What should happen to Sky for getting food on Stage 18?

[yetiyeti]

Maybe he doesn't know the exact rule either, there's a lot of people on here that don't!

I don't know what the exact rule is, but I'd like to - do you have it handy?

 

[Pricey_sky]

I don't know what the exact rule is, but I'd like to - do you have it handy?

No idea what the actual rule is and there lies the problem, there is a precedent where Mollema was a 20 second penalty earlier in the season for a similar offence.

 

[cineteq]

Maybe he doesn't know the exact rule either, there's a lot of people on here that don't!

wut? your comment is now 2nd.

 

[mrhender]

What should happen to C.Froome/R.Porte/Sky for getting food on le Alpe d'Huez?

Its hard to say what penalty is fair..

The penalty should imply the significance of the deed i would say..
Therefore it is impossible to conclude, if he had a total meltdown he could easily loose minutes, but we will never know how bad is was..

His luck is that Porte was there.. But hearing his bad excuses about Porte was the only "fellon" afterwards make him to small for the jersey i think...

 

[cineteq]

Its hard to say what penalty is fair..

The penalty should imply the significance of the deed i would say..
Therefore it is impossible to conclude, if he had a total meltdown he could easily loose minutes, but we will never know how bad is was..

His luck is that Porte was there.. But hearing his bad excuses about Porte was the only "fellon" afterwards make him to small for the jersey i think...

That just did. The current rule encourages riders to break it. Make it 3-5 minutes, otherwise allow riders to feed at will.

 

[Dalakhani]

Over 6km on a stiff course, I'd expect the rider to lose at least 3 minutes.

I suppose the real penalty is that Froome won't be able to claim he won the Tour without cheating!

 

[mrhender]

That just did. The current rule encourage riders to break it. Make it 3-5 minutes, otherwise allow riders to feed at will.

Well i actually agree.. The big problem is that ASO does not dare to make a stand, cause if that stand turns out to be deciding for the winner of the race they would get a devestating criticism and the whole race would be about ASO favorising riders, and not about the race itself... They are to scared in my opinion to be a decicing factor in these cases..
But i would doubt the penalty would be so lenient if the rider for example was Birdsong or Mollema??

Concliusion: The rule sucks as you say..

 

[mrhender]

Over 6km on a stiff course, I'd expect the rider to lose at least 3 minutes.

I suppose the real penalty is that Froome won't be able to claim he won the Tour without cheating!

Thats were you unfortunatly are wrong..

He DID get a penalty therefor he can claim that it has no significance..

Even though the penalty is a mock of other riders playing buy the rules...

 

[Granville57]

They should force Froomey to wear a clown suit in the final stage.

 

[myrideissteelerthanyours]

Over 6km on a stiff course, I'd expect the rider to lose at least 3 minutes.

I suppose the real penalty is that Froome won't be able to claim he won the Tour without cheating!

Do you think the food he took just instantly gave him some sort of advantage over the others? Its true the amylase in your mouth does begin digesting food right away.

Maybe it will effect his recovery and his day tomorrow and the next. Someone mentioned he needed the carbs for post pwnage press and supposedly yellow jersey press interviews detract from one's tdf recovery over 3 weeks so perhaps not bonking while getting a podium smooch is the perceived advantage

 

[batchuba]

There is no Bastille to imprison him in.

It's minimum security these days.
Could just chain him to the railings there - he could still get a bit of exercise, chat to passers by and whatnot.
Wouldn't want to be too hard on the guy.

 

[oldcrank]

I think froome should be given a lifetime's supply of energy gels.

Yes, it would be great if Froomey and SKY can turn this
incident into a lucrative ad campaign for their current
energy bar partner which I believe is CNP.

 

[MatParker117]

Would anyone here of complained if he had been awarded the same time as Contador?

 

[myrideissteelerthanyours]

Yes, it would be great if Froomey and SKY can turn this
incident into a lucrative ad campaign for their current
energy bar partner which I believe is CNP.

im thinking a duracell spot. sort of a parody of today.... porte is freewheeling up a mountain alongside froome and the skyborgs who are team timetrialing past generic looking riders. He sends him back to the car for more batteries. Froome powers up his wattometer and then is suddenly flying up the mountain as part of the skytrain.

 

[Magnus]

Well i actually agree.. The big problem is that ASO does not dare to make a stand, cause if that stand turns out to be deciding for the winner of the race they would get a devestating criticism and the whole race would be about ASO favorising riders, and not about the race itself... They are to scared in my opinion to be a decicing factor in these cases..
But i would doubt the penalty would be so lenient if the rider for example was Birdsong or Mollema??

Concliusion: The rule sucks as you say..

What does ASO have to do with it?

Isn't it the commissaires under the UCI?

And 20 seconds is the standard punishment.

 

[stampedingviking]

Would anyone here of complained if he had been awarded the same time as Contador?

Why should he?

 

[MatParker117]

Why should he?

Just throwing out hypotheticals

 

[Dalakhani]

Thats were you unfortunatly are wrong.

Yes, you're right. He CAN claim he didn't cheat while winning the Tour de France... but those claims will be hollow as he was found guilty of breaking the rules.

He DID get a penalty therefor he can claim that it has no significance...

Yes, he can claim that, too... but, obviously, not at the same time he's claiming he didn't cheat. He could say he cheated but it didn't make a difference to the overall result of the race.

But, if he'd lost 3 minutes, then it would have made a huge difference because it would have given opponents something to aim at tomorrow and Saturday.

 

[zigmeister]

This thread makes no sense, the rules are clear and the distance from the finish to take on food is determined for all stages.

So, he was penalized 20 seconds.

DQ'ing someone for this offense isn't even an option, and the penalty wouldn't fit the crime as it were.

With that said, Froome is kind of a jackass for saying that, technically, Porte took food, then he gave it to Froome, therefore, he isn't actually taking food from the car.

Stupid logic and loophole attempt of the rules. Seriously Froome, get a grip man.

 

[mrhender]

Yes, you're right. He CAN claim he didn't cheat while winning the Tour de France... but those claims will be hollow as he was found guilty of breaking the rules.



Yes, he can claim that, too... but, obviously, not at the same time he's claiming he didn't cheat. He could say he cheated but it didn't make a difference to the overall result of the race.

But, if he'd lost 3 minutes, then it would have made a huge difference because it would have given opponents something to aim at tomorrow and Saturday.

It was not an attack, just showing how he can argue against the "cheating" accusation..

I would rather that the penalty was more significant so that we could be in for one heck of a showdown..

And by the way think the descision from SKY puts them in a bad view, not to say Froomes "technical" bla bla afterwards...

 

[fantomas]

This thread makes no sense, the rules are clear and the distance from the finish to take on food is determined for all stages.

So, he was penalized 20 seconds.

DQ'ing someone for this offense isn't even an option, and the penalty wouldn't fit the crime as it were.

With that said, Froome is kind of a jackass for saying that, technically, Porte took food, then he gave it to Froome, therefore, he isn't actually taking food from the car.

Stupid logic and loophole attempt of the rules. Seriously Froome, get a grip man.

In all fairness he did say in his official post stage interview that he asked Porte to go to the var and get him some sugar.

The punishment didn't fit the crime. He might have lost minutes, maybe less, we'll never know. Contador lost like a minute, a minute-and-a-half on a flat within 2, 3, 4 km in Paris-Nice in 2009 due to low sugar.

 

[oldcrank]

Yes, you're right. He CAN claim he didn't cheat while winning the Tour de France... but those claims will be hollow as he was found guilty of breaking the rules.

An off-side pass is against the rules in football,
but it would be silly to say a team that was
whistled down for a couple of off-side passes
were 'cheaters' because 'they were found guilty
of breaking the rules.'

 

[AtletiSK]

If I remember well, he did something similar on Mt.Ventoux, too... even tough that was not from the car, so should be fine... today, clear rules violation, 20 secs penalty is ridiculous yet not surprising... TdF does not always have the same criteria for everyone

 

[postmanhat]

Shouldn't this be in the fantasy cycling forum by now

 

[lemoogle]

An off-side pass is against the rules in football,
but it would be silly to say a team that was
whistled down for a couple of off-side passes
were 'cheaters' because 'they were found guilty
of breaking the rules.'

Oh please.... this is not the same at all, this is more like handballing the ball when it's going in ala Suarez (if froome really had a hunger knock , which a lot of us are skeptical about, he could have lost minutes ) . What's wrong is not necessarily what they did, assuming froome was really bonking, but the attitude of froome saying that he didn't break the rules that "porte" did and he just fed from porte... that's just crappy attitude.