• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread

Page 927 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.

Should we change the thread title?


  • Total voters
    112
The UCI made these rules in regards to helmet dimensions and safety just a year ago. Based on said rules, Visma and Giro made this design, according to said newly implemented rules. You don't think it's rather unfair to now start making up new stuff again, based on what is in all likelihood nothing more than Rodolfo3948394829 shouting some stuff on Twitter?

I find this bureaucratic UCI way of living very pathetic in itself, but they've also just let teams waste some time, energy and money.
I hope that if they change the rules, it will only be from the beginning of the next season.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jmdirt
Hmm. I would say there's quite a difference between blocking a team (certainly unethical) during a TTT and tackling an opponent (totally ethical) in an NFL game. One is obviously a key component of the game which happens on every play, the other (would have been) a move which unfairly impeded the other team. I would say holding (or some other penalty) would be a more apt comparison.

I don't for a minute think DeClerq did anything unethical or even mildly wrong. I think Evenepoel was feeling pressure at the end, and as he often does when under pressure, he lashed out. And he lashed out at a guy who honestly seems to have been a good friend and supporter if I read the body language right over the last 5 years, and I think I did. The problem is with Evenepoel acting like a tool.

In my opinion, if he blocked QS intentionally Evenepoel would have been right to call it out. But I don't believe he blocked intentionally for one second.
If Declerq is riding out the TTT (ethical) and not moving out of the way (still ethical IMO, but maybe not 'sporting' in some peoples' eyes) then people/RE get cranky until they look at the situation clearly.

Obviously a huge difference in my comparisons...
 
  • Like
Reactions: red_flanders
To the contrary, I think a dropped rider should get out of the way of an approaching team to not impede its forward trajectory. While not doing so may not be against the rules, it's unsportsman-like. Plus trying to get in the way will make enemies in the peloton, which isn't the best tactic. In ITTs a rider about to be passed doesn't try to block the one passing him, although he may illegally try to get into his slipstream just long enough to not invoke a penalty.
 
So, you don't think a dropped rider going at half speed would not expect the following team to overtake him?
I’m sure Declerq expected to be caught but he isn’t looking back for them. If he’s not told where they are or to move over he’s just doing his own race. Now was he told Quickstep was coming upon him, who knows but only two or three people. Did they lose a few seconds from it, yes but it isn’t why they lost. They had that, weather, potentially starting too hard, and UAE just being better. It’s great Evenepoel speaks his mind and what he thinks but some of the things he says leaves him open to those that don’t like him. But it’s in the past and if he wants to win the overall he has some work to do if he wants to win the overall.
 
I’m sure Declerq expected to be caught but he isn’t looking back for them. If he’s not told where they are or to move over he’s just doing his own race. Now was he told Quickstep was coming upon him, who knows but only two or three people. Did they lose a few seconds from it, yes but it isn’t why they lost. They had that, weather, potentially starting too hard, and UAE just being better. It’s great Evenepoel speaks his mind and what he thinks but some of the things he says leaves him open to those that don’t like him. But it’s in the past and if he wants to win the overall he has some work to do if he wants to win the overall.
Granted, but I was not speaking to support Evenepoel. I just meant as general praxis. If one thing a cyclist knows, it's when he is about to be overtaken and, most of the time, gets out of the way.
 
The right decision according to some rando at the UCI? These guys are a joke

Items of clothing may not modify the morphology of the rider and any non-essential element or device, of which the purpose is not exclusively that of clothing or protection, is forbidden.

The right decision because the rule possibly prohibiting the sock had been there since at least 2019 (and was not specifically changed yesterday) and the manufacturer was consulted regarding the sock.

While the whole process should have been done 2 years ago, I think this is ultimately a fairer outcome than doing nothing or rewriting the rules to make the sock legal.
 
It's populism.

The new helmet of Visma, which the UCI approved themselves in November, is now under investigation, and you cannot tell me anything other than it is due to public outrage over its design.
But who cares if it is populism? Cycling is a genre of entertainment, it makes sense that the people running it adapt their rules to popular opinion lol. As long as the rules don't make the sport unfair, it fundamentally doesn't matter, and I don't really get why Remco is even vaguely upset about it. It's just a sock over his head!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan
But who cares if it is populism? Cycling is a genre of entertainment, it makes sense that the people running it adapt their rules to popular opinion lol. As long as the rules don't make the sport unfair, it fundamentally doesn't matter, and I don't really get why Remco is even vaguely upset about it. It's just a sock over his head!
Because he's been working with Specialized on his CdA leading up to last year at least, and the helmet was an integral part of that. Work down the drain for Specialized and the riders. Now they have to scramble for a new helmet, and probably realize they lost some efficiency.

And Remco has no filter.
 
But who cares if it is populism?
Anyone with half a brain, perhaps? You want a governing body to make decisions based on actual concrete thoughts and concepts, rather than act a spineless fool and run to new sorts of rules because they succumb to public outrage. Outrage that looked more like memeing, fyi.

Let's say you want to buy a car. I say, based on the rules I myself previously set and papers you have provided, you are allowed to do so. You purchase car. Your neighbour starts laughing at you because you bought a Fiat Multipla. I take notice of him mocking you and subsequently decide you are no longer allowed to ride in that car. Unfair? That's too bad. No refunds btw.

What a great analogy, if I say so myself.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: topcat and SHAD0W93
Anyone with half a brain, perhaps? You want a governing body to make decisions based on actual concrete thoughts and concepts, rather than act a spineless fool and run to new sorts of rules because they succumb to public outrage. Outrage that looked more like memeing, fyi.

Let's say you want to buy a car. I say, based on the rules I myself previously set and papers you have provided, you are allowed to do so. You purchase car. Your neighbour starts laughing at you because you bought a Fiat Multipla. I take notice of him mocking you and subsequently decide you are no longer allowed to ride in that car. Unfair? That's too bad. No refunds btw.

What a great analogy, if I say so myself.
I think you're overstating the importance of cycling, somewhat. It's just sport and entertainment! I want my sports governing bodies to care about fan opinions! It's not important enough for riders to actually care about, maybe some lost money for Specialised/Giro which they can claim back in damages if the decision really was so arbitrary. If UCI want to avoid that, then they can just impose those rules from the '25 season onwards, and maybe re-consider ways to prevent extreme designs if they don't want them (and I'd understand if they don't want them, plenty of reasons why they don't really help the sport as a whole).

But really, a sporting governing body is allowed to make decisions based on fan opinion – should be encouraged, even. What is at stake is not the future of the country.
 
  • Like
Reactions: red_flanders
If Declerq is riding out the TTT (ethical) and not moving out of the way (still ethical IMO, but maybe not 'sporting' in some peoples' eyes) then people/RE get cranky until they look at the situation clearly.

Obviously a huge difference in my comparisons...
Unless he's got the vision of a fruit fly he wouldn't see behind him. It's also in his professional interest and duty to keep his team's pace as high as safely possible. If he's wandering off the back he should be on the outer edge of any reasonable line, though. Anyone clip a video of that offense to Remco's World view?
 
  • Like
Reactions: jmdirt
The incident with Tim Declercq is closed. The reason they lost 40 s in the TTT in the last part, was due to the weather (maybe in combination with a furious start). Remco is Remco... He should manage his emotions after bad results in a better way. Can't believe Tim to do such a thing on purpose. Just unfortunate...

Regarding the helmets, I totally agree with Remco. It's *** to change the rules after hard work and research by riders, teams, manufacturers,.. The sock makes sure the helmet is kept in the right position. So what?
 
  • Like
Reactions: jmdirt and Wvv
I see there's still some confusion about the incident with Declercq.

Declercq has explained it already himself though.

He said that at a certain point he was told that the Quick-Step riders were 500 metres behind him. Before the corners that followed he looked behind but couldn't see them yet. Then he got into the corners and since they were riding 20-30km/h faster than him, suddenly they were behind him in the corners but there was nowhere he could go at that point. He also said that the motard in front of him should have signalled it that they were right behind him.

So he did actually hinder the Quick-Step guys a bit but he definitely didn't do it intentionally. He said it were unfortunate circumstances but he also feels a bit bad about it.

The thing he couldn't accept was that Remco (in his first reaction) seemed to insinuate that Declercq might have done it on purpose. Remco has however since apologized personally for those words and for both of them the case is closed and there are no more hard feelings.