The much needed UCI loller thread

[scribers]

It was darker earlier, then changed to lighter one before becoming darker again.

Sagan one will do nicely. Thank you!

 

[Devil's Elbow]

Their most ridiculous idea yet? Imagine the difference between staying and falling out of the WT being someone else having signed the Zwift world champion...

Buried in an interview with one of their directors mostly about the already-ludicrous-but-also-previously-discussed-on-here idea of punishing riders who have the temerity to choose their own schedule instead of riding every last World Cup race for ten straight weeks, the UCI are openly talking about counting results earned in all non-road disciplines towards the WT promotion/relegation ranking, possibly starting as soon as 2026.

What we will aim for, is to incorporate points scored in other disciplines count in the team classification that determines WorldTour licenses. In Filippo Ganna, a team like Ineos has a top-level rider participating in major track events. That's nice, but it doesn't earn Ineos any WT points. We want to discuss and change that. In that way, we can offer teams added value by stating that we fully support them if they let riders participate in other disciplines. [...] And also the Roodhooft brothers [who run Alpecin] do this with their road team, their CX riders, their MTB riders and even their e-cyclists. We want to reward teams for that.

 

[QueenStagiaire]

So how many cycle ballers will Lotto sign?

 

[awavey]

Their most ridiculous idea yet? Imagine the difference between staying and falling out of the WT being someone else having signed the Zwift world champion...

Buried in an interview with one of their directors mostly about the already-ludicrous-but-also-previously-discussed-on-here idea of punishing riders who have the temerity to choose their own schedule instead of riding every last World Cup race for ten straight weeks, the UCI are openly talking about counting results earned in all non-road disciplines towards the WT promotion/relegation ranking, possibly starting as soon as 2026.

In most governing bodies you get to understand why the craziness exists but the UCI ? Why when something works and has done for years without their infernal interference, do they feel the need to do this ?

 

[Ricco']

UCI bans celebrating teammates victories during sprint finishes.

No word about booing, so rival sprinters within a team can still express their dissatisfaction.

 

[Didinho]

Only the winner can celebrate. I would just put my hands in the air after 10km, winner known.

And what about the too early celebrations. Not win the stage AND a fine.

 

[Netserk]

UCI bans celebrating teammates victories during sprint finishes.

No word about booing, so rival sprinters within a team can still express their dissatisfaction.

Great! No more OTT hugging.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

UCI bans celebrating teammates victories during sprint finishes.

I'd love to see the same rule applied to football. Scorer can make himself look like a ****, but all his teammates have to just jog back to their positions promptly to be ready for the restart.

 

[Ilmaestro99]

UCI bans celebrating teammates victories during sprint finishes.

No word about booing, so rival sprinters within a team can still express their dissatisfaction.

Why do they want to remove all the fun from the sport.

 

[Wyndbrook]

Why do they want to remove all the fun from the sport.

Blame Edward Planckaert at last years Vuelta.

 

[awavey]

tbf the way the rule is worded implies you'd have to decelerate and endanger other riders in the celebration, of course it doesnt mean some random commissaires wont end up behaving like the fun police about it, but in theory it just reinforces the whole dont be an idiot when youre involved in a sprint bunch.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

Is it actually a new rule?

I think I remember someone losing the British criterium championship (women's) a few years ago by disqualification for taking her hands off the handlebars in celebration, as she was in the middle of a peloton that she had lapped. Have I remembered any part of that correctly?

 

[awavey]

Is it actually a new rule?

I think I remember someone losing the British criterium championship (women's) a few years ago by disqualification for taking her hands off the handlebars in celebration, as she was in the middle of a peloton that she had lapped. Have I remembered any part of that correctly?

ah the London Nocturne, with Hannah Barnes in the British Cycling officials at the race definately only wanted golden girl Laura Kenny (nee Trott at the time) to win that one.

Hannah got demoted to 2nd for lifting both her arms up when she crossed the line ahead of Laura as per this riding dangerously regulation, so no its not new as such, its just been refined over the years and extended now to cover those not necessarily directly contesting the sprint, and for the most part is ignored, except when it isnt.

anyway 2 days after that race they overturned their decision and left Hannah with only a reprimand, and the win, of course theyd got all the publicity, photos etc theyd wanted by then but Hannah never raced that crit again.

and the thing with the lapped riders, shouldnt have been on the course anyway at that stage, precisely because they could have interfered with the sprint, so the commissaires hadnt done their job properly and hooked them off on the previous lap, and theyd allowed Laura, and basically the rest of the womens British Cycling Track pursuit team at the time who were trying road racing out as a thing, to use aero shells on their helmets, which I dont believe were allowed in crit races, I think they also got to park their team camper van in the prime position in the pits, whilst everyone else just had to get rollers out and squeeze in together and make do with camping chairs and the like around bits of Smithfield market and crowd barriers.

 

[Ripper]

Yet another useless rule.

Perhaps the UCI should consider banning riders that crash a lot ... they are a danger to the rest of us in the peloton!

 

[houtdffan]

new rule

feed zones required every 30-40km

no feeding outside of a feed zone

 

[Wyndbrook]

Yet another useless rule.

Perhaps the UCI should consider banning riders that crash a lot ... they are a danger to the rest of us in the peloton!

Why is it a useless rule, if it saves one crash a year it's been well worthwhile.
The incident last year in the Vuelta nearly caused fan favourite Victor to crash.

 

[tobydawq]

Why is it a useless rule, if it saves one crash a year it's been well worthwhile.
The incident last year in the Vuelta nearly caused fan favourite Victor to crash.

I don't recall ever seeing a crash caused by this, so it won't save one crash per year.

 

[Ripper]

Why is it a useless rule, if it saves one crash a year it's been well worthwhile.
The incident last year in the Vuelta nearly caused fan favourite Victor to crash.

Because I don't think the cure for some riders being idiots is to ban what is mostly a safe/benign behavior,

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

And despite the new rule saying that, in races other than GTs, it is the responsibility of race organisers to avoid a colour clash between leaders' jerseys and any of the teams, there is Brennan bedecked in white.


If Movistar and Bahrain are going to be forced to use a change kit in the GTs to avoid clash with the BYR, then the same rule says that it is incumbent on the organisers here to make sure that their choice of jersey colour abides by the same restriction.

Hands up if you are surprised that the rule is ignored at the first (or first high profile) opportunity.

 

[Jumbo Visma Fan :)]

And despite the new rule saying that, in races other than GTs, it is the responsibility of race organisers to avoid a colour clash between leaders' jerseys and any of the teams, there is Brennan bedecked in white.


If Movistar and Bahrain are going to be forced to use a change kit in the GTs to avoid clash with the BYR, then the same rule says that it is incumbent on the organisers here to make sure that their choice of jersey colour abides by the same restriction.

Hands up if you are surprised that the rule is ignored at the first (or first high profile) opportunity.

You ought to think this will happen many more time throughout the year, unless race organizers start to give a damn about UCI rules.

 

[Logic-is-your-friend]

Was it so hard to neutralise the stage (no time gaps) while awarding Ganna his rightful win? They could even take the finish order of the first few dozens of riders (for UCI points) like they crossed the line. By the time riders climbed over the fence in order to cross the line, most if not all UCI points would have been gone, and if not, simply relegate those riders who did to last place, problem(s) solved.
Riders not having crossed the line should not be a problem, as they have to deal with riders crossing the line without transponders (after a bikechange for instance) all the time.

 

[RedheadDane]

By the time riders climbed over the fence in order to cross the line, most if not all UCI points would have been gone, and if not, simply relegate those riders who did to last place, problem(s) solved.

I see a slight challenge with that...

"You get last place."
"You get laster place."
"You get lastest place."

 

[Rob5091]

18 to the 21st March. Mark those dates in your calender as Lappi aims for the top honcho's job at the IOC. Elbows have been sharpened and no doubt, promises made, and maybe a few envelopes have been passed under the table.
https://www.olympics.com/ioc/organisation/ioc-president-election?displayAsWebView=true,true

 

[Mayomaniac]

Still not able to take a stance against hookless wheels...

 

[Wyndbrook]

18 to the 21st March. Mark those dates in your calender as Lappi aims for the top honcho's job at the IOC. Elbows have been sharpened and no doubt, promises made, and maybe a few envelopes have been passed under the table.
https://www.olympics.com/ioc/organisation/ioc-president-election?displayAsWebView=true,true

Third favourite according to betonline odds.