So....cav outside time limit but race organisers let him stay in TDF

[Anonymous]

fairly obvious, he should be in.

The rules clearly state that if 20% of the riders are outside the limit the jury can let them stay in the race but they suffer a deduction of points equivalent to that won by the stage winner (20 in this case).

The rules are clear, its within the rules. I dont see the issue.

 

[ultimobici]

Comparing today's stage with the one last Saturday it's interesting that the average speed of the winner was higher today by more than half a kilometre an hour, despite the 30km extra & two HC climbs.

When you look at the amount they missed the cut by it becomes even more ridiculous to suggest they're slacking.

AS averaged 32.6kmh today meaning that the Autobus had to average a hair under 30kmh to make the cut. They actually averaged 29.8kmh which is 0.6% off the pace they needed. Looks like a genuine miscalculation, IMO.

To suggest that they are soft pedalling yet still average a speed most posters here would have trouble maintaining on the flat is laughable.

 

[Kender]

Let's just say Martin didn't make the time gap and Cancellara did while it costed him a huge effort. Now on saturday Martin wins the TT because Cancellara is too tired. Pure abuse!

they both finished behind cav

 

[lanternrouge]

fairly obvious, he should be in.

The rules clearly state that if 20% of the riders are outside the limit the jury can let them stay in the race but they suffer a deduction of points equivalent to that won by the stage winner (20 in this case).

The rules are clear, its within the rules. I dont see the issue.

Oh deary deary me you really do have a lot to learn don't you! You will get absolutely nowhere around here talking sense and stating facts like that. What the hell is wrong with you!?!?
You need a bull**** agenda like some of the posters on here and spout complete bollox and then attempt to pass it off as a fact as it happens to fit your preconceived prejudice.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

fairly obvious, he should be in.

The rules clearly state that if 20% of the riders are outside the limit the jury can let them stay in the race but they suffer a deduction of points equivalent to that won by the stage winner (20 in this case).

The rules are clear, its within the rules. I dont see the issue.

I think the issue is not that he was allowed to stay in, that's pretty much protocol. It's that the penalty was so small, because of the Tour's weighting of green jersey points towards flat bunch sprints. Cavendish can gain all the points lost back just by winning an intermediate sprint, not even a stage, because a mountain stage win is worth less than half the points of a bunch sprint.

The problem is that because the penalty is so small, there is no incentive not to miss the time cut, because it doesn't matter much, and so as long as there's enough riders they can take it as easy as they like.

Therefore the problem is to do with whether the rule should be reformed or not (probably), rather than whether or not the decision today was the correct one (it was).

 

[2wheels]

- there is a (good?) possibility the current 20% (subjective) rule is being abused.

It almost seems like the time triallists were looking ahead today and taking a rest: Millar, Cancellara, Lang, Leipheimer, Martin, Boasson Hagen, Van Garderen, Vandborg, Fuglsang, Gerdemann, Gerrans, L.L. Sanchez etc. all finishing HD? These are all guys who can climb well enough when they have to. Granted, each case is different, and there may be health issues I'm not aware of. . . but it kind of smells like a bit of resting going on. I guess I can't blame them, if they can get away with it.

 

[Kender]

Here's one possibility for a rule change: If you miss a time cut, you can stay in the race-- BUT, however much you miss it by, you start the next day's stage at that same exact time disadvantage. So tomorrow we'd have 88 guys starting two minutes or so behind the field, and they'd have some serious work to rejoin the bunch-- thereby undoing any favors they got by resting the day before.

That said-- I'd still keep the points penalty as well.

yeah that would work... NOT

have you bothered to see how many riders were in that group and who they are? the peloton will wait for them without hesitation. you just can't leave out that many domestiques and have a fair race. wake up people, cycling is a team sport.

this thread has nothing to do with enforcing rules and everything to do with bashing cav.

the application of this rule to allow these riders to stay in the race has been around for a long time. Many of the posters in this thread are showing their ignorance and bias.

All of these guys have been punishing themselves day after day to entertain the likes of you and now you want to throw them all under the bus. you should all be ashamed of yourselves

 

[lanternrouge]

I think the issue is not that he was allowed to stay in, that's pretty much protocol. It's that the penalty was so small, because of the Tour's weighting of green jersey points towards flat bunch sprints. Cavendish can gain all the points lost back just by winning an intermediate sprint, not even a stage, because a mountain stage win is worth less than half the points of a bunch sprint.

The problem is that because the penalty is so small, there is no incentive not to miss the time cut, because it doesn't matter much, and so as long as there's enough riders they can take it as easy as they like.

Therefore the problem is to do with whether the rule should be reformed or not (probably), rather than whether or not the decision today was the correct one (it was).

20 points is not that small a penalty if you think about it, jersey competitions have been lost on smaller margins. It is not Cav's fault he has built a healthy lead and can "afford" to lose those 20 points. Instead of *****ing Rojas should win a stage or sprint and earn it.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

20 points is not that small a penalty if you think about it, jersey competitions have been lost on smaller margins. It is not Cav's fault he has built a healthy lead and can "afford" to lose those 20 points. Instead of *****ing Rojas should win a stage or sprint and earn it.

20 points is the equivalent of about 7th in a bunch sprint. Not much of a punishment for a sprinter who, on form, will win about 80% of the sprints he contests. I haven't heard Rojas whining about today's judgment anyway.

It's the same as when Renshaw was thrown out last year. They couldn't put him to the back of the bunch, the standard penalty for irregular sprinting, because he's a leadout man, his sprinter won the stage, why should he care? It would be no penalty at all.

20 points is the same as an intermediate sprint. In the Giro and Vuelta this rule has been applied, but has penalised the riders in question the same amount of points as they can win in any stage.

 

[hrotha]

20 points is not that small a penalty if you think about it, jersey competitions have been lost on smaller margins. It is not Cav's fault he has built a healthy lead and can "afford" to lose those 20 points. Instead of *****ing Rojas should win a stage or sprint and earn it.

The real problem with the 20 point penalty is that it's only a penalty for Cav. The rest of the gruppetto couldn't care less. It's not a real deterrent to keep the gruppetto from taking it too easy.

Also I don't see where Rojas whined about this.

 

[Midnightfright]

20 points is the equivalent of about 7th in a bunch sprint. Not much of a punishment for a sprinter who, on form, will win about 80% of the sprints he contests. I haven't heard Rojas whining about today's judgment anyway.

It's the same as when Renshaw was thrown out last year. They couldn't put him to the back of the bunch, the standard penalty for irregular sprinting, because he's a leadout man, his sprinter won the stage, why should he care? It would be no penalty at all.

20 points is the same as an intermediate sprint. In the Giro and Vuelta this rule has been applied, but has penalised the riders in question the same amount of points as they can win in any stage.

Do agree they aren't punishing them with the loss of enough points but unfortunately this is there rules hopefully nxt year they will change it and give them a reason to really try and beat the cut off which they should be doing anyway.

 

[MADRAZO]

Fair enough that they allow the grupetto to stay (due to the size) and give the pointspenalty (at least to those riders that havent held on to the cars, no judgment), but the 20 points is completely disproportional to the new high pointscores. At least 40 points like a stagevictory would have been a much more fair deduction.

When Greipel got 20 points deducted in the Vuelta he won that contest with only 150 points, so it was significant, this time its just 1 intermediate sprint...

 

[Libertine Seguros]

The penalty is for however many points are available for the stage win, so Greipel on Sierra Nevada and Farrar in L'Aquila were both penalised 25 points. With such a high disparity between flat stages (45 points) and mountain stages (20 points), being penalised the amount available for winning a mountain stage is a relative pittance for somebody of Cav's calibre when so many points are available in sprint stages.

 

[benpounder]

...
When you look at the amount they missed the cut by it becomes even more ridiculous to suggest they're slacking.

AS averaged 32.6kmh today meaning that the Autobus had to average a hair under 30kmh to make the cut. They actually averaged 29.8kmh which is 0.6% off the pace they needed. Looks like a genuine miscalculation, IMO.

To suggest that they are soft pedalling yet still average a speed most posters here would have trouble maintaining on the flat is laughable.

Any DS worthy of their job knows what the cut-off time is. To claim that there was any miscalculation on behalf of 88 riders and 18 DS's is silly. They all knew that if they stuck together, and took it easy, the rules would allow them to continue tomorrow. Mind you, I'm not disagreeing with the jury decision, I just think the penalty ought to be severe enough that the sprinters teams think twice about launching the collusion that went on today.

 

[avantage]

He should be allowed to continue, but in cases like this everyone outside should lose all their points in every point competition.

Why 20 points?? This does not change anything.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

20 points, because that's what the rule is, and it is therefore the right decision.

What we're debating is whether that rule should be changed, and if so what to, to actually punish riders for missing time cuts, rather than whether or not it was the right decision, because it was, it's as simple as that.

 

[Mambo95]

- in reality cut off times have nothing to do with logistics. Yes it will upset some minimum wage ASO workers if a rider comes in an hour late but have you ever seen/heard of them pulling a rider off the road. Those at the top are already in their hotels or helis.

You're obviously not too familiar with French Unions.

 

[ImmaculateKadence]

From the CN story.

With the time limit fixed at 33:07, Cavendish came home in a sizable gruppetto of 88 riders, 35:50 adrift of stage winner Andy Schleck (Leopard Trek). Joining Cavendish in arriving hors délai were Philippe Gilbert (Omega Pharma-Lotto), Thor Hushovd (Garmin-Cervélo), Fabian Cancellara (Leopard Trek) and Alessandro Petacchi (Lampre-ISD), but the size of their group meant that they were not eliminated.

Would anybody care about watching the final stage without those guys, or the TT without Cancellara. The only thing they got wrong was docking him 20 points. If he loses the jersey because of this....

 

[zigzag wanderer]

He should be allowed to continue, but in cases like this everyone outside should lose all their points in every point competition.

Why 20 points?? This does not change anything.

Not sure why this debate is so centred around sprinters - there were 5 Europcars, 3 Leopards and 2 BMCs in that grupetto - all of them will be available for chasing down breakaways and bottle fetching etc tomorrow. How do you punish them without elimination?

89 riders were outside the time limit but only Cavendish and Gilbert have received any sort of meaningful punishment at all.

Let's face it - 89 riders outside the time limit suggests they got the time limit wrong - simple as that. As for posters suggesting they took it easy - as the rule stands if they'd finished 55 minutes down they'd all still be in the race tomorrow.

 

[maltiv]

If Rojas wins the sprint tomorrow (Cav won't be there) and Cav gets another 20 point penalty then Rojas will more or less have the green jersey wrapped up.

 

[Winterfold]

Dim don't ruin the thread by bringing the rules and facts into it.

Burn them!!!

The original CN article was **** though - you would think Cav finished on his own rather than 96th

I checked the results before deciding what to think...

 

[Libertine Seguros]

From the CN story.

Would anybody care about watching the final stage without those guys, or the TT without Cancellara. The only thing they got wrong was docking him 20 points. If he loses the jersey because of this....

He won't lose the jersey, and 20 points is what the rules state he has to lose. If it were a case of 'people won't watch without these guys' then there has to be some kind of penalty for those that miss the time cut, otherwise it's a farce to even have a time cut in the first place.

With 45 available on the Champs-Elysées, 20 points is very lenient in comparison to the 25 points penalised to Greipel on Sierra Nevada and to Farrar on Zoncolán with regards to the battle for the points jersey. 20 points docked is absolutely the right decision, because that's the rule, and it's a rule that applies everywhere - the riders outside the time limit will be docked the same number of points as are available for the stage victory.

If Cav loses the green jersey because of this, then he should have raced up Galibier a couple of minutes faster, then he wouldn't have been docked. C'est la vie. This isn't a judgment call like the irregular sprint penalty in 2009, this is a fixed, permanent rule.

 

[2wheels]

yeah that would work... NOT

have you bothered to see how many riders were in that group and who they are? the peloton will wait for them without hesitation. you just can't leave out that many domestiques and have a fair race. wake up people, cycling is a team sport.

No, you're missing the point. You wouldn't have 88-man groups missing the cut to begin with, if there were actual time penalties assessed for it. I've got nothing against Cav, nor do I want to "throw any riders under the bus." I just don't believe that all 88 riders were physically unable to make the cut today. Some took advantage of the rules to catch a bit of a break-- more power to them.

 

[Rooboy]

You're obviously not too familiar with French Unions.

Unfortunately in my job I am way too familiar with their ways but I have yet to see them in action at the tour.

To be honest I don't know how unions affect the tour but I'm pretty sure their usual labour laws do not apply. Take the caravanne for example. They start about 1.5 hours before the riders. Obviously there would be some restocking and vehicle washing etc beforehand and they have to get to the start. They then spend more than a fews hours throwing glorious trinkets out or dancing/waving etc. They don't stop for the usual 2 hour lunch. Where they spend a penny is one of the true mysteries of the tour I have yet to discover.

They reach the end and we think it's all over. But no, it's a mountain top finish and no other way down - they have to wait for all the riders to come in. They secretly curse the fact that any rider outside the time limit is not immediately swept up by the broom wagon.

They then have to wait for a police escort to get down the mountain but the road is blocked by silly spectators - they don't seem to wave so much on the way down for some reason. They get to the bottom and again we think that's it. But no it's a 200km transfer. These vehicles can't drive on normal open roads. They have to be half dismantled and loaded in trucks or for the bigger ones loaded on to a low loader. This takes time. A lot of time.

Unless it's a super big transfer (to the start/finish to paris for example) they get no police escort from here on. It's now about 8PM and they still have 200km to drive in painstakingly slow traffic and they still have to find somewhere for lunch, let alone dinner. Basically a 14+ hour day.

I'm pretty sure by the end of the day every french labour law has been broken but there is surprisingly no union in sight.

 

[Aleajactaest]

I don't remember, in the history of the internet, a post with so much nonsense and self-contradictions, as this one.

No hyperbole there.....

I think the real issue is that knowing that the 20% rule existed, the group made a deliberate choice to not try. For me, a professional should have more pride. I don't see the point of having a cutoff with such an easily exploited exception.