It sometimes seems that people get so caught up in the ettiquette of cycling that it becomes something akin to constitutional law rather than just some blokes riding bikes.
There are certainly traditions re not attacking in certain circumstances, and some of these are pretty straight forward. You dont attack the yellow jersey while he is taking a leak etc. But there is a huge amount of interpretation that can be applied to these and the situation with mechanicals is certainly one that falls into this category.
Obviously if you are just riding along and AS has a mechanical you wait for him, but if it is in the middle of the key moment of the race, then this is something different and really a club cyclist should be able to manage changing gears without dropping his chain, so you have to ask the question about whether he deserves any sympathy. In particular the issue with gear changing goes back to the times before sti shifters where gear changing, particularly on mountain climbs was a major tactical consideration. Many of the current DS's would have ridden at a time when you attacked when your apponenet chnaged gear cause you hoped he would have problems getting it engaged.
I think that maybe the commentary was at least a bit about the fact that in an attempt to get the historiacal ettiquette right, that nations newer to cycling actually go further than what was ever intended with the "tradition". In a way they are trying to say that even through the new nations earnestly try - they just dont get it. So its a bit snobish and really I think that for some Europeans it going to be a case of saying you are ignorant if you dont know about the ettiquette and that you dont uderstand the subtleties, of the ettiquette whe you try to put it in place. I dont think you are ever going to win if you are an Aussie, Yank or Pom.