- Apr 28, 2009
- 1,205
- 0
- 0
afpm90 said:Did Cadel fall last year?![]()
palmerq said:does anyone know a good radio station i could get on the internet to listen to the tour de france.. I am being conspired agaisnt so I am missing it... It is on tv but the house here does not pick up eurosport or itv 4 :S and my netbook is so old and rubbish it will not play any videos online... radio works though...
Cerberus said:Cadel tried to do a long range attack in a group with among other Cancellara. They argued presumably about a GC contender being in a break. Apparently ACF94 think waiting for a GC contender who crashed is equivalent to helping pull a group with an attacking GC contender.
Thoughtforfood said:This should play into tomorrows stage hopefully. There will be some tired legs tomorrow. In a way, it kind of sucks that nobody raced on. I know the unwritten rule and all, but this stage was always ripe for something like that to happen, that is why they put it in. This stage was supposed to cause gaps. The whole race is about causing gaps and winning.
I am not saying I don't understand why they waited, but in some ways, this stage should have been more like a classic mentality. You drop, you drop regardless of reason.
palmerq said:does anyone know a good radio station i could get on the internet to listen to the tour de france.. I am being conspired agaisnt so I am missing it... It is on tv but the house here does not pick up eurosport or itv 4 :S and my netbook is so old and rubbish it will not play any videos online... radio works though...
Thoughtforfood said:This should play into tomorrows stage hopefully. There will be some tired legs tomorrow. In a way, it kind of sucks that nobody raced on. I know the unwritten rule and all, but this stage was always ripe for something like that to happen, that is why they put it in. This stage was supposed to cause gaps. The whole race is about causing gaps and winning.
I am not saying I don't understand why they waited, but in some ways, this stage should have been more like a classic mentality. You drop, you drop regardless of reason.
Looked to me like it was Gavazzi who crashed first, then the moto almost ran over him, then I guess the peloton had to break hard which caused the big crash.Cobblestones said:I didn't see it, but read here that it was a moto which caused the crash. Also, I think, too many GC hopes came done.
Cerberus said:There's a Danish feed reporting that the Schlecks are back in the Peleton.
Beech Mtn said:+1. Would have made for a more interesting race overall.
Shades of Tour 2009?
Cobblestones said:I didn't see it, but read here that it was a moto which caused the crash. Also, I think, too many GC hopes came done.
Thoughtforfood said:This should play into tomorrows stage hopefully. There will be some tired legs tomorrow. In a way, it kind of sucks that nobody raced on. I know the unwritten rule and all, but this stage was always ripe for something like that to happen, that is why they put it in. This stage was supposed to cause gaps. The whole race is about causing gaps and winning.
I am not saying I don't understand why they waited, but in some ways, this stage should have been more like a classic mentality. You drop, you drop regardless of reason.
Moondance said:Saxo are going to look the worst hypocrites tomorrow when Cancellara pulls the Schlecks to the finish line after the cobbles; where one or two or more other contenders will inevitably hit the deck.
lilyprotector said:i wouldn't have expected radioshack to want to put the schlecks out of it by driving the group once lance was back in. they need the schlecks to help attack contador and they want saxo bank to do the work. it's not in their interest at all for the schlecks to be out already.