Your comments are getting more and more hysterical. No word on the content. Not a word about irresponsible cycling behaviour.
Again, is Bernal responsible for his own crash ? You seem to be insinuating that it was an ordinary accident, pure bad luck.
Is it justifiable that, if Bernal later goes back to road training, with the same carelessness, that he is endangering others and himself.
As I wrote before, Pidcock had the right analysis. Pidcock at the age of 22 is far more intelligent than you are.
I hope one thing, that Bernal and others will finally realize that they are not alone on the open road. And that cycling on a busy public road with time trial bikes is actually not justifiable.
Look, I think your reasoning on this is ludicrous and peurile, in addition to offensive to Bernal. You claim ownership of the "facts," but have no sense of their context (certainly not me), without which facts are meaningless.
Once again the contingent circumstances upon which the crash was determined aren't recognized, obsessed as you are with casting sole blame on Bernal for his supposed irresponsibility. A more reasoned analysis, however, recognizes that the choice of road was certainly not entirely his, but decided in agreement with the team (which should have put a scout on a motorcycle ahead alerting to any danger). Secondly, performance science today demands that a rider assumes an ever lower and tucked aerodynamic position, at the expense of vision, which includes keeping the head down to reduce drag as much as possible, exacerbated by the fact of having to monitor their numbers on the computer.
None of this was Bernal's fault, but it did place him at greater risk. His only real responsibility, therefore, was to ride like that with total commitment, because team investments in him and performance science require so and it has to be practiced out on the road to simulate race conditions. The stealth look of today tests a rider's capacity to hold the optimal position to the limit, which comes at great expense in terms of environmental awareness. And this fact shifts a fair bit of the burden of responsibility away from the rider in Bernal's case, to external forces imposed on him by science and technology (and sponsorship investing in them). Pidcock's (and now Froome's) concerns arise from this, not some featherbrained understanding. Naturally this makes your comment about Pidcock being a lot smarter then me utterly laughable, since you didn't even understand his intention. The point is, and the one Pidcock was making, is that this wouldn't have happened in the sport 30 years ago. You needed help getting it, so I've spelled it out for you. Perhaps, therefore, it's time to reconsider the new praxis, rather than cast rash aspersions on someone sent to hospital.
It was the combination of these factors and an ill-fated stationary bus, whilst riding according to team plan in that "zone" of entranced fatigue, which led to the crash; not one man's "recklessness." To not see this is foolish. To then bombastically claim a self-important concern for rider safety, whilst showing no regard for the severity of Bernal's injuries (other than a conciliatory hope he heals after conceitedly criticizing him), doesn't make your statements any more appealing. At any rate, this is not the place to lobby for it and especially under your totally misdirected moral indignation.
In any case, solutions will involve reconsidering systemic approaches, not crass indictments against supposed single rider irresponsibility. Perhaps the UCI, therefore, should step in and mandate safer riding. If the idea of banning time trial bikes altogether seems too radical, then maybe it should put rigorous limitations on their geometry. Moreover, it should immediately ban the head down riding position on penalty of disqualification. Nobody would train that way anymore. Problem solved or at least greatly mitigated.
So at best we can be shocked and dismayed by Bernal's lack of awareness at a critical moment; but certainly not irritated over a nonexistent foolhardiness. Again he wasn't acting alone like some Joe Blow amateur trying to impress, but in fellowship with his team under work conditions. In other words, he was just doing his job when accident struck. But in almost every job related incident the employee is rarely entirely at fault because he's not without help. And this one doesn't even come close to qualifying.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram