Nope.I don't get all the Roglic hate.
Indurain won the Tour 5 times riding that way.
1995, 7th stage. Indurain goes from far out and takes a minute on a LBL parcours, pulling Bruyneel to stage victory. That's a huge 30 minute effort, a day before the ITT so he wasn't riding defensively to save his legs:
1994, 1st mountain top finish. Pantani attacks and Indurain is isolated. He decides to pull for the next 25 minutes and all but Luc Leblanc are dropped. Indurain already had the race lead after obliterating everyone in the ITT, but he still went on to put the icing on the cake in the mountains. That's some panache.
1991. After Lemond lost contact with the lead group on the Tourmalet, he got back before they reached the Aspin. But meanwhile, Indurain, your most boring rider, attacked from the lead group in the descent. He smartly waited for Chiapucci and together they tackled Col d'Aspin. Chiappucci the stage and Indurain his first yellow jersey, with panache.
And that's exactly what Roglic failed to do in the first week: crush his opponents while they were weak. If Roglic now has any bad luck (puncture, crash, off-day), he will regret not having tried a bit harder to drop Bernal or to follow Pogacar on the Peyresourde.
ps: I am not a Roglic hater. I just feel he could ride a bit better, tactically. He is doing OK but OK could translate in "not enough" when evaluating the race in Paris.
disclaimer: I agree 1992 and 1993 were borefests. But Indurain can't be held responsible for those parcours designs with long ITT and less mountains, while they knew exactly what Indurain's talents were.