what happened to sportsmanship ?

Rodrego Hernandez

If the race is full on there should be no expectation for anyone to stop apart from your own team mates. This is pro bike racing, teams go into stages with game plans and tactics. Stephen Roche agreed that Contador shouldn't have stopped as will most pros. Even thinking that Contador should have stopped is just ridiculous.

mercsport

Bugly wrote:

Ok I am a babyboomer - to me what AC did was wrong - but then I am a dinosaur. Wonder if its mostly GenYs that support the win at all costs and bugger the sportsmanship?

I'm a dinosaur and a believer in the Corinthian spirit as it was, but for the life of me I cannot see that Contador was wrong in any particular. I thought the booing of AC on the podium was brainless and regrettable.

I watch the ITV4 highlights and know what Phil and Paul's opinions on the incident are -Phil pro Contador, Paul anti Contador (I don't know why but my impression is that Paul seems to have an issue with AC and doesn't like the fellow at all). I'd be interested to know what Harmon and Kelly's thoughts were about it all on EuroSport.

Aside from all that, it's been the best TDF for as long as I can remember. Hope there's some drama on the Tourmalet tomorrow and AC isn't sucking Schleck's wheel all day.

Buckled_Rims

Bugly wrote:

Ok I am a babyboomer - to me what AC did was wrong - but then I am a dinosaur. Wonder if its mostly GenYs that support the win at all costs and bugger the sportsmanship?

So, please explain exactly why Contador should have stopped? Was Schlecks life is dire danger? Did he ride past a badly injured rider? No, be followed an attack that failed because Schleck couldn't find the right gear.

If you really want a totally fair and gentlemanly sport of cycling, lets ban ALL frame makers apart from 1 genenic frame, everyone use Shimano, all use mavic wheels, same tyres etc. Have everyone on the same type of bike....Now see how boring being a gentleman is

pedro118118

Andy Schleck did NOT have a mechanical.
Therefore, Contador was perfectly free to respond to the attack and counter if the opportunity arose.

Very simple really.

micron

This unwritten rule about' not attacking the MJ' - does that also apply to stage 3 when Saxo (headed by les freres Schleck) drove the peloton away when Chavanel, the Yellow Jersey, punctured? Or was that acceptable because:
a) he's French
b) it was early in the race
c) well we all know he wasn't going to be wearing it in Paris
d) a puncture isn't a mechanical
e) it was on the cobbles so it's fair game
If anyone destroyed the 'unwritten rule' in this race it was Saxobank.

Schleck profited hugely from that other unwritten rule that, after a serious crash containing the race favourites, there's a regroupment. Contador and the rest of the peloton obeyed that particular rule - wonder what would have happened if, like Armstrong in 99, they had simply ignored it and driven away?

ellieb

Interesting that Contador has now apologised. Even he realizes that he was unsporting

rick_chasey

From the interviews from the peleton I've heard, the consensus seems to be that maybe Contador should have stopped, maybe not, but he shouldn't lie about the fact he didn't see it because he clearly must have.

RichN95.

micron wrote:

This unwritten rule about' not attacking the MJ' - does that also apply to stage 3 when Saxo (headed by les freres Schleck) drove the peloton away when Chavanel, the Yellow Jersey, punctured? Or was that acceptable because:
a) he's French
b) it was early in the race
c) well we all know he wasn't going to be wearing it in Paris
d) a puncture isn't a mechanical
e) it was on the cobbles so it's fair game
If anyone destroyed the 'unwritten rule' in this race it was Saxobank.

The real reason is:

f) Chavanel is in French Fighter's signature line. It would be wrong not to attack him.

ellieb

e) it was on the cobbles so it's fair game

this one

greasedscotsman

RichN95 wrote:

micron wrote:

This unwritten rule about' not attacking the MJ' - does that also apply to stage 3 when Saxo (headed by les freres Schleck) drove the peloton away when Chavanel, the Yellow Jersey, punctured? Or was that acceptable because:
a) he's French
b) it was early in the race
c) well we all know he wasn't going to be wearing it in Paris
d) a puncture isn't a mechanical
e) it was on the cobbles so it's fair game
If anyone destroyed the 'unwritten rule' in this race it was Saxobank.

The real reason is:

f) Chavanel is in French Fighter's signature line. It would be wrong not to attack him.

Did I read somewhere that FF has gone to the Pyrenees to watch the race? Maybe this thread should be neutralised until his return so he can defend his hero.

micron

So it's fair game if you have a puncture on the cobbles but not if you botch a shift in the mountains - the application of this unwritten rule is really confusing isn't it? Imagine having to make all those decisions in a split second

So it would be fair to say: 'this rule applies when my favourite rider is in the MJ and has had a self induced problem but does not apply if I couldn't care less about the rider or his circumstances'? Just trying to get it straight...

Having followed the sport for a good long while, and definitely not being a Gen Y'er, I've seen this 'unwritten rule' broken time and again - I think the only rider who made a big deal of it was Armstrong because it suited him to do so. I recall most pros at the time saying that Ullrich was stupid to have thrown away a race winning chance at Luz Ardiden. Instead Armstrong attacked and won the stage - not terribly sporting was it? Shouldn't he have respected Ullrich's sportsmanship and rode tempo with him to the finish? But then where does it end? With every stage an endless procession and nobody attacking anybody under any circumstances?

ratsbeyfus

greasedscotsman wrote:

Did I read somewhere that FF has gone to the Pyrenees to watch the race? Maybe this thread should be neutralised until his return so he can defend his hero.

It's true... here's a photo of Frenchy trying to get Contodor's autograph:

secretsqirrel

Kléber wrote:

Should Vino and Evans have waited when Basso slipped on the muddy roads in the epic Strade Bianche stage of the Giro? Should Paris-Roubaix have a safety car to neutralise the race each time someone drops a chain, punctures or slides? Should the prologue times be handicapped because some had to ride in the rain?

Looks to me like Andy Schleck made the schoolboy error of attacking with the chain on the inner ring at the front and the smallest sprocket on the back. As any MTB rider knows, it's bonjour chainsuck time.

Just for the record Vino and Scarponi tried to neuralise any advantage gained form that incident. Gerdeman, amongst others, de-neutralised it by overtaking the Vino/Scarponi group.

Otherwise I agree. I have mulled over this for a couple of days, a luxury Contador didn't have in the heat of the moment. Although waiting would have been a 'nice touch', and a gesture of goodwill, I'm afraid Andy's strop put me off, as he obviously expected what should be a privilege.

Anyway, if Contador had waited and then lost the tour by a small margin, then people like me would complain that he had no killer instinct, and had wasted all Astana's hard work! :evil:

Rodrego Hernandez

pedro118118 wrote:

Andy Schleck did NOT have a mechanical.
Therefore, Contador was perfectly free to respond to the attack and counter if the opportunity arose.

Very simple really.

Not sure what else you would call a mechanical mis-hap!

Just saw someones Twitter saying that Contador is waiting for Shleck to go to sleep on the rest day before he does so as not to be accused of being un-sportsmanlike!

micron

Liked this quote from Cuddles "If we waited every time something went wrong, we'd still be at stage 3 by now, waiting for someone to adjust their underpants,"

deejay

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.

I've been thinking (what the thick scotsman hates, hurrah) and I remember. ! (ok a bit of research now as I wouldn't want to get it wrong)

Anyone else remember 1990 TDF - Stage 18 and the road to Pau and near the top of the Col d'Aubisque and that long run to the finish. (oh goody you saw it yesterday)

Delgado launches an attack and Lemond punctures before the top. He is not in yellow yet but pretty certain to win by Paris.
The whole of the contenders set about putting time into him.
Why do I remember, well that figure of Duclos-Lassalle "Z Team" having to hang around for about 10 mins after being pulled out of the break of the day because of the Panic in his team.
He watches as the big group of contenders go by and another minute or so before his team arrive. He wasn't needed because they were catching the peloton anyway.

Greg's interview at the end was "I was lucky the team were able to get me back in touch)
There was no whinging or complaints from anybody but because of circumstances involving armstrong in recent years (who everybody was afraid off ) you think that applies to all incidents.
A spectators bag or any other outside incident will hopefully get respect from the other riders but a bike failure brought on by oneself is fair game I think.

Edit The only reason Andy came unstuck was that his brother wasn't there and Saxo had no other rider good enough to be there.
They were all used on the climb.

rockmount

pedro118118 wrote:

Andy Schleck did NOT have a mechanical.

DID TOO !!
Every time little bertie looks at the winner's trophy he'll hear the booooos of the crowd !

deejay

rockmount wrote:

pedro118118 wrote:

Andy Schleck did NOT have a mechanical.

DID TOO !!
Every time little bertie looks at the winner's trophy he'll hear the booooos of the crowd !

Chip off the old block and the training he got at disco to get used to the booooos of the crowd.

blazing_saddles

rockmount wrote:

pedro118118 wrote:

Andy Schleck did NOT have a mechanical.

DID TOO !!
Every time little bertie looks at the winner's trophy he'll hear the booooos of the crowd !

A least he will be looking at a trophy, not down the barrel of a federal gun.

It's all change at the top, with the Armstrong fanboys set to spend the next decade as haters and the haters as the smug, but defensive, "drafted" Contador fanboys.

Still, the new hater's material will be pretty thin. One mechanical, versus BB's list of doping charges and accusations, plus a federal indictment in the USPS. :P

RichN95.

Blazing Saddles wrote:

A least he will be looking at a trophy, not down the barrel of a federal gun.

It's all change at the top, with the Armstrong fanboys set to spend the next decade as haters and the haters as the smug, but defensive, "drafted" Contador fanboys.

Still, the new hater's material will be pretty thin. One mechanical, versus BB's list of doping charges and accusations, plus a federal indictment in the USPS. :P

That picture of a scrap of paper will become the new BB graph.

mercsport

rockmount wrote:

pedro118118 wrote:

Andy Schleck did NOT have a mechanical.

DID TOO !!
Every time little bertie looks at the winner's trophy he'll hear the booooos of the crowd !

Schleck as good as leant down and lifted the chain off his chainwheel with both hands because of his crummy cog swapping. There was no mechanical defect only a mental defect. :roll: He carried on racing with no repair having been made to his bike and with no further problems, other than nursing a massive dent to his ego.

micron

I remember that Deejay - there are plenty of instances of the MJ being attacked when in trouble.

Knedlicky says it best on another thread

All this stuff about ‘noble tradition of not taking advantage of another's misfortune’, ‘big No No to attack the Yellow Jersey when the rider has a crash or mechanical’, ‘unwritten rule in the peloton that you did not capitalise on someone else's crash or mechanical’, “etiquette’, etc, is nonsense.
It’s a race and all competitors have to take it how it comes, including rivals taking advantage when they can.

It’s wrong to say ‘the players of TDF used to have a gamesmanship not found in other sports’, this approach never really existed in past decades, at least to the extent that some people now believe.
Merckx didn’t wait for Ocana when he punctured, Thevenet for Merckx when he was attacked by a spectator, Zoetemelk for Hinault when he punctured, Roche for Bernard when he punctured, Chiappucci for Lemond when he punctured, etc.

The idea of waiting only really took over during the Armstrong years, when on the one hand LA almost demanded it from others or, in order to appear magnanimous, granted it to certain others (but only in hypocritical fashion, i.e. not to all rivals), while on the other hand the media played up this notion to suggest the sport still had some ideals despite doping scandals

Those who should know best, ex-riders Hinault, Bernard, Jalabert and Bruyneel, have all stated what Contador did is quite legitimate.
One of them also pointed out that if people expected Contador to wait, where do you draw the line, because Menchov and Sanchez would have heard through their earpieces what had happened.

redddraggon

I liked Vroomen's article on the subject, and I pretty much agree:

http://www.cervelo.com/en_us/news-blog/ ... ws_id=2418

rockmount

Blazing Saddles wrote:

rockmount wrote:

pedro118118 wrote:

Andy Schleck did NOT have a mechanical.

DID TOO !!
Every time little bertie looks at the winner's trophy he'll hear the booooos of the crowd !

A least he will be looking at a trophy, not down the barrel of a federal gun.

It's all change at the top, with the Armstrong fanboys set to spend the next decade as haters and the haters as the smug, but defensive, "drafted" Contador fanboys.

Still, the new hater's material will be pretty thin. One mechanical, versus BB's list of doping charges and accusations, plus a federal indictment in the USPS. :P

As usual the biggest LA fanette wants to make it all about Lance !

moray_gub

Blazing Saddles wrote:

rockmount wrote:

pedro118118 wrote:

Andy Schleck did NOT have a mechanical.

DID TOO !!
Every time little bertie looks at the winner's trophy he'll hear the booooos of the crowd !

A least he will be looking at a trophy, not down the barrel of a federal gun.

It's all change at the top, with the Armstrong fanboys set to spend the next decade as haters and the haters as the smug, but defensive, "drafted" Contador fanboys.

Still, the new hater's material will be pretty thin. One mechanical, versus BB's list of doping charges and accusations, plus a federal indictment in the USPS. :P

What category do you come into then Victor Meldrew ?

Buckled_Rims

Rick Chasey wrote:

.... but he shouldn't lie about the fact he didn't see it because he clearly must have.

So if it took Schleck 4 seconds to realise his chain was off, how come you think Contadore is a liar?

Please provide the evidence before you accuse him of being a liar. I think that's only fair, don't you?

rick_chasey

Buckled_Rims wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

.... but he shouldn't lie about the fact he didn't see it because he clearly must have.

So if it took Schleck 4 seconds to realise his chain was off, how come you think Contadore is a liar?

Please provide the evidence before you accuse him of being a liar. I think that's only fair, don't you?

Please don't take half quotes out of context to get arsey.

The entire quote again.

Rick Chasey wrote:

From the interviews from the peloton I've heard, the consensus seems to be that maybe Contador should have stopped, maybe not, but he shouldn't lie about the fact he didn't see it because he clearly must have.

SpaceJunk

Rick Chasey wrote:

Buckled_Rims wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

.... but he shouldn't lie about the fact he didn't see it because he clearly must have.

So if it took Schleck 4 seconds to realise his chain was off, how come you think Contadore is a liar?

Please provide the evidence before you accuse him of being a liar. I think that's only fair, don't you?

Please don't take half quotes out of context to get arsey.

The entire quote again.

Rick Chasey wrote:

From the interviews from the peloton I've heard, the consensus seems to be that maybe Contador should have stopped, maybe not, but he shouldn't lie about the fact he didn't see it because he clearly must have.

Actually Rick, without inflaming the situation anymore, you entire quote could be interpreted as:

'From the interviews ...... etc' being you've listened and heard interviews from the peloton. However, from the point of 'but he shouldn't lie ...... etc' as being a new thought in the sentence, one that you've provided yourself, based on what you have gleaned from the interviews.

rick_chasey

SpaceJunk wrote:

Actually Rick, without inflaming the situation anymore, you entire quote could be interpreted as:

'From the interviews ...... etc' being you've listened and heard interviews from the peloton. However, from the point of 'but he shouldn't lie ...... etc' as being a new thought in the sentence, one that you've provided yourself, based on what you have gleaned from the interviews.

No. That is part of the consensus given in the interviews.

Hence it being part of the same sentance.

carrock

cyclingtaz wrote:

as the title says really after todays stage it looks like its non existent in sport now

Yes but they're cheating bloody foreigners

If they were English, Contador would have stopped, gave Schleck a cucumber sandwich and a drink of Lemonade, fixed his chain for him, and spent the next half hour deciding who would go first...." after you old chap " " No after you...." etc.