Giro Stage 10 - spoilers

1…1213151718…20

Comments

  • epc06
    epc06 Posts: 216
    frenchfighter wrote:
    Dolan Driver wrote:
    Please tell us definitively where you stand on Contador removing his helmet mid-race on last Sunday's stage. Should he have been disqualified as the rule states or not?

    Did it give him a time advantage like Porte's infraction did?
    Has anyone been thrown off the race for removing their helment momentarily?
    Is the rule about not putting your helmet back on? Ie/. riding without a helmet?
    Was video evidence thrown around immediately after the event that the Giro organizers did not act on?

    Ask yourselves these questions.

    If Porte had been Contador yesterday, would my position be any different? No.

    Would there be 15 pages of outrage..No
  • TheBigBean
    TheBigBean Posts: 21,541
    frenchfighter wrote:
    Screen%2BShot%2B2015-05-20%2Bat%2B06.52.58.png

    Porte should be lucky he didn't get a penalty for this. They clearly could have. Looks like the jury turned a blind eye to it. Odd really when I thought the Italians were out to get the no Italian riders.


    I think Porte deliberately dropped the wheel so he wouldn't be accused of drafting a team car. As I said at that the time, I would have expected a time penalty if had failed to do this. Smart riding ruined by his less smart (with hindsight) wheel change.
  • frenchfighter
    frenchfighter Posts: 30,642
    ^^You tell me why there are 15 pages of outrage? Because he is English speaking?
    Contador is the Greatest
  • joelsim
    joelsim Posts: 7,552
    frenchfighter wrote:
    ^^You tell me why there are 15 pages of outrage? Because he is English speaking?

    No, because cycling has an unwritten code of fair play and riders looking out for each other. It has nothing to do with him being English speaking. He is an Aussie, that is no different than him being a Spaniard.
  • frenchfighter
    frenchfighter Posts: 30,642
    adr82 wrote:
    Maybe he saved himself a whole 5 or 10 seconds from the OGE wheel change

    Really? As far as we are led to believe, he was on the other side of a roundabout by himself. So it would have taken time for his teammates to know he was dropped, turn around and cycle back to him (if this is even allowed), then give him his wheel. Or wait for the teamcar.

    Both scenarios are significant amounts of time lost.
    Contador is the Greatest
  • frenchfighter
    frenchfighter Posts: 30,642
    Joelsim wrote:
    frenchfighter wrote:
    ^^You tell me why there are 15 pages of outrage? Because he is English speaking?

    No, because cycling has an unwritten code of fair play and riders looking out for each other. It has nothing to do with him being English speaking. He is an Aussie, that is no different than him being a Spaniard.

    So we would see similar outrage if it were Contador? SOLD; both hands.
    Contador is the Greatest
  • k1875
    k1875 Posts: 485
    frenchfighter wrote:
    ^^You tell me why there are 15 pages of outrage? Because he is English speaking?

    If it had happened to contador you'd have managed 15 pages of outrage all by yourself and plenty of others would have agreed with you, so i imagine the thread would be longer still.
  • TheBigBean
    TheBigBean Posts: 21,541
    FWIW I'm a rules are rules person who would disqualify the P-R riders for riding on the pavement. The only issue here is that that doesn't happen - the outrage should appear in all the classics' spoiler threads rather than here.

    Making a comparison to a helmet change is a bit weak.

    Sticky bottles, urinating in public etc. are routinely punished with fines. It is important for the organisers to have the flexibility to vary the punishment for different offences, so that it is a deterrent to all riders. Cavendish is not going to worry about a 2 min penalty or a small fine, but a points deduction would hurt. A small low budget team will be more concerned with the fine than points or time.
  • joelsim
    joelsim Posts: 7,552
    frenchfighter wrote:
    Joelsim wrote:
    frenchfighter wrote:
    ^^You tell me why there are 15 pages of outrage? Because he is English speaking?

    No, because cycling has an unwritten code of fair play and riders looking out for each other. It has nothing to do with him being English speaking. He is an Aussie, that is no different than him being a Spaniard.

    So we would see similar outrage if it were Contador? SOLD; both hands.

    Unsold. I would have had exactly the same thoughts on it. It's not about the riders involved, it's about a sense of fair play, something which is quite apparent in cycling unlike in football etc.

    (Frenchie, one of my big rivals in my very competitive UCI game has Porte. I have Caruso and Formolo so I gain... but I would rather see Porte not lose that time).
  • Macaloon
    Macaloon Posts: 5,545
    frenchfighter wrote:
    adr82 wrote:
    Maybe he saved himself a whole 5 or 10 seconds from the OGE wheel change

    Really? As far as we are led to believe, he was on the other side of a roundabout by himself. So it would have taken time for his teammates to know he was dropped, turn around and cycle back to him (if this is even allowed), then give him his wheel. Or wait for the teamcar.

    Both scenarios are significant amounts of time lost.

    Come off it. You've seen this image of a Sky rider beside Porte. Clarke's wheel saved 15s, max? Two mins is a ridiculous sport destroying penalty.
    CFYheuiW8AAcP-S.jpg
    ...a rare 100% loyal Pro Race poster. A poster boy for the community.
  • manic_esso
    manic_esso Posts: 92
    I don't know why everyone's getting so upset

    “It doesn’t change anything,” Contador said when asked by an Italian journalist if he considered Aru his top rival following Porte’s puncture and as if to underline the point, he repeated, “it doesn’t change anything.”
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,241
    edited May 2015
    manic_esso wrote:
    I don't know why everyone's getting so upset

    “It doesn’t change anything,” Contador said when asked by an Italian journalist if he considered Aru his top rival following Porte’s puncture and as if to underline the point, he repeated, “it doesn’t change anything.”
    But that's quite clearly nonsense. (Although I think it was said before the penalty, in which case it was less nonsense, but still wrong).
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • frenchfighter
    frenchfighter Posts: 30,642
    Joelsim wrote:
    I would have had exactly the same thoughts on it

    Speak for yourself.
    Joelsim wrote:
    I would rather see Porte not lose that time

    Likewise.
    Contador is the Greatest
  • crooky13
    crooky13 Posts: 5
    Just to note that whilst everyone is arguing about 'strict interpretation'…it might help if you were all arguing about the interpretation of the provisions in the correct language. As I understand it, the French version of the rules prevail over the English version for the Part 2 and Part 12 provisions. My French is pretty agricultural but in French 2.3.012 seems to cover all wheels (‘roues’) and the relevant provision in 12 is still ambiguous but would seem to imply the helmet would have to be removed/taken away rather than just taken off (‘coureur enlevant le casque’)
  • ddraver
    ddraver Posts: 26,660
    Joelsim wrote:
    sjmclean wrote:
    frenchfighter wrote:

    If Porte had been Contador yesterday, would my position be any different? No.

    Lol.

    Mega lols.
    hyde-laughing-o.gif
    We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
    - @ddraver
  • BenderRodriguez
    BenderRodriguez Posts: 907
    I see that Brailsford is arguing that the 'spirit' of the rules should be followed, not what they actually say. I wonder, how does trialling the use of 'within the letter of the law' doping products such as Tramadol fit in with this 'abiding by the spirit of the rules' thing? :lol:
    "an original thinker… the intellectual heir of Galileo and Einstein… suspicious of orthodoxy - any orthodoxy… He relishes all forms of ontological argument": jane90.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    crooky13 wrote:
    Just to note that whilst everyone is arguing about 'strict interpretation'…it might help if you were all arguing about the interpretation of the provisions in the correct language. As I understand it, the French version of the rules prevail over the English version for the Part 2 and Part 12 provisions. My French is pretty agricultural but in French 2.3.012 seems to cover all wheels (‘roues’) and the relevant provision in 12 is still ambiguous but would seem to imply the helmet would have to be removed/taken away rather than just taken off (‘coureur enlevant le casque’)

    Isn't unreasonable to assume an international governing body has a fairly good translation from French to English and that the English one can be used in the same way as the French.
    _
  • fleshtuxedo
    fleshtuxedo Posts: 1,857
    frenchfighter wrote:
    ^^You tell me why there are 15 pages of outrage? Because he is English speaking?

    No because we want to see a good race with 3 riders with a fair chance at winning it, not a classic hometown stitch up in the finest tradition of the sport.

    You're stoking the outrage as best you can, keep going maybe you'll get it up to 30 pages. Comments like 'you're all big babies who've lost their dummies' is just gutter trolling.
  • fleshtuxedo
    fleshtuxedo Posts: 1,857
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    crooky13 wrote:
    Just to note that whilst everyone is arguing about 'strict interpretation'…it might help if you were all arguing about the interpretation of the provisions in the correct language. As I understand it, the French version of the rules prevail over the English version for the Part 2 and Part 12 provisions. My French is pretty agricultural but in French 2.3.012 seems to cover all wheels (‘roues’) and the relevant provision in 12 is still ambiguous but would seem to imply the helmet would have to be removed/taken away rather than just taken off (‘coureur enlevant le casque’)

    Isn't unreasonable to assume an international governing body has a fairly good translation from French to English.

    Quite. I could find a dozen loopholes in that one rule in half an hour, and I'm hardly a legal mastermind. The UCI could put someone on it for a month and come up with dramatically improved rules. So why don't they? Shambles. As if cycling doesn't have enough other issues to deal with.
  • Squaggles
    Squaggles Posts: 875
    2 Minutes for that is very harsh , 30 seconds would be a more reasonable time penalty

    Richie Porte seems to have the right attitude about it though , I wasn't too bothered about who won the race but I'd actually like to see him win it now
    The UCI are Clowns and Fools
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,241
    frenchfighter wrote:
    ^^You tell me why there are 15 pages of outrage? Because he is English speaking?
    When Contador beats Aru comfortably in the TT and then follows his wheel all the way to Milan remember that this penalty is what killed the race.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • Coriander
    Coriander Posts: 1,326
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    crooky13 wrote:
    Just to note that whilst everyone is arguing about 'strict interpretation'…it might help if you were all arguing about the interpretation of the provisions in the correct language. As I understand it, the French version of the rules prevail over the English version for the Part 2 and Part 12 provisions. My French is pretty agricultural but in French 2.3.012 seems to cover all wheels (‘roues’) and the relevant provision in 12 is still ambiguous but would seem to imply the helmet would have to be removed/taken away rather than just taken off (‘coureur enlevant le casque’)

    Isn't unreasonable to assume an international governing body has a fairly good translation from French to English and that the English one can be used in the same way as the French.

    No, it's precisely because translation is not and never can be an exact science that all the international bodies I've worked with have an official version of documents, even if that official document is then translated into other languages by the organisation. It can be a bit ridiculous: I used to work with the Universal Postal Union, whose official language was French. We'd send in papers, they'd be translated into French, which became the official version, and would then be translated into other languages, including English. The version we received back never looked anything like the version we'd originally submitted.
  • frenchfighter
    frenchfighter Posts: 30,642
    RichN95 wrote:
    frenchfighter wrote:
    ^^You tell me why there are 15 pages of outrage? Because he is English speaking?
    When Contador beats Aru comfortably in the TT and then follows his wheel all the way to Milan remember that this penalty is what killed the race.

    I disagree.

    You could even make the excuse that this could have made the race more exciting. ie/. Porte will now have to race aggressively rather than the totally boring and un-fan friendly way he races. His team will have to be inventive. They might change focus and go for stage wins. It might get very interesting. Sky gave a decent amount of viewing pleasure last Giro.
    Contador is the Greatest
  • fleshtuxedo
    fleshtuxedo Posts: 1,857
    Coriander wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    crooky13 wrote:
    Just to note that whilst everyone is arguing about 'strict interpretation'…it might help if you were all arguing about the interpretation of the provisions in the correct language. As I understand it, the French version of the rules prevail over the English version for the Part 2 and Part 12 provisions. My French is pretty agricultural but in French 2.3.012 seems to cover all wheels (‘roues’) and the relevant provision in 12 is still ambiguous but would seem to imply the helmet would have to be removed/taken away rather than just taken off (‘coureur enlevant le casque’)

    Isn't unreasonable to assume an international governing body has a fairly good translation from French to English and that the English one can be used in the same way as the French.

    No, it's precisely because translation is not and never can be an exact science that all the international bodies I've worked with have an official version of documents, even if that official document is then translated into other languages by the organisation. It can be a bit ridiculous: I used to work with the Universal Postal Union, whose official language was French. We'd send in papers, they'd be translated into French, which became the official version, and would then be translated into other languages, including English. The version we received back never looked anything like the version we'd originally submitted.

    This sounds like overthinking it. Apparently the French rules cover wheel changes, the English version does not. That's a worse situation than the ambiguities of translation isn't it?
  • fleshtuxedo
    fleshtuxedo Posts: 1,857
    edited May 2015
    frenchfighter wrote:
    RichN95 wrote:
    frenchfighter wrote:
    ^^You tell me why there are 15 pages of outrage? Because he is English speaking?
    When Contador beats Aru comfortably in the TT and then follows his wheel all the way to Milan remember that this penalty is what killed the race.

    I disagree.

    You could even make the excuse that this could have made the race more exciting. ie/. Porte will now have to race aggressively rather than the totally boring and un-fan friendly way he races. His team will have to be inventive. They might change focus and go for stage wins. It might get very interesting. Sky gave a decent amount of viewing pleasure last Giro.

    How kind of the organisers to improve the race for us by hitting one of the protagonists with an unfair and disproportionate penalty like this!
  • Macaloon
    Macaloon Posts: 5,545
    frenchfighter wrote:
    I disagree.

    You could even make the excuse that this could have made the race more exciting. ie/. Porte will now have to race aggressively rather than the totally boring and un-fan friendly way he races. His team will have to be inventive. They might change focus and go for stage wins. It might get very interesting. Sky gave a decent amount of viewing pleasure last Giro.

    I disagree. Porte's been very aggressive all season. Paris-Nice:
    WATSON_00004119-020.jpg
    ...a rare 100% loyal Pro Race poster. A poster boy for the community.
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,241
    frenchfighter wrote:
    You could even make the excuse that this could have made the race more exciting. ie/. Porte will now have to race aggressively rather than the totally boring and un-fan friendly way he races. His team will have to be inventive. They might change focus and go for stage wins. It might get very interesting. Sky gave a decent amount of viewing pleasure last Giro.
    Porte has won the queen stage of every stage race he's done this season (except one where he was second).

    Let's see how fan friendly Contador is in week three. My guess is he'll win this Giro without ever once attacking.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • above_the_cows
    above_the_cows Posts: 11,406
    inseine wrote:
    “Donnez-moi votre bicyclette?” Incredibly, the Belgian obliged.

    How fabulous!
    Correlation is not causation.
  • above_the_cows
    above_the_cows Posts: 11,406
    Macaloon wrote:
    Above The Cows wrote:
    Macaloon wrote:
    It shouldn't be forgotten that a well-drilled team, one that sleeps together, has nominated bodyguards for their GC leader in the final, ensuring a team wheel is available for punctures. Why did Sky fail at this basic procedure?

    Richie can answer you that:

    "I picked up a front wheel puncture as we were going around a roundabout. I'd gone around it on the left but my team-mates went around the other side. I stopped, and by the time the guys had got back to me Simon (Clarke from Orica GreenEdge) had already stopped and offered me his wheel."

    That was daft. But a 45s deficit is punishment enough for a schoolboy error. Great attitude from Porte in that interview considering he's had the potential for a life-changing win crushed by a Kafkaesque judiciary.

    Absolutely. Nice avatar by the way. I was thinking of finding a fitting quote from 'The Trial' to sum up this situation but that book is just too damn depressing for me and I couldn't face venturing into it last night.
    Correlation is not causation.
  • Ashbeck
    Ashbeck Posts: 235
    frenchfighter wrote:
    Joelsim wrote:
    frenchfighter wrote:
    ^^You tell me why there are 15 pages of outrage? Because he is English speaking?

    No, because cycling has an unwritten code of fair play and riders looking out for each other. It has nothing to do with him being English speaking. He is an Aussie, that is no different than him being a Spaniard.

    So we would see similar outrage if it were Contador? SOLD; both hands.


    You keep banging on with this card FF but, as you pointed out in another post, life ain't like that and you need to look at some facts.
    This is an English speaking forum
    On an English website.
    The majority of which will support English or English speaking riders.

    As you also said on another post. If you don't like it, then I don't care. F*ck off to a non-English speaking, non-English fan waving forum that speak Italian/French/Spainsh, who's members do think this is fair on Porte.

    You have options too. No one forces you to speak here son. Just because you shout the loudest, doesn't make you right.

Categories