Suisse railroad incident/Costa

[Fetisoff]

The rule says that the barrier must be down to have a DQ. Since it was not, no movistar should be punished. However, anyone showing good sportsmanship would have stopped right after.

Not 100% bought on the "sportsmanship" issue here. Riding in front of the peloton is hard, you do it for a reason - to protect your rider.

Someone can be stuck behind in echelons due to crosswinds, a crash... Are road barriers that much different?

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

No reason at all for DQ. These guys can't stop on a dime. They made the correct and safe call to keep going past the barriers, which were just barely in the process of moving down.

 

[The Hitch]

Not 100% bought on the "sportsmanship" issue here. Riding in front of the peloton is hard, you do it for a reason - to protect your rider.

Someone can be stuck behind in echelons due to crosswinds, a crash... Are road barriers that much different?

You can't have riders racing to make it to a crossing before a train

 

[Wigwan]

Not 100% bought on the "sportsmanship" issue here. Riding in front of the peloton is hard, you do it for a reason - to protect your rider.

Someone can be stuck behind in echelons due to crosswinds, a crash... Are road barriers that much different?

Crosswind don't make you lose minutes waiting for a train to pass. Riders often slow down when a leader or a big group crash to let those who can continue come back in the bunch. Also, those left behind in this situation can benefit of the car's slipstream.

 

[hfer07]

It happened, heres video of it, happens at 1:58
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZ1J1GhKEKw

 

[JA.Tri]

The last rider thru, in particular, could easily have stopped, he apparently made a conscious decision to continue.

Good lesson for race hierarchy, for ensuring (maximizing) future safety/fair racing conditions.

 

[Afrank]

Not all the riders made it through the crossing, and the group that did were neutrilized and the peloton re-formed. no harm, no foul. If some of the riders had attacked out of the crossing, and tried to use the crossing to their advantage then a DQ would be in order, but that didn't happen here.

 

[spalco]

No reason at all for DQ. These guys can't stop on a dime. They made the correct and safe call to keep going past the barriers, which were just barely in the process of moving down.

If you're normal traffic, you already have to stop when the lights go on, which seems to have been the case.

In a cycling race it's surely a bit different though, I doubt they pay that much attention to traffic lights etc. since usually they don't apply to them.

After watching the video multiple times, I don't think I'd blame the first group, but the last guy across the rails was very late, he must have already realised what was going on.

 

[orangerider]

Bah, watched the video & these guys went through an equivalent of an intersection crossing exactly when a green flicked to yellow. No ticket by policeman or photocam and likewise no DQ here.

 

[Pippo_San]

The only ones to blame in this peculiar situation are the organizers: I believe that with a better course planning they could've avoided that crossing, or they could've thought a little more about the chrono table.
In any way, situations like these should NEVER happen, not in 2012, not without an emergency that requires a change of plans, not at World Tour level.

 

[jens_attacks]

wow what a big deal...

 

[rickshaw]

ummmmm

i am taking it easy. . . they sat up when asked by the organization so why should they be DQ'd? it had no influence on the race that's why it wasn't discussed after movistar sat up.

Sorry, its not about the race, or "sitting up". The rule is so the dumbass riders don't get killed on the train tracks AND so they don't interfere with the rail transport system in most countries is more important than a bunch guys in spandex.

... and don't be dissing Luxemb-whatever. I'm sure its a nice country, wherever it is. If they like cycling, they're OK by me. Isn't it Europe somewhere, a Duchy or something like Andorra?

 

[williamp78]

It looks like this was just a freak of timing. If the peleton arrived ten seconds earlier they all would have passed on without ever realising anything untowards. If they arrived ten seconds later the barrier would have been down already and they would all have stopped.

 

[SantiBotero]

I started reading the topic and was thinking "what a stupid move by the riders!"

Then i saw the video and, well, the only way they couldn't stop before the railroad was by causing a massive crash.

 

[zigmeister]

well from the looks of it the policeman only raises his arm when they are already 10 meters away from the rail cross so it's not like they had minutes to carefully think what they should do.

I remember right when the Universal sports coverage started they showed it.

It is obvious that about 10-12 riders were still going along at a good clip, and the lights started flashing and the arms then began to come down. They continued and went through while the rest stopped.

At that same time, a guy came running out with a flag (assume motorcycle ref) with a flag, about 6-7 guys were already going around/passing him before he started really waving it, a few kept going as noted earlier.

The arms were not DOWN yet completely. The rule needs to be clear, a signal arm in the process of going down, or does it have to be completely down?!?!

I would think it has to be completely down, then you do something dangerous/stupid, like go around at an angle, that would be required, to get through. While almost getting plowed/killed by a train.

I equate this to running a red light. If you cross the white line in the US when the light is yellow, and as you go under the light and see it turn red, that isn't running a red light technically.

Since the road was also very wet/rainy, trying to hit the brakes for some of those guys may have caused a fall/crash, right on top of the tracks. That would be just as dangerous.

Now, the real question, if they were continuing onward and drilling it, attacking the misfortune of others, and not waiting..who cares what the officials are stating, that is lame and pathetic to take advantage of a situation like that IMO.

 

[FignonLeGrand]

If he did indeed cross a rail road illegally he should be disqualified. The same happened to Leif Hoste in Paris-Roubaix in 2006. It's dangerous and shouldn't be encouraged.

Yes in Psris Roubaix it wasnt for getting any advantage, it was the breach of safety that got them disqualified. In fairness its a bike race why risk it.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

so let me see if i got this straight:

contador counter attacks schleck after he dropped his chain launching the an attack:

pisti's reaction: he did the right thing, schleck should learn how to shift!!!!!!

leipheirmer falls while the race is launched and movistar keeps pushing the pace

pisti's reaction: herp derp they have no ethics.

double standards any1?

You forget this is Pisti you're dealing with, it's not double standards, he just has a strict hierarchy of a minimum acceptable moral behaviour. It runs as follows:

Alberto Contador, Philippe Gilbert: Carte blanche. These guys are Übermenschen and therefore what they decree as acceptable behaviour for themselves is to be accepted.
Belgian riders: Generally any behaviour is acceptable moral behaviour for these, though kicking babies, eating puppies raw and depictions of the Prophet Mohammed are frowned upon.
Non-Belgian riders on Belgian teams: These are generally subject to general ethical behaviour, though pro-Belgian rhetoric can allow them further concessions.
Riders not from Belgium or on Belgian teams, but who contest the cobbled classics: Generally subject to general ethical behaviour.
Other riders not named Mark Cavendish: Some higher standards are required, especially of riders or teams who have performed a perceived slight on a Belgian rider or team in the past, and they may find themselves criticised for behaviour other riders would be praised for.
Mark Cavendish: Minimum acceptable standard of behaviour to avoid criticism is Mother Teresa on a bike.

It happened, heres video of it, happens at 1:58
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZ1J1GhKEKw

Ah right. So it's pretty small really. Nothing too dangerous, certainly not like the 2006 Roubaix one. A couple of the riders cut it fine, but the guys at the front probably did nothing wrong. It seems like cooler heads have prevailed and the race organisers have sorted it out fairly amicably.

Looks like quite a few GreenEdge guys made the group? Not sure I can count up the whole Movistar team anyhow, though if they've got some new green rain jackets I could see it.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

You can't have riders racing to make it to a crossing before a train

The gates will always be down about 30 seconds before the train gets there: this is not playing dares with several hundred tonnes of high speed train.

 

[Angliru]

That is a DQ offense.

And if the riders were told from their team cars to do it - the DS's should be DQ'd too. That part is my opinion - not the rule. Rule says the rider.

Dumb illegal move to go around the gates. Were there special circumstances?

Did you even watch the stage? The gates hadn't dropped when the group went over the tracks and the official waving his flag only came forward when they were already crossing the tracks. The Greenedge riders continued to flow threw even after the official came forward, bringing up the rear of the "offending riders".

 

[El Pistolero]

so let me see if i got this straight:

contador counter attacks schleck after he dropped his chain launching the an attack:

pisti's reaction: he did the right thing, schleck should learn how to shift!!!!!!

leipheirmer falls while the race is launched and movistar keeps pushing the pace

pisti's reaction: herp derp they have no ethics.

double standards any1?

i wish more teams were like movistar maybe racing would be better instead of the ethical pile of crap we keep being served, when OPQS put piti out of contention on the first stage of catalunya you didn't hear a single complain from any one on movistar and they simply said that's how racing is.

regarding this rail road situation i think you guys just need to:

happened early in the race, had no effect on the final result so who cares

Leipheimer fell during a non-GC stage, long before the final started(and it never did start by the way) and Movistar was not even riding for the win, but for a pathetic second place(one that wouldn't even score them WT points!). Notice the very subtle difference with the Contador case. I wouldn't actually have cared if they were riding for the win. We all know they were riding for something else.

As for Quick Step eliminating Valverde at Catalunya. First of all, QS didn't make Valverde crash and drop out the race because of injuries. Second of all, payback's a *****. And that's exactly what Contador did with Schleck when his chain fell off. What comes around goes around.

The race was launched when Leipheimer fell? Yeah, that's why Thomas De Gendt won with more than 10 minutes advantage.

Ps: I didn't even think about the Paris-Nice incident when I said Movistar have no ethics what so ever. You might not know this, but Valverde is quite the bully in the peloton. Only against small names though, doesn't dare to take on the big boys.

 

[El Pistolero]

You forget this is Pisti you're dealing with, it's not double standards, he just has a strict hierarchy of a minimum acceptable moral behaviour. It runs as follows:

Alberto Contador, Philippe Gilbert: Carte blanche. These guys are Übermenschen and therefore what they decree as acceptable behaviour for themselves is to be accepted.
Belgian riders: Generally any behaviour is acceptable moral behaviour for these, though kicking babies, eating puppies raw and depictions of the Prophet Mohammed are frowned upon.
Non-Belgian riders on Belgian teams: These are generally subject to general ethical behaviour, though pro-Belgian rhetoric can allow them further concessions.
Riders not from Belgium or on Belgian teams, but who contest the cobbled classics: Generally subject to general ethical behaviour.
Other riders not named Mark Cavendish: Some higher standards are required, especially of riders or teams who have performed a perceived slight on a Belgian rider or team in the past, and they may find themselves criticised for behaviour other riders would be praised for.
Mark Cavendish: Minimum acceptable standard of behaviour to avoid criticism is Mother Teresa on a bike.

Ah right. So it's pretty small really. Nothing too dangerous, certainly not like the 2006 Roubaix one. A couple of the riders cut it fine, but the guys at the front probably did nothing wrong. It seems like cooler heads have prevailed and the race organisers have sorted it out fairly amicably.

Looks like quite a few GreenEdge guys made the group? Not sure I can count up the whole Movistar team anyhow, though if they've got some new green rain jackets I could see it.

At least I don't hate every non-climbing cyclist like you do. Surprised you even know who Gilbert is!

Ps: you used the Ubermensch term of Nietzche incorrectly. How ignorant can you get.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

At least I don't hate every non-climbing cyclist like you do. Surprised you even know who Gilbert is!

Ps: you used the Ubermensch term of Nietzche incorrectly. How ignorant can you get.

Ignorant enough to mis-spell both Übermensch and Nietzsche, evidently

 

[Froome19]

You forget this is Pisti you're dealing with, it's not double standards, he just has a strict hierarchy of a minimum acceptable moral behaviour. It runs as follows:

Alberto Contador, Philippe Gilbert: Carte blanche. These guys are Übermenschen and therefore what they decree as acceptable behaviour for themselves is to be accepted.
Belgian riders: Generally any behaviour is acceptable moral behaviour for these, though kicking babies, eating puppies raw and depictions of the Prophet Mohammed are frowned upon.
Non-Belgian riders on Belgian teams: These are generally subject to general ethical behaviour, though pro-Belgian rhetoric can allow them further concessions.
Riders not from Belgium or on Belgian teams, but who contest the cobbled classics: Generally subject to general ethical behaviour.
Other riders not named Mark Cavendish: Some higher standards are required, especially of riders or teams who have performed a perceived slight on a Belgian rider or team in the past, and they may find themselves criticised for behaviour other riders would be praised for.
Non riders-(also known as sprinters): Particularly high standards are expected and nothing which constitutues sprinting will be tolerated especially when such a discipline is being contested again Tom Boonen.
Mark Cavendish: Minimum acceptable standard of behaviour to avoid criticism is Mother Teresa on a bike.

Missed out a bit there which I fixed for you

 

[El Pistolero]

Ignorant enough to mis-spell both Übermensch and Nietzsche, evidently

Not nearly as bad as using terms you don't understand. The reason I don't use an umlaut is because of mere convenience. It's after all only the internet.

 

[ansimi]

Ah right. So it's pretty small really. Nothing too dangerous, certainly not like the 2006 Roubaix one. A couple of the riders cut it fine, but the guys at the front probably did nothing wrong. It seems like cooler heads have prevailed and the race organisers have sorted it out fairly amicably.

Looks like quite a few GreenEdge guys made the group? Not sure I can count up the whole Movistar team anyhow, though if they've got some new green rain jackets I could see it.

It all went down after live coverage started so you should be able to find full video. It was pretty entertaining. I do think the whole Movistar team made it through. Bruseghin was the leader of the front group having very animated discussions with the race officials when they finally drove up to the group. Cancellara was the leader of the main peloton with his own animated discussions. I think what had riders most upset was when they realized that the breakaway was getting an extra 2+ minutes which did have a major impact on how the stage played out.