what happened to sportsmanship ?
cyclingtaz
Posts: 326
as the title says really after todays stage it looks like its non existent in sport now
"you tried your best and failed miserably. the lesson is never to try"
0
Comments
-
Join the other two threads discussing just this point...0
-
ynyswen24 wrote:Join the other three threads discussing just this point...
fyp0 -
artpyoms0
-
Schleck mucked up his gear change and Contador took advantage of it.
That's racing!CAAD9
Kona Jake the Snake
Merlin Malt 40 -
sorry its not racing or rather it never used to be - That Contador attacked at that point breached racng etiquette, as would attacking a rider when they are having a 'nature' break. The move may be decisive but it shows AC in a new light - went way down in my eyes.
0 -
Argghh, this really winds me up there has never ever been any unwritten rules in cycling, people take advantage of others misfortune, always have done always will, f**k all to do with sportsmanship. This is PRO cycling if you don't like it watch Eastenders or something.0
-
eh wrote:Argghh, this really winds me up there has never ever been any unwritten rules in cycling, people take advantage of others misfortune, always have done always will, f**k all to do with sportsmanship. This is PRO cycling if you don't like it watch Eastenders or something.
Yes there has, you've just never seen them
0 -
Of course there have been unwritten rules - otherwise why don't riders attack when a rival punctures ? Whether you like them or not is one thing but don't pretend they haven't been respected by the riders for years.
it's a hard life if you don't weaken.0 -
I still can't see that Contador did anything wrong. Schleck had attacked, Contador responded and went past as Schleck's chain derailled, tough on Andy but that's how it goes. It's a long way from launching an attack just because you have seen someone get a problem.
The trouble if you expect riders to wait no matter what the circumstances of a rivals misfortune is that someone who can't respond to a move might suddenly "develop" a problem that stops everything in it's tracks. Footballers are not the only ones who would dive to gain an advantage.0 -
Tom Butcher wrote:Of course there have been unwritten rules - otherwise why don't riders attack when a rival punctures ? Whether you like them or not is one thing but don't pretend they haven't been respected by the riders for years.
+1 there'll be attacks at feed zones at this rate as there's no unwritten rule saying you don't do it apparently.0 -
Smokin Joe wrote:I still can't see that Contador did anything wrong. Schleck had attacked, Contador responded and went past as Schleck's chain derailled, tough on Andy but that's how it goes. It's a long way from launching an attack just because you have seen someone get a problem.
The trouble if you expect riders to wait no matter what the circumstances of a rivals misfortune is that someone who can't respond to a move might suddenly "develop" a problem that stops everything in it's tracks. Footballers are not the only ones who would dive to gain an advantage.
Contador's attack robbed everyone of a good battle of legs.
Instead it was a capitalisation of a mechanical, weather caused by a mistake or misfortune.
That's why people are p1ssed. They want a battle which isn't decided by mechanicals, and had Contador waited, which wouldn't have taken too much, we would have seen that battle.
That's what sporstmanship is about. Winning or not in the way the sport is supposed to be won, rather than in an unfortunate way it can be won.0 -
Smokin Joe wrote:I still can't see that Contador did anything wrong. Schleck had attacked, Contador responded and went past as Schleck's chain derailled, tough on Andy but that's how it goes. It's a long way from launching an attack just because you have seen someone get a problem.
The trouble if you expect riders to wait no matter what the circumstances of a rivals misfortune is that someone who can't respond to a move might suddenly "develop" a problem that stops everything in it's tracks. Footballers are not the only ones who would dive to gain an advantage.
All Contador had been doing had been riding up to Schleck's wheel - as soon as he saw he had a mechanical he attacked. It's exactly like launching an attack when you see someone has a mechanical.
Nobody is saying riders should wait no matter what the circumstances are and in general slowing up a bit still requires the rider in trouble to ride hard back up to the group - it's not like they are neutralising the rest of the climb just easing off slightly to give time for the person to sprint back - it'd still be a disadvantage so nobody is going to fake a mechanical.
it's a hard life if you don't weaken.0 -
Unwritten rules don't exist? Try reading any book by an ex pro and you might learn something. :roll:0
-
We'll have to agree to differ on this. Neither Contador or Schleck came to the tour overly concerned about giving the TV viewing public a good battle of legs, neither did Merckx or Indurain or anyone else for that matter.Rick Chasey wrote:Smokin Joe wrote:I still can't see that Contador did anything wrong. Schleck had attacked, Contador responded and went past as Schleck's chain derailled, tough on Andy but that's how it goes. It's a long way from launching an attack just because you have seen someone get a problem.
The trouble if you expect riders to wait no matter what the circumstances of a rivals misfortune is that someone who can't respond to a move might suddenly "develop" a problem that stops everything in it's tracks. Footballers are not the only ones who would dive to gain an advantage.
Contador's attack robbed everyone of a good battle of legs.
Instead it was a capitalisation of a mechanical, weather caused by a mistake or misfortune.
That's why people are p1ssed. They want a battle which isn't decided by mechanicals, and had Contador waited, which wouldn't have taken too much, we would have seen that battle.
That's what sporstmanship is about. Winning or not in the way the sport is supposed to be won, rather than in an unfortunate way it can be won.
There has to be a line beyond which waiting for a rival who has a problem is or isn't expected, and in my view continuing a move which had already started is completely different from jumping away after you had seen the other rider's trouble.0 -
Schleck wouldn't still be in contention if Contador et all hadn't waited when he and many others crashed in stage 2 of the race.
What wound me up, was bertie claiming ignorance of Schleck's problem, when interviewed at the end of the stage.0 -
phearnde wrote:What wound me up, was bertie claiming ignorance of Schleck's problem, when interviewed at the end of the stage.
Seconded. also the astana rider that went with schleck wasnt contador.
Bertie, is about 5 feet behind him when his chain fell so to say i didnt see it is pure bull.0 -
Assuming he wins I think Contador will reget it in time as there will always be a cloud over the circumstances of yesterday's time gain. It's in his interests now to make the gap as large as possible to demonstrate it isn't a crucial factor. Or Andy Schleck drop him far enough from Thursday's finish to recover?O na bawn i fel LA0
-
If there is so many unwritten rules the rider abide by, why not stick drug taking/doping in there as well.
It's a bit rich for them to have all these unwritten rules but be cheating in other areas.2010 Specialized Allez Elite
2009 Specialized Rockhopper
2009 Quintana Roo Seduza0 -
Dave-M wrote:If there is so many unwritten rules the rider abide by, why not stick drug taking/doping in there as well.
It's a bit rich for them to have all these unwritten rules but be cheating in other areas.
i see what you mean, but an unwritten rule usually involves the rule not being written....0 -
These boys haven't taken their eyes off each other for the last few stages..and all of a sudden AC doesn't see the mechanical problem five feet in front of him - what a load of BS.
He saw it, he thought "fark me, I can make some time up here", then attacked like a weasel. No good apologising after the event and making up some BS cover story.
Contador's yellow jersey isn't fit to wipe Andy's arse....0 -
Pross wrote:Tom Butcher wrote:Of course there have been unwritten rules - otherwise why don't riders attack when a rival punctures ? Whether you like them or not is one thing but don't pretend they haven't been respected by the riders for years.
+1 there'll be attacks at feed zones at this rate as there's no unwritten rule saying you don't do it apparently.
Sky already tried that earlier this year - ask Roger Hammond.0 -
I know (well, they rode hard through it rather than attacking)- that post was originally going to say or riding hard when the race leader needs a pee.
This is why there's a need for unwritten rules and etiquette otherwise where does it end? People will take food from a team car before a feed then blitz off the front when everyone else is getting their mussette leaving the choice of chasing or getting some food.0 -
Sorry, is the TdF or a kid's birthday party? How many gifts does Schleck want FFS? They should have left his whiny skinny carcass by the roadside on stage 2 - then let's see whether he's in contention for any jersey, let alone the Yellow one.
His problem is he preferred to play silly beggars on stage 14 instead of trying to attack, knowing that all 3 men behind him are better in the TT. If Contador hadn't countered yesterday, Sanchez and Menchov would still have attacked and gained time and, if Schleck hadn't bothered to chase again his position on any of the 3 steps of the podium would be under threat his TT is so poor. Instead of faffing about doing track stands, he should have been applying himself to the serious task of winning the race. I can absolutely imaging Contador having had more than enough of Schleck's oh so clever 'poker game'0 -
If you want to know when sportsmanship went out of this race you only have to look at Saxo Bank attacking the yellow jersey on the cobbles after he'd punctured? Or does that not count as a mechanical? Or was it too early in the race? Or was Schleck already mentally in yellow so he couldn't attack himself? After the courtesy shown on stage 2 by all the teams - including Astana -to attack the yellow jersey and your biggest rival when held up by a crash is a blinding example of sportsmanship, right?
I'd be b*ggered if I'd sit back and give someone the gift of rewarding their own incompetence after he'd attacked my own genuine misfortune0 -
Yesterday's events only served to neutralise the advantage that Saxo were given on stage 2 - seems they have one rule for themselves and one rule for others. Schleck instigated yesterday's attack and then he makes a schoolboy error of jamming his gear. He only lost 12 seconds due to the mechanical, the remainder was down to his numbtie descending skills, which nicely brings us back to stage 2..Make mine an Italian, with Campagnolo on the side..0
-
-
Read the examples I gave in one of the other threads about who attacked when the main rival or the yellow jersey punctured.Pross wrote:
+1 there'll be attacks at feed zones at this rate as there's no unwritten rule saying you don't do it apparently.Tom Butcher wrote:Of course there have been unwritten rules - otherwise why don't riders attack when a rival punctures ?
Re feed zones, that's where Hinault attacked in 1984 when trying to grab the yellow jersey off Fignon.0 -
The F1 Championship leaders didn't slow down or stop when Vettel punctured at the British GP the other weekend...Earn Cashback @ Wiggle, CRC, Evans, AW Cycles, Alpine Bikes, ProBikeKit, Cycles UK :
http://www.topcashback.co.uk/ref/stewartmead0
