TdF 2016 Stage 12 *Contains spoilers*

graeme_s-2

Slim Boy Fat wrote:

Another view of events here.

https://twitter.com/11uisagusti/status/ ... 6815314944

There's that prick from Poland again. ClearIy has no interest in the race, only interested in just running in front of the camera bike with his placard. WTF do people like him bother going for. Complete 'tard.

Richie Porte looks like he's smiling even while he's remounting his hastily repaired bike half way up Ventoux having just had a GC damaging crash with a race moto. His face just seems to be permanently fixed in a grin. I'm starting to find it unsettling.

smithy21

KingstonGraham wrote:

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.

:?

adr82

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

That needs some official sanction IMO (as do Aru's shenanigans), whatever fine/time penalty the rules already set out. Don't care if he wasn't going very fast, you're still saving energy by getting a tow up the hill. You just shouldn't do that, full stop.

KingstonGraham wrote:

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.

Well it does show that he was struggling badly enough that he thought he needed to risk taking a tow, and then still got dropped in the remaining few hundred metres...

emadden

keydon wrote:

emadden wrote:

UCI Rule: 1.2.109: you can cross the finish line on foot as long as you have your bike with you

EDIT: not sure if there is a rule that states that the course must only be covered by bike... still looking

How could there be if you can cross the line on foot?

Here it is, RULE 14 of UCI Regulations:

"14.
Wilful deviation from the course, attempt to be placed without having covered the entire course by bicycle, resuming the race after having accepted a lift in a vehicle or on a motorbike..."

http://www.uci.ch/mm/Document/News/Rulesandregulation/16/26/68/12-DIS-20160101-E_English.pdf

graeme_s-2

Maybe Quintana can claim that the bike had just stopped suddenly in front of him and he'd put his hand out so he didn't run into the back of it and crash?

k-dog

FocusZing wrote:

He's lucky it wasn't his leg the bike ran over. Could have been a lot worse.

hypster

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

Looks to me like he was just trying to get a wheel to help Froome.

blazing_saddles

KingstonGraham wrote:

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.

Eh?
Handed a 7 second bonus AND gets a tow from the motorbike.
Certainly makes a big difference and this time the rules are clear.

Still, I hope it gets swept under the carpet, due to the ludicrous circumstances, yesterday.

Frank Wilson

argyllflyer wrote:

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?

Must admit the cynic in me wonders whether Froome / Sky would have backed the peleton up the way Quintana / Moviestar did if the roles had been reversed.

above_the_cows

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

The language is very fruity! :shock:

No but seriously, I actually think he was doing that to stay safe. There were riders all over the road — a running Froome and his broken bike, Richie getting a new wheel — fans all over the road, cars and motos everywhere, there was no 'clear' line and it isn't easy to wiggle and weave in those conditions (he's also little and can't see well over the motos) so just used the moto as a shield. I would have done the same thing I think.

adr82

Frank Wilson wrote:

argyllflyer wrote:

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?

Must admit the cynic in me wonders whether Froome / Sky would have backed the peloton up the way Quintana / Moviestar did if the roles had been reversed.

Froome asked them to slow it down before he stopped, they didn't just decide to do it all by themselves. I think it allowed an extra couple of their teammates to catch up with that second bunch so it was partly in their own interest too.

larkim

emadden wrote:

keydon wrote:

emadden wrote:

UCI Rule: 1.2.109: you can cross the finish line on foot as long as you have your bike with you

EDIT: not sure if there is a rule that states that the course must only be covered by bike... still looking

How could there be if you can cross the line on foot?

Here it is, RULE 14 of UCI Regulations:

"14.
Wilful deviation from the course, attempt to be placed without having covered the entire course by bicycle, resuming the race after having accepted a lift in a vehicle or on a motorbike..."

http://www.uci.ch/mm/Document/News/Rulesandregulation/16/26/68/12-DIS-20160101-E_English.pdf

Is anyone seriously concerned that the rules don't allow someone to take a few strides forwards on foot in cleats such that it needs including in the rules? Running almost by definition is slower than cycling. That'd be like disqualifying someone from a marathon because they walked a little bit.

There are Froome fanboys and Froome anti-fanboys. Only an anti-fanboy would try to find a way to get him DQ'd for covering probably less than 0.1% of a 140km route on foot.

mfin

k-dog wrote:

He's lucky it wasn't his leg the bike ran over. Could have been a lot worse.[/quote]

I think you're assuming his leg was near the seat stay as if he was on the bike when it was hit, he was already thrown forward off his bike and it was lying just behind him when the following moto ran into it.

It is of course lucky as with any off, particularly slower ones that all 3 weren't hurt, collar bone breaks etc.

surrey_commuter

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

Judging by the non-reaction of the crowd it must be a common occurrence

onyourright

Quintana’s tow was blatant cheating and should be punished. I bet you nothing will happen, though. The application of the rules is pathetic.

I disagree that you can’t legislate for the various unusual things that happen in racing. You don’t need to predict that the flamme rouge or crowds will block the course – although that wouldn’t be hard, since those things or similar happen almost every year. You just need to legislate for likely harms caused, e.g. a rider losing time in various circumstances (distance from finish, position on GC, etc.) due to the actions of various third parties.

The principle of the rule of law is that, firstly, the rules should be disclosed, and that secondly the rules should have characteristics of generality, equality, and certainty. None of these apply in road racing. The rules are only partially published (in badly translated English), they are pointlessly specific (e.g. they talk about walking over the finish line but not walking elsewhere on the course), they are seemingly randomly applied, and racers and observers have no idea how they will be applied.

The current rule-book isn’t fit for purpose. The participants and spectators just put up with arbitrary decisions every year as the price for enjoying the benefits.

It is appalling that not even the professional commentators on TV had any idea what would happen to Froome yesterday. And no-one knows if Quintana will be punished for that tow. It depends on the mood of the decision-makers.

above_the_cows

Graeme_S wrote:

Slim Boy Fat wrote:

Another view of events here.

https://twitter.com/11uisagusti/status/ ... 6815314944

There's that prick from Poland again. ClearIy has no interest in the race, only interested in just running in front of the camera bike with his placard. WTF do people like him bother going for. Complete 'tard.

Richie Porte looks like he's smiling even while he's remounting his hastily repaired bike half way up Ventoux having just had a GC damaging crash with a race moto. His face just seems to be permanently fixed in a grin. I'm starting to find it unsettling.

Unsettling? I don't know what you mean?

kingstongraham

Blazing Saddles wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

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.

Eh?
Handed a 7 second bonus AND gets a tow from the motorbike.
Certainly makes a big difference and this time the rules are clear.

Still, I hope it gets swept under the carpet, due to the ludicrous circumstances, yesterday.

All I mean is that the decision was made that they should get the same time as the group they were with at the time they came to the incident. It wouldn't make any difference if they finished 30 seconds down or 7 seconds down.

blazing_saddles

KingstonGraham wrote:

Blazing Saddles wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

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.

Eh?
Handed a 7 second bonus AND gets a tow from the motorbike.
Certainly makes a big difference and this time the rules are clear.

Still, I hope it gets swept under the carpet, due to the ludicrous circumstances, yesterday.

All I mean is that the decision was made that they should get the same time as the group they were with at the time they came to the incident. It wouldn't make any difference if they finished 30 seconds down or 7 seconds down.

True enough.

emadden

larkim wrote:

Is anyone seriously concerned that the rules don't allow someone to take a few strides forwards on foot in cleats such that it needs including in the rules? Running almost by definition is slower than cycling. That'd be like disqualifying someone from a marathon because they walked a little bit.

There are Froome fanboys and Froome anti-fanboys. Only an anti-fanboy would try to find a way to get him DQ'd for covering probably less than 0.1% of a 140km route on foot.

emmm.... fanboys and anti-fanboys trying to find ways to get him DQ's??? hahaha

Nobody is doing that. I simply made the point yesterday evening that running without a bike is not permissible - to which others questioned if that rule exists... and I found it - that is all.

BTW, I don't think fanboys have the right to send their objections to commissaires!!!! Let me see if I can find that rule for you

smithy21

Blazing Saddles wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

Blazing Saddles wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

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.

Eh?
Handed a 7 second bonus AND gets a tow from the motorbike.
Certainly makes a big difference and this time the rules are clear.

Still, I hope it gets swept under the carpet, due to the ludicrous circumstances, yesterday.

But that decision was only made after the event. When he took the tow he didn't know what was going to happen.

I tend to agree that in the circumstances probably just let it go. It does indicate to me that Quintana is not right physically.

All I mean is that the decision was made that they should get the same time as the group they were with at the time they came to the incident. It wouldn't make any difference if they finished 30 seconds down or 7 seconds down.

argyllflyer

emadden wrote:

larkim wrote:

Is anyone seriously concerned that the rules don't allow someone to take a few strides forwards on foot in cleats such that it needs including in the rules? Running almost by definition is slower than cycling. That'd be like disqualifying someone from a marathon because they walked a little bit.

There are Froome fanboys and Froome anti-fanboys. Only an anti-fanboy would try to find a way to get him DQ'd for covering probably less than 0.1% of a 140km route on foot.

emmm.... fanboys and anti-fanboys trying to find ways to get him DQ's??? hahaha

Nobody is doing that. I simply made the point yesterday evening that running without a bike is not permissible - to which others questioned if that rule exists... and I found it - that is all.

BTW, I don't think fanboys have the right to send their objections to commissaires!!!! Let me see if I can find that rule for you

There's another rule that says you must complete the course under your own efforts - a logical interpretation of the guidelines is to prevent people taking a tow, jumping on a horse / car etc... anything FASTER than a bike. There are few circumstances that a Pro would be faster running - look at the morons trying just that getting tailed off.

smithy21

smithy21 wrote:

Blazing Saddles wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

Blazing Saddles wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

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.

Eh?
Handed a 7 second bonus AND gets a tow from the motorbike.
Certainly makes a big difference and this time the rules are clear.

Still, I hope it gets swept under the carpet, due to the ludicrous circumstances, yesterday.

All I mean is that the decision was made that they should get the same time as the group they were with at the time they came to the incident. It wouldn't make any difference if they finished 30 seconds down or 7 seconds down.

But that decision was only made after the event. When he took the tow he didn't know what was going to happen.

I tend to agree that in the circumstances probably just let it go. It does indicate to me that Quintana is not right physically.

jscl

The current rule-book isn’t fit for purpose. The participants and spectators just put up with arbitrary decisions every year as the price for enjoying the benefits.

I think you're very wrong.

I know most UCI rules inside out, it used to be my job to do so. They allow an interpretation in given circumstances and it leaves the ultimate decision with the commissaires and the UCI. At any of these races you have a panel of UCI officials who the commissaires have to consult with and it allows for a fair decision to be decided on after consultations amongst the two teams.

The issue isn't the rules, it's their ineffective application. The issue teams face is that you never know how an official is going to interpret them. Sometimes it goes your way and sometimes it doesn't. They work perfectly well when they work in your favour and they aren't fit for purpose when they don't, that's the devil.

If you make them tighter, you never know what could have been (as a team or rider). I think there does need to be *some* reform, but they're suitable for the time being.

orraloon

I want to see professional road racing. These TdF mountain finish stages seem to be turning into drunken freak shows. What's next, Gladiators style assault courses, giant cotton buds...?

Yesterday wasn't a business as usual racing incident and the results could not stand. Else green light for accidental or deliberate interference by crowd. Say Quintana is up the road by 10s from Froome group, unlikely as that might be given his performance yesterday, group of spectators block road deliberately in front of chasers. Just accept that?

lostboysaint

You think that they're not being paid for their efforts?

cruff

FocusZing wrote:

What I take away from this, mainly, is the egregious violation of #90...

Garry H

zebulebu wrote:

FocusZing wrote:

What I take away from this, mainly, is the egregious violation of #90...

He should have ran, with bike, to the nearestcarbon repair specialist, requested the necessary tools and materials from the specialist and fixed it under his own steam. This the only way to ensure immortality. Christophe Froome

Anonymous

10 minute penalty for asking a helper to man the vacuum pump for the curing process?

blazing_saddles

So, The Arrow does a complete U turn on what he said, yesterday and thinks the Commies descion was great after all.....

Garry H

coriordan wrote:

10 minute penalty for asking a helper to man the vacuum pump for the curing process?

Without question.