it

 

[veji11]

Re: Re:

Why not couldn't they be ejected from the race? What were the extraordinary circumstances on this stage that meant they couldn't finish within the time limit or even try and finish within the limit?

The circumstances are not extraordinary (although the stage was raced quite hard), but it's ridiculous to compete a GT with 70 riders.
It's a business in the end and there's too much at stake here to make an example like that, funny as it would be for Froome to be sole survivor of Team Sky it's just not realistic.

Also precedent is against it.

However I wouldn't be opposed to GT organisers to make it clear from the start that there won't be any leniency anymore with the time limit from here on out.

To me one of the main issue is that the organiser should have made it clear during the stage to the guys that they weren't going to save them : Organisers need to put themselves in a position where they can't back down anymore. tell team cars on Radio tour "ok guys you are no 20 minutes back on the 2 front groups and there is 70ks to go, we warn you that we won't save you guys if you refuse to race"..

 

[glassmoon]

Poll: YES
Would be pretty amazing if some DS would pull out all of his riders who didn't make the cut. Would probably cost him his job though

 

[valentius borealis]

Out of curiosity, what were the time cuts on the stages to La Toussuire (grupetto 44'01" behind) and Morzine (grupetto 52'02" behind) in the 2006 Tour?

 

[huge]

Re:

Poll: YES
Would be pretty amazing if some DS would pull out all of his riders who didn't make the cut. Would probably cost him his job though

The decision was discussed with DSs as well. And I'm sure most of them if not all agreed to keep the 93 riders in the race.

At the end of the day, the only ones complaining about it (apart from the fans, who count zero) are a few riders... but again, only a few of them. I'm sure most of the peloton agrees too.

 

[spiritualride]

Re: Re:

I would have loved to see the last stages of this GT with a peloton of similar size as what was seen in the 2003 Giro.

Poll: YES
Would be pretty amazing if some DS would pull out all of his riders who didn't make the cut. Would probably cost him his job though

The decision was discussed with DSs as well. And I'm sure most of them if not all agreed to keep the 93 riders in the race.

At the end of the day, the only ones complaining about it (apart from the fans, who count zero) are a few riders... but again, only a few of them. I'm sure most of the peloton agrees too.

The peloton is one big clique. Nobody is going to speak out against so many riders and teams.

 

[King Boonen]

Re: Re:

Poll: YES
Would be pretty amazing if some DS would pull out all of his riders who didn't make the cut. Would probably cost him his job though

The decision was discussed with DSs as well. And I'm sure most of them if not all agreed to keep the 93 riders in the race.

At the end of the day, the only ones complaining about it (apart from the fans, who count zero) are a few riders... but again, only a few of them. I'm sure most of the peloton agrees too.

I think you'll find that's completely incorrect. Cycling doesn't happen in a vacuum, people and companies sponsor teams almost exclusively because they expect to see a return on that investment in one way or another. If fans turn off, sponsorship goes.

 

[Jagartrott]

Re: Re:

At the end of the day, the only ones complaining about it (apart from the fans, who count zero) are a few riders... but again, only a few of them. I'm sure most of the peloton agrees too.

Everything about this comment is just plain wrong.

The peloton is one big clique. Nobody is going to speak out against so many riders and teams.

Except for Bakelants, Geniez, De Gendt, Hermans, Moser, Vervaeke, etc...

 

[Netserk]

Re: Should Chris Froome still have teammates on Stage 16?

I just have a feeling that their riders and the power of sky is behind such a blatant abuse of rules and such a small riding

I'm sorry, are you new to cycling? This is the way it's ALWAYS done. Again, unfortunately.

The difference this time, hrotha, is that while there used to be a rule that allowed for a big enough group to be allowed to stay, they actually did remove that rule, so you cannot compare it with what has always been done. I'm not aware if this has happened before after the rule was removed, if not, then they would have a very good case for throwing them out, as they would then have been warned beforehand.

 

[Armchair cyclist]

Re:

P.S. How difficult it would have been for organizers to tell DS's that time limit will be applied no matter the size of gruppetto..? Maybe when the gap hit 15 minutes/20 minutes?

Excellent point: probably betrays the thinking of the organisers. "Ah, they're playing that game are they? That's a pity, but we'll just have to go along with them."

I am not looking forward to seeing one of yesterday's mickey-takers crossing the line with his arms in the air today.

If the race organisers are not willing to apply the rules without fear or favour, then an alternative sanction needs to be on the rulebook, so that there is something other than the entirely meaningless loss of Green Jersey points as a disincentive to riders doing this.

My proposal would be that such riders be allowed to continue, but only as wind-breakers and bottle carriers; they would lose their GC ranking, they cannot get stage results, KoM or points rankings, or score towards the team classification. This would apply for the rest of the race. They would know that this is the case , and there could be some indication to others that they are riding under these conditions (a yellow number seems appropriate). Maybe they could even be required to stop at the 3km marker or earlier on sprint stages.

 

[gregrowlerson]

Re: Re:

If they are not going to enforce the time limit, how about banning any riders who finished outside from winning the stage the following day? Those riders, who have essentially broken the rules of the race, now have a massive advantage in the stage tomorrow; they should at least be deprived of that opportunity.

And how is that going to work?

You can cross the line first, but won't be on the podium? Good luck explaining that to the average follower.

And yes, they should be DQed. Ridiculous to lose that much time in a not particularly difficult 3 hour stage regardless of what happened yesterday.

Pretty much, yes.

Or perhaps a better option: The amount of time they finish outside the time limit today, they have to start behind the rest of the field tomorrow.

This.

But then I thought about it a little more. Riders that finished way behind would simply lose more time the next day, and then the next day, and then the next day. It would get to a point where said rider would be finishing a stage during week three just as the leaders were starting the next stage

Yes, they should be thrown be out, though it would also be a little unfair, since they rarely implement this rule in the past. There needs to be a statement at the beginning of a year to give reasonable warning that the rule will be applied. It's not exactly fair to not implement the rule a dozen times and then suddenly do so.

Having said that, I thought that 30 minutes gift to Oscar in '06 was a disgrace. Technically all but four riders should have been out of the Tour. But at least that stage was over 200kms, and it was 30 minutes rather than 53. 53!! 53 minutes in just 120kms, without any really difficult mountains. That is pathetic.

I almost hope that one of those riders wins stage 16. I will have a laugh at everyone who values a stage win over a top ten in GC :razz:

 

[hrotha]

Re: Should Chris Froome still have teammates on Stage 16?

I just have a feeling that their riders and the power of sky is behind such a blatant abuse of rules and such a small riding

I'm sorry, are you new to cycling? This is the way it's ALWAYS done. Again, unfortunately.

The difference this time, hrotha, is that while there used to be a rule that allowed for a big enough group to be allowed to stay, they actually did remove that rule, so you cannot compare it with what has always been done. I'm not aware if this has happened before after the rule was removed, if not, then they would have a very good case for throwing them out, as they would then have been warned beforehand.

I'm aware that the rule was changed, but it's worded in a vague enough way to allow the organizers to do as they please - which was exactly their intention when they wrote it.

There's precedent before the rule rewrite, and not a clear break from the previous rule. This was always going to happen.

 

[gregrowlerson]

Re:

Hope the organizers do the right thing and we are here for an epic conclusion.

Froomey battling alone for a podium place. What a story

But if he came back to win the Vuelta then that would well and truly put an end to our claims that reduced team sizes would help to reduce the dominance of Froome/Sky :lol: