TdF 2016 Stage 12 *Contains spoilers*

above_the_cows

Niet goed.

DeVlaeminck

Having had a bit of time I reckon I'm going to switch from saying the results should have stood to saying the comms got it just about right. There is no good outcome but maybe this is the least worst.

bobmcstuff

Salsiccia1 wrote:

FocusZing wrote:

What's happened in Nice puts all this into perspective.

Yup

Christ.

stu227

Just watched some French footage on youtube - the French commentary is pretty telling - they're much more shocked than the ITV guys, and it's the most bizarre thing I remember seeing in 30 years of watching the tour on tv. The police were shambolic, the race organisers shambolic - what's the point of neutral service cars if the bikes don't fit and they don't have pedals that work?

onyourright

I am still not sure the UCI made the right decision here. It harms and helps in about equal measure.

More generally, it’s a farce that no-one knows what the outcome will be every time a slightly unusual thing happens on the course. A rule-book that has to be interpreted (or made up) by grandees is more banana republic than it is rule of law.

Froome, though, rode a great race.

Assuming Quintana isn’t sick, he must have been exhausted by 300-odd kilometres of battling the wind. If so, expect worse from him tomorrow.

The_Boy

RichN95 wrote:

I don't think anyone should have stopped. No-one really knew what was going on. You have to just get on with it and wait for the fallout.

Playing to the whistle as they say in sports where men chase a ball around a park.

Bo Duke

Rick Chasey wrote:

It's more when bad external sh!t happens my understanding is that they said 'yeah, it's bad luck'. It's part of the circus.

Merckx didn't get his time back when he got punched by a fan.

Neither did Flecha, neither did Giuseppe Gerini on the Alp.

Look, like I said, I don't mind the decision, but I get the other side.

Sheesh, you lot are defensive of your Froomedog!

The Tour needs (sadly) to adapt to the times, what happened in 25 years ago to Merckx is not an indicator of how matters should be handled today.

Today's scenes expose an inevitable signal that better crowd control is necessary along greater sections of key mountain course stages - not only were the riders shamelessly pinned to a tight single file route barely shoulder width wide, but Quintana had no hope of attacking or bridging across as he would have been equally caught and depending on which lead moto was doing a better job splitting the mob, the breakaway either lost or gained ground.

This cannot be allowed to happen again, these lads train all year for one race.... unruly mobs cannot be allowed to interfere with what is a very serious sport. Big Dave would not have been pleased.

I genuinely fear the situation at next Dutch corner once we're into the Alps in week 3.

Bo Duke

smithy21 wrote:

poppit wrote:

smithy21 wrote:

Above The Cows wrote:

I can't believe people booed Froome on the podium. What is wrong with people?

I don't get what your problem with this is. People boo sportsmen they don't like. It's not snooker or golf. It's a hard sort. I am sure he can take it

I think that some of us just don't like or comprehend that sort of behaviour.

Really. Tough old world out there sometimes. Maybe better for you to stay in your safe space.

You're a big boy, are you the Polish guy with the sign?

FocusZing

Sad to hear so many people lose loved ones.

Crampeur

Puts everything into perspective really.

The_Boy

Crampeur wrote:

Puts everything into perspective really.

Froome being booed?

Daz555

So so shocked. :-(

Bo Duke

This lad talks some sense: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPf8FJ2Vbbk

Bo Duke

Chris Froome's Tour de France crash will happen again unless crowds learn - or are forced - to behave

TOM CARY CYCLING CORRESPONDENT , MONT VENTOUX Tom Cary 14 JULY 2016 • 9:31PM

Brian Cookson called it last weekend. The president of the cycling’s world governing body the UCI implored Tour fans to behave themselves this year, warning them in an interview with The Sunday Telegraph that it would “not take much for something tragic to happen”. He was not wrong.

Thursday’s farcical, chaotic scenes – on what was supposed to be this year’s Queen Stage with the peloton tackling the iconic Mont Ventoux climb on Bastille Day – could not perhaps be bracketed as ‘tragic’. Ultimately, no one was badly hurt and a sensible decision was made to award Chris Froome the same time as one of the riders he had been with at the time of the accident, ensuring he kept hold of the yellow jersey and the general classification remained largely unaffected. But they could yet have tragic consequences for the sport.

Brian Cookson implored Tour fans to behave themselves last weekend
“The beauty of cycling,” Cookson said, “is its accessibility; we need to be careful we don't lose that. It's a great free show. But it does depend on all of us behaving appropriately when we're out there enjoying that free show. Do we want cycling to take place on motor racing circuits and everyone is watching from stands or behind barriers?”

Cookson may have been exaggerating with the motor racing circuit reference. But the threat to have fans watching from behind barriers, certainly on key climbs if not on the hundreds of kilometres leading up to them, is not beyond the realms of possibility. Nor is limiting the number of fans who are allowed up those climbs. Or policing the crowds to a far greater extent.

Froome was forced into running up Mont Ventoux after a crash in the closing few kilometres of Thursday's dramatic stage
Because this, as Cookson warned, was an accident waiting to happen. No, it was not the first time spectators have caused riders to crash, or come into contact with them. LottoNL-Jumbo’s George Bennett collided with one who stepped out into the road only the other day. Eddy Merckx was famously punched by one on the Puy De Dome. But this was on primetime television, at the Tour de France, on Bastille Day, and it involved the race leader. The pressure to act will be intense. Next time it could be worse. Froome or Richie Porte or Bauke Mollema might quite easily have broken a leg, or an arm, or a collarbone.

Something like this had been brewing. Consider the ingredients; the huge crowds that amass on these climbs, many of them fuelled by drinking after a long day in the sun, many of them in costumes, running alongside the riders and tripping up over themselves.

That is before you even consider the potential for more sinister acts of sabotage. Both Froome and his team principal Sir Dave Brailsford seemed happy to write this one off as an accident. But it would be no exaggeration to say that Team Sky – and Froome in particular – are unpopular in France. You only needed to hear the cheering and laughing from a section of French fans at the Team Sky bus or the booing of Froome on the podium to be reminded of the unpleasant atmosphere that prevailed at both of his previous wins in 2013 and 2015. And he was saying only on the rest day on Monday that he was happy not to have experienced any of that “silly nonsense” this year.

It is tempting to write off Thursday’s incident as unfortunate. The stage finish had been moved further down the mountain due to high winds (this, at least, was one decision the organisers got spot on judging by the upturned campervan which was seen near the summit) and the barriers had not been moved accordingly. They only began after the kilometre to go marker.

But the truth is it could have happened before and is likely to happen again, unless the crowds learn to behave – or they are forced to.

Moontrane

Froome running up Ventoux was quite a sight!

slim_boy_fat

Incredibly sad this morning.

smithy21

Rick Chasey wrote:

It's more when bad external sh!t happens my understanding is that they said 'yeah, it's bad luck'. It's part of the circus.

Merckx didn't get his time back when he got punched by a fan.

Neither did Flecha, neither did Giuseppe Gerini on the Alp.

Look, like I said, I don't mind the decision, but I get the other side.

Sheesh, you lot are defensive of your Froomedog!

I would be more upset if I was GVA. He would have won San Sebastián. There was no doubt there.

The fans thing is an interesting one as in the early part of the thread people were looking forward to "boar man" or whatever. Is he not one of the dicks that run alongside. So some people like the spectacle of the idiocy- it's only when something goes a bit wrong that the tune is changed.

Out of interest what do we think would have been the decision if a fan had directly caused the issue ie taken out a rider rather than indirectly caused a moto, which is part of the race organisation, to do so?

tailwindhome

mrb123

Once again the direction of the host broadcasters was completely amateurish. Why oh why do we have to endure so many shots of average French riders getting shelled out the back when all the action is up at the front. Furthermore, when all the drama was kicking off we were still having to watch the minor placings from the break trailing in rather than the real action.

above_the_cows

The thing about the rules is that they are purposely vaguely written because it is impossible to create policies for every possible scenario. So you create frameworks within which 'experts' are then able to use their discretion depending on the particulars of each case.

yourpaceormine

Gerrans out after his crash - collarbon. As my news on Stannard? He went down heavily.
Prudhomme says lack of barriers was due to high winds. Presumably too windy to move them from the top of Ventoux.
But all pales into insignificance compared to events in Nice.

FocusZing

DeVlaeminck

Above The Cows wrote:

The thing about the rules is that they are purposely vaguely written because it is impossible to create policies for every possible scenario. So you create frameworks within which 'experts' are then able to use their discretion depending on the particulars of each case.

Yes I think that is right. In this instance - stage race, close to the finish, Mollema getting to the finish with a gap so you could argue that is the Froome group - the circumstances allow for the commissaires to make what appears a fair adjustment to minimise the affect of the accident on the race.

In other races circumstances wont allow that kind of guesswork - what would have happened without the incident will be less predictable.

above_the_cows

DeVlaeminck wrote:

Above The Cows wrote:

The thing about the rules is that they are purposely vaguely written because it is impossible to create policies for every possible scenario. So you create frameworks within which 'experts' are then able to use their discretion depending on the particulars of each case.

Yes I think that is right. In this instance - stage race, close to the finish, Mollema getting to the finish with a gap so you could argue that is the Froome group - the circumstances allow for the commissaires to make what appears a fair adjustment to minimise the affect of the accident on the race.

In other races circumstances wont allow that kind of guesswork - what would have happened without the incident will be less predictable.

In my day job we call this 'governing the incalculable'.

Bo Duke

I'm a commercial arbitrator and Rulebooks are meant to be kept vague to allow parties to use common and commercial sense to achieve the most equitable outcome. If you legislate for everything you're committed to an outcome no matter the circumstances and degree of fault of each party, and circumstances. You need flexibility to arrive at the best solution.

No doubt about yesterday's stage, using the old adage 'but for' the action of the moto, the riders wouldn't have fallen nor lost time to Quintana. The ASO had a duty of care to correctly marshall the crowds, ensure the motos were not crunched together (4?) and held a reasonable distance fore and aft of the riders. ASO broke their breach of duty to the riders and teams and were found negligent, thus left wide open for 'further action' should a solution not be found at the enquiry at the end.

As we have discussed, yesterday's circumstances were fairly unique, shortening the course thus bunching the fans, too many motos on a narrow section of road compressing the crowd onto both motos and bikes. Does this absolve ASO from their responsibilities? No. They should have anticipated this and tried harder.

The outcome was a let off for ASO, Froome accepted it, Adam Yates was the epitome of sportsmanship and they were spared a law suit.

Moral of the story, leave the rulebook deliberately vague and use 'custom of the trade' and good old common sense.

mrb123

Bo Duke wrote:

I'm a commercial arbitrator and Rulebooks are meant to be kept vague to allow parties to use common and commercial sense to achieve the most equitable outcome. If you legislate for everything you're committed to an outcome no matter the circumstances and degree of fault of each party, and circumstances. You need flexibility to arrive at the best solution.

No doubt about yesterday's stage, using the old adage 'but for' the action of the moto, the riders wouldn't have fallen nor lost time to Quintana. The ASO had a duty of care to correctly marshall the crowds, ensure the motos were not crunched together (4?) and held a reasonable distance fore and aft of the riders. ASO broke their breach of duty to the riders and teams and were found negligent, thus left wide open for 'further action' should a solution not be found at the enquiry at the end.

As we have discussed, yesterday's circumstances were fairly unique, shortening the course thus bunching the fans, too many motos on a narrow section of road compressing the crowd onto both motos and bikes. Does this absolve ASO from their responsibilities? No. They should have anticipated this and tried harder.

The outcome was a let off for ASO, Froome accepted it, Adam Yates was the epitome of sportsmanship and they were spared a law suit.

Moral of the story, leave the rulebook deliberately vague and use 'custom of the trade' and good old common sense.

This^
It is impossible to legislate for every situation. Sometimes things can happen that no-one could ever predict (eg the Adam Yates flame rouge incident). The rules are there to provide a framework but ultimately there has to be discretion.

argyllflyer

When Froome stopped before the climbs, he seemed to be about to expose his gentlemen's collection for a comfort break but the camera cut away. The remainder of his team had gone down earlier, including him - wonder if he said to El Patron that he'd use the crash of teammates to get himself back up after relieving himself?

r0bh

Video has emerged from the aftermath of the Froome/Porte/Mollema moto crash that seems to show Quintana getting a tow from the Mavic neutral service moto. Thoughts?

https://twitter.com/assekevin/status/753720450551836673

jscl

r0bh wrote:

Video has emerged from the aftermath of the Froome/Porte/Mollema moto crash that seems to show Quintana getting a tow from the Mavic neutral service moto. Thoughts?

https://twitter.com/assekevin/status/753720450551836673

It is what it is.

He wasn't exactly being advantaged over the others in that finish and it was probably safer than just sitting in the draft of the bike. No different to Aru's fifty sticky bottles and bike changes earlier in the day.

kingstongraham

r0bh wrote:

Video has emerged from the aftermath of the Froome/Porte/Mollema moto crash that seems to show Quintana getting a tow from the Mavic neutral service moto. Thoughts?

https://twitter.com/assekevin/status/753720450551836673

He (and Valverde) already got given 7 seconds back to get them the same time as the Yates group, so doesn't make any difference.