Tour de Pologne 2020

Page 17 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Can't "sorry" be both? Like, if I missed a stop sign and ran into you then my immediate reaction would be "I'm sorry!" with the "it was my fault" being implicit.
But if you wrote that someone else that missed a stop sign and ran into you, then my reaction would probably also be "I'm sorry (to hear that.)"
Nah then you'd just say I'm sorry for what I did or something. But it's probably for legal reasons he doesn't admit to guilt
 
Can't "sorry" be both? Like, if I missed a stop sign and ran into you then my immediate reaction would be "I'm sorry!" with the "it was my fault" being implicit.
But if you wrote that someone else that missed a stop sign and ran into you, then my reaction would probably also be "I'm sorry (to hear that.)"
I guess in English it could imply both. But he wrote it in Dutch and in Dutch it does not imply that it was his fault. He actually just says: 'I find it horrible what happened'.
 
If you think of it, it's quite crazy that the barriers form the edge of the racing zone. If you touch them, you will almost always crash, so there is literally no safety margin. Why not paint lines in the last km that signal the edge of the racing zone, and then the barriers 1 m further to the side. If you cross the line, you're out, if you get pushed outside the lines, others can get punished. At least there would be a margin of safety. Sounds a bit artificial maybe, but it is being done in other sports (like car racing), and it would very likely improve safety a lot.
That's not a bad suggestion. Would be difficult to do this on smaller roads.

Why don't they use the boarding they use at (ice) speed skating?

 
Can't "sorry" be both? Like, if I missed a stop sign and ran into you then my immediate reaction would be "I'm sorry!" with the "it was my fault" being implicit.
But if you wrote that someone else that missed a stop sign and ran into you, then my reaction would probably also be "I'm sorry (to hear that.)"
The way his sentences are build up it does not imply he is sorry for his actions, but rather for what has occurred, befallen the other riders including of course Fabio. He writes as if he was witness to a horrible crash rather than the instigator. In other words, it is constructed such that these could've been mine or your words as well.
 
May 28, 2017
10
21
2,580
I dont see why Dylan has to apologize to any of us, he has to and most likely will apologize to Fabio, I feel we have more use by discussing what we can do to prevent actions/falls like the one we saw yesterday in Poland.
 
Does Groenewegen have to explicitly spell out "it was my fault"? I think we all know that he was at fault, and I think he knows it! Some of you're acting like he's some unfeeling piece of *** who can't possibly be feeling genuinely sorry - in the "admitting that he's at fault kind of way - for what happened.

I dont see why Dylan has to apologize to any of us, he has to and most likely will apologize to Fabio, I feel we have more use by discussing what we can do to prevent actions/falls like the one we saw yesterday in Poland.
This, so much! The real apology will be the one that happens between Dylan and Fabio, no media.
 
Has anybody actually ever seen a contested sprint in which everyone goes in a straight line? Nobody complained about yesterday's Milan-Torino finish (cited only because of chronological proximity) but the distance between Demare and the right hand barrier at the end is not the same as a few seconds earlier. The current rule does not describe anything that riders can do, intend doing, or think they should do because it mandates an impossible absolute. It is equivalent to a school rule that all pupils must have highly polished shoes, but only applying it when a student is thought to have mumbled obscenities abut a teacher but there is no evidence.

Sprinter safety is not maintained by that type of rule, because it is so rarely applied. In so far as there is sprinter safety, it is achieved by a tacit balance between them not wanting to hurt each other, and them not wanting to be hurt. (What follows is obviously speculation, but not, I would suggest, far of what happens in every incident of sprint brinkmanship until its terrible conclusion) When DG moved a little to his right, he will have thought FJ would back off, or switch left loosing some speed. When he didn't. DG moved a little further: again FJ didn't back off. Please don't think that I am blaming Jacobsen, but this happened because of his extreme courage and determination not to be intimidated: Matthews stopped pedalling when Bouhanni shut the door on him, Fabio didn't and was still going for the win. Groenewegen kept moving right, because he thought he was showing more cojones, more determination to win, by doing so. And we praise our favourite sprinters for their determination and refusal to be baulked

If a rule about a straight line sprint is to be maintained, then it needs to be applied ridigly, so that no rider imagines for an instant that he will get away with it (just as rules about staying on the road surface need to be applied consistently and ruthlessly, and not come as a shock when they are applied). That means that straight approaches are necessary: it should be the UCI/national federation's responsibility to ensure that, enough of these right angles with 400m remaining (not an issue yesterday, but it often is). It means finding some way to encourage full width of the road gallops, rather than last 50m slingshots. And it may mean that for some time, until sprinters, managers and coaches get used to it, many stages in which the first several men over the line are relegated, and the guy coming 5th or so gets to be the one on the podium with the champagne. Because it is knowing that breaking the rule will always make the result impossible, and that it will get you disqualified even from 8th place (when that is a good result for you or your points accumulation) that things may change, not for so long as the rule is free to be broken until the point at which those who also frequently break it decide that you went too far this time, crossing some indefinable honour code.

Are the UCI sitting down today with all team managers to discuss what is a fair sprint?
 
Does Groenewegen have to explicitly spell out "it was my fault"? I think we all know that he was at fault, and I think he knows it! Some of you're acting like he's some unfeeling piece of *** who can't possibly be feeling genuinely sorry - in the "admitting that he's at fault kind of way - for what happened.



This, so much! The real apology will be the one that happens between Dylan and Fabio, no media.
Me personally i was just explaining the legal side of things. It actually makes sense that he’s not admitting to fault in a public statement. I think the rider and team wanted to send something out but they were made aware of certain things on what they could put in such a statement.
This shows he feels very bad and thinking of Jakobsen without admitting guilt which is ideal.
I agree that apologies are between the riders and teams.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
Does Groenewegen have to explicitly spell out "it was my fault"? I think we all know that he was at fault, and I think he knows it! Some of you're acting like he's some unfeeling piece of *** who can't possibly be feeling genuinely sorry - in the "admitting that he's at fault kind of way - for what happened.



This, so much! The real apology will be the one that happens between Dylan and Fabio, no media.
[/

Nobody thinks that honestly. At the same time, how hard is it to say 'I am sorry for my actions' ?
 
I dont see why Dylan has to apologize to any of us, he has to and most likely will apologize to Fabio, I feel we have more use by discussing what we can do to prevent actions/falls like the one we saw yesterday in Poland.
Totally agree with the above. Let's not get carried away with emotions and disect every little detail about this, and instead hope (and pray, for those who does that) for Jakobsens wellbeing, while focusing on the measures to avoid this in the future. Jagartrott has the right kind of idea, IMO, with a "safe race area" and a further distance to spectators/barriers.
 
He doesn't need to apologize to us or to anyone in particular but isn't this goalpost moving? People pointed out he hadn't actually acknowledged any personal responsibility, others countered that saying "sorry" implies guilt, then it was pointed out that he didn't in fact say "sorry", and now all of sudden it doesn't matter whether or not he said it because he doesn't need to apologize to us. Ooook.
 
A PR written and lawyer approved statement makes sense out of his and jumbos perspective, but from a human point of view this is really disappointing. Not sure if i could be that cold hearted to follow the lawyers advice. Maybe it's normal in today's society, but this just isn't for me.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan and Naico
I dont see why Dylan has to apologize to any of us, he has to and most likely will apologize to Fabio, I feel we have more use by discussing what we can do to prevent actions/falls like the one we saw yesterday in Poland.
I hope that he will indeed apologize to Fabio (and his family) in person (and I do think he will) but there's not just Fabio to apologize to. There's Sarreau, Touzé, Prades, the photographer/spectator that got hurt, ...

And actually I think he should (or maybe at least could) apologize to the cycling public in general (and thus to us) as well since everybody who watched the stage live saw the horror crash and most likely felt really bad and really concerned immediately afterwards. Ofcourse this can't be compared to what the actual victims and their families had (and have) to go through but still it could be taken into account I guess.

Or maybe that's just me getting a little carried away by the emotions but I guess this is my view on it.
 
Has anybody actually ever seen a contested sprint in which everyone goes in a straight line? Nobody complained about yesterday's Milan-Torino finish (cited only because of chronological proximity) but the distance between Demare and the right hand barrier at the end is not the same as a few seconds earlier. The current rule does not describe anything that riders can do, intend doing, or think they should do because it mandates an impossible absolute. It is equivalent to a school rule that all pupils must have highly polished shoes, but only applying it when a student is thought to have mumbled obscenities abut a teacher but there is no evidence.
The rule is not that sprinters aren't allowed to deviate from their chosen line. The rule is quite fine as it is.

2.3.036 Sprints
Riders shall be strictly forbidden to deviate from the lane they selected when launching into the sprint and, in so doing, endangering others.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY