WAITING or NO WAITING -

[la.margna]

There's no doubt. The maillot jaune is the boss in the field. And if he says we stop, then all riders should respect this and obey. So riders who don't respect this like for example Rolland yesterday, are just disgusting (please note that I followed his past race interviews very closely and in his very first interview he did not excuse and say that he didn't know what's been going on, he just stated that he wanted to recover some time lost during week one and that nobody waited for him in week one (the latter I can't remember whether it was Rolland or Voeckler who said it).

But I don't want to discuss yesterday's incident in detail, that was already done in the respective race thread very extensively.

I have in general a very big problem with the actions imposed yesterday by Wiggo or two years ago in the stage to Spa by Cancellara. And it's not that I am against Cadel or Cancellara/brothers. I adore them all. I even remember when I was freaking out in front of the TV when Cadel flatted and lost his Vuelta (was it 09?).

The thing is that this is an outdoor sport. This involves many risks. Waiting is unfair and a lottery. Otherwise they should wait for everyone who flattens. Nobody did wait for VDB or Valv.Piti at La Planche des Belles Filles. Nobody waited in those terrible and numerous crashes during week one. As hard as it sounds, this is also right. Unfortunately, it's part of the game. Personally, I can't remember that 15 or 20 years ago such actions were called by the maillot jaune. I think this unwritten law should be rewritten:

NO WAITING ANY MORE, BAD LUCK, IT'S A RACE!

 

[Panda Claws]

Will they wait or will they not wait? is just another unpredictable variable that makes cycling exciting.

 

[la.margna]

Will they wait or will they not wait? is just another unpredictable variable that makes cycling exciting.

I'm glad that it's not the unpredictable crashes/punctures variable that makes your unpredictable variable possible, which makes cycling exciting for you. Seems you like cycling for the right reasons.

 

[SetonHallPirate]

Seriously, la margna? That was a situation where there was obvious foul play from the spectators. I mean, there were a half-dozen (or more, perhaps?) TEAM CARS that got flats...now how often does THAT happen?

Kudos to Wiggins for what he did.

 

[Gloin22]

The main difference between La Planche des Belles Filles and yesterday - the stage was freaking SABOTAGED...

Can you tell the difference OT ? ...

 

[cineteq]

Valverde knows the answer

 

[SetonHallPirate]

The main difference between La Planche des Belles Filles and yesterday - the stage was freaking SABOTAGED...

Can you tell the difference OT ? ...

Check and mate.

 

[Catwhoorg]

I feel confident in the prediction that if the riders hadn't neutralised the stage the organisers would have after the finish.


The way it happened made the riders generally look good, and very sportsmanlike.

(Rolland not so much, but I'll take his explanation at face value)

Look at the stick AC got for chaingate, and that was arguably an error by Andy, not something like onlooker interference.

 

[Panda Claws]

I'm glad that it's not the unpredictable crashes/punctures variable that makes your unpredictable variable possible, which makes cycling exciting for you. Seems you like cycling for the right reasons.

I said nothing about the crashes themselves, but crashes will always be there so it's best to look at things from the bright side.

I am saying that you cannot have a rule for everything.

 

[Cerberus]

There's no doubt. The maillot jaune is the boss in the field. And if he says we stop, then all riders should respect this and obey. So riders who don't respect this like for example Rolland yesterday, are just disgusting (please note that I followed his past race interviews very closely and in his very first interview he did not excuse and say that he didn't know what's been going on, he just stated that he wanted to recover some time lost during week one and that nobody waited for him in week one (the latter I can't remember whether it was Rolland or Voeckler who said it).

But I don't want to discuss yesterday's incident in detail, that was already done in the respective race thread very extensively.

I have in general a very big problem with the actions imposed yesterday by Wiggo or two years ago in the stage to Spa by Cancellara. And it's not that I am against Cadel or Cancellara/brothers. I adore them all. I even remember when I was freaking out in front of the TV when Cadel flatted and lost his Vuelta (was it 09?).

The thing is that this is an outdoor sport. This involves many risks. Waiting is unfair and a lottery. Otherwise they should wait for everyone who flattens. Nobody did wait for VDB or Valv.Piti at La Planche des Belles Filles. Nobody waited in those terrible and numerous crashes during week one. As hard as it sounds, this is also right. Unfortunately, it's part of the game. Personally, I can't remember that 15 or 20 years ago such actions were called by the maillot jaune. I think this unwritten law should be rewritten:

NO WAITING ANY MORE, BAD LUCK, IT'S A RACE!

Both the Spa stage and this one were massively atypical situations way outside the parameters of normal racing with respectively nails and oil on the road. To claim that it's waiting that's unfair and a lottery is absurd.

 

[Izzy eviel]

To be fair, they weren't really trying yesterday. Cav spent a lot of time leading the peloton up the climbs. It would be have been foul play & completely unsporting to suddenly attack. Had they all been going for it then tough luck.

 

[MartinGT]

When Rolland attacked no way did they know it was tacks causing punctures or that there were multiple punctures, IMO Sky sh!t their pants re the descent.

I was sick off seeing all the mongs **** kissing Cath Wiggins saying how great Wiggo was on Twitter, clueless July watching morons.

Its a race, IF it had been one puncture that was unfortunate, then tough. I am sorry and I love Cuddles, but it was a stupid idea not having a Swanny up there with 1) No knowledge how to change a wheel quickly and 2) not having any spares where they knew, or should have known that the cars couldnt go up due to the narrow climb.

Some incidents, yes, wait, a bad crash bringing down a load, a fall ala Armstrong v Ullrich. There is no way Wiggo knew it was a sabotage, no way.

/Edit

If Wiggo then found out, then fair play and I am sure not only Wiggo would of stopped the racing, it would have been a lot more riders. So yes, neaturlised when some bell cheese throws tacks down, but a standard puncture?

 

[Swifty's Cakes]

I think Wiggins wants to win because he is the the best rider (or at least the captain of the strongest team) rather than because his opponents were ambushed.

 

[la.margna]

I think some people did unfortunately not read my post entirely. Yes, I am not an idiot, of course there was an obvious difference. So I state it here again, THIS THREAD IS NOT TO DISCUSS YESTERDAY's TERRORISTIC ATTACK ON CYCLING (as stated already by someone else, the jury would have neutralised the times anyway, I strongly believe). So to make it more clear, what I would like to discuss:

-under which circumstances should a race be neutralised
-who should neutralise
-where to draw the line

My view is that waiting is not appropriate. It was never before in cycling. The only authority to decide whether to neutralise a stage or neutralise caused time differences should be the official race jury.

For example in the Tour de Suisse (2009 if I remember correctly) the entire peloton was hit by hail. Race director neutralised and riders could stop and cover. Fully agree with that.

In 2009, Cadel had a flat in a major climb due to A TACK. Nobody waited. It was just one rider.

That's what I want to say. This is an outdoor sport. Whether it's a flat, a stupid spectator standing in the way taking a picture, sabotage, nails or tacks lost by somebody, oil on the street, cobbles, bad street quality, a hole in the street, hail, rain, technical default, whatever you name it, these are all very unfortunate events. Everybody can be hit. It's random, it's lottery. The unfair thing is that if one, two or three riders get hit by it, nobody waits. If 20 are hit, maybe they wait, maybe not, if 40 are hit, they probably wait, who knows (luckily very seldom such situations occur).

If a rider has rainy streets in his ITT (or like Rominger in 1993 HAIL!!!) and other riders dry roads, that's also unlucky but part of the game. Look at all the flats in cycling. most are caused by obstacles such as tacks, nails or stuff, left on the roads willingly or unwillingly.

But don't get me wrong. Not stoping does not indicate that I am fine with somebody attacking or letting the team do hard work to benefit from such incident. That is disgusting, that's a different thing.

So where should the line be drawn? 5 riders? 10? 25? And who should draw it?

From my point of view, only the race jury should have the authority to neutralise times or the race or do this post race. I am sure, the jury will do the right thing and this might also avoid polemics, as sometimes, there might be obivious conflict of interests involved (Cancellara Spa stage). This is just part of the random bad luck lottery that unfortunately is part of cycling.

 

[PhiberAwptik]

If the peleton chooses to be sporting about circumstances, then so be it. Get over it crybaby.

 

[la.margna]

If the peleton chooses to be sporting about circumstances, then so be it. Get over it crybaby.

Thanks a lot for the classy and substantiated contribution to this thread.

 

[UpTheRoad]

To be fair, they weren't really trying yesterday. Cav spent a lot of time leading the peloton up the climbs. It would be have been foul play & completely unsporting to suddenly attack. Had they all been going for it then tough luck.

HAHAHA. This is an underrated post for sure. Well done.

 

[Danilot]

Thanks a lot for the classy and substantiated contribution to this thread.

From YOUR contributions, it is clear that the only answer you'll accept is "Yes, yes, you're absolutely right and your insight into cycling is amazing".

Stop bullying others for not sharing your point of view that cycling should be like a NASCAR race.

 

[BotanyBay]

About 8 years ago, I was driving along a two-lane road approaching an intersection. I was in the right-hand lane. The left-hand lane was backing-up considerably for some reason, probably because of their wanting to turn left some distance ahead. So I proceeded with caution.

I came past a truck in the left-hand lane and BAM!, a van turned left in front of me at a high rate of speed, slamming my car into a telephone pole. He was wishing to turn into a local business' driveway. The guy in the truck had waved him through figuring "we're stopped anyway, so go ahead and turn". But the truck driver didn't speak for me, and he had no idea what I was making of the situation. I had a clear path ahead of me, and I did not see the guy who wanted to turn. That truck driver had no right to speak for me, and the van driver had no right to listen to him (as he was responsible for looking-out for two lanes worth of oncoming traffic).

The moral of this story? Wiggins probably thought that Evans was getting a raw deal by flatting. And yes, his team is kind of running the show, and yes, he can certainly turn to his pelonton companions and say "let's cut him a break"... but he has absolutely no reason to expect any kind of compliance. Race YOUR race and I'll ride mine. As it should be.

Rolland was one of the riders caught in that massive pileup (stage 4?). I didn't see either Wiggins and Sky waiting for him then. And we know that without that pileup, he'd have been higher up the pole than 8th place.

Yes, classy gesture on Wiggins' part. But for anyone to impose their will like that on a simple flat tire? In that kind of chaotic scene? That's just wrong.

Rolland deserves a pass on this criticism.

 

[la.margna]

From YOUR contributions, it is clear that the only answer you'll accept is "Yes, yes, you're absolutely right and your insight into cycling is amazing".

Stop bullying others for not sharing your point of view that cycling should be like a NASCAR race.

No worries, you are allowed to disagree. Everybody shall have his view and should express it. I don't think my view should be the only right and correct opinion. It also often ocurred that discussions led me to adapting my views or changing opinion. Like many other human beings I am far from being infallible.

It's just a question of the tone and way. Trying to make the other look like an idiot or call him crybaby or other childish silly words is not appropriate and has no class, sorry. Furthermore, please stay with the facts and don't try to insinuate me of something that's not the case (did I somewhere say that cycling should be like a NASCAR race?), it's just a matter of class and respect.

 

[Apollonius]

If the peleton chooses to be sporting about circumstances, then so be it. Get over it crybaby.

Indeed! It's a tradition of cycle racing and one of the aspects that makes GT racing so unique and interesting.

 

[Thee_chisa]

nothing wrong with what happened. when this is done for the right reasons should be commended.

however, if sky slowed it to allowed cavendish back on then i wouldn't like it, just like when cancellara neutralised it to allow the schlecks back in

 

[Catwhoorg]

Wasn't one of Lance's early wins basically down to the USPS drilling it on a flat stage after a crash held up a lot of the contenders ?

 

[Geraint Too Fast]

nothing wrong with what happened. when this is done for the right reasons should be commended.

however, if sky slowed it to allowed cavendish back on then i wouldn't like it, just like when cancellara neutralised it to allow the schlecks back in

Why would Sky have wanted Cav back?

 

[Thee_chisa]

Why would Sky have wanted Cav back?

i didn't mean yesterday, but earlier in the tour they tried to slow things down for cavendish to get back on after a lump in the road