To race or to wait?

dinyull

KingstonGraham wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

I don't disagree.

But I don't get why it upsets riders and fans quite so much.

It's like they don't want interesting racing.

It's because they do want interesting racing. Gaining an advantage on someone who hasn't got a bike isn't that interesting.

Not interesting, pure or actually racing. A desperate move that shows Aru doesn't believe he can beat him head to head.

Don't buy Aru's "I didn't see his arm go up", Gonzo's helmet hit Froome's elbow.

ContrelaMontre

RichN95 wrote:

ContrelaMontre wrote:

The Cycling Podcast covered this well today.

In my view, Aru's move was ungentlemanly but, so what? It's the last climb of the Queen stage, of course he can attack when a rival's gear fails him. Attacking 60km from the finish when the race isn't on would be wrong. But the leader trying to neutralise the race because he feels like it is just rubbish. He was even fiddling with his computer before chasing back on. What was he doing? Pairing his powermeter or something?

Aru can attack. But he must do it with the knowledge that if he persists, then he gives everyone the green light to attack him in similar circumstances for the rest of his career. So is it worth it?

If by 'similar circumstances' you mean on the final climb of a key stage when the race is on, then yes. Did it do Bertie's career any damage as he attacked Schleck when he messed his gears up?

What he actually did seems to be worst of both worlds as he now has a bad reputation but because he eased off he got no advantage.

bobmcstuff

Dinyull wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

I don't disagree.

But I don't get why it upsets riders and fans quite so much.

It's like they don't want interesting racing.

It's because they do want interesting racing. Gaining an advantage on someone who hasn't got a bike isn't that interesting.

Not interesting, pure or actually racing. A desperate move that shows Aru doesn't believe he can beat him head to head.

Don't buy Aru's "I didn't see his arm go up", Gonzo's helmet hit Froome's elbow.

Yeah, you want to see the best riders competing head to head not written out of the race by a mechanical or something outside of their control. To the argument around kit and someone earlier who said that was the team's fault too, all the teams are using basically the same kit (particularly when it comes to drivetrain) and a lot of times it's down to their sponsor anyway.

Crashes due to rider error are different as that's part of the game.

RichN95.

ContrelaMontre wrote:

If by 'similar circumstances' you mean on the final climb of a key stage when the race is on, then yes. Did it do Bertie's career any damage as he attacked Schleck when he messed his gears up?

What he actually did seems to be worst of both worlds as he now has a bad reputation but because he eased off he got no advantage.

Nothing came of it so it will be forgotten quickly. As for Contador/Schleck - there was too much talk at the time - but no-one disagreed that Schleck attacked first. As a rider said at the time - "If you draw your sword, don't drop it"

rick_chasey

To feel hard done by as a fan is some of the fun in watching sport. To take that out with specific rulez for specific instances, unwritten or otherwise, is to deny you the darker pleasures. I mean, look at the 5 live phone ins after the weekend of football. Fans love revelling in their injustices, even if it winds them up.

The fun bit about any rule, unwritten or otherwise, is to test and break them.

I can’t be the only one who was smiling when I saw Aru attack the mechanical. That’s the fun. We all need the villains.

It’s the same opportunity for every rider in that respect, so it’s not unfair.

Chris also seems to invite the kind of behaviour too; he seems to have a lot of mechanicals at crucial points.

tailwindhome

Rick Chasey wrote:

Chris also seems to invite the kind of behaviour too; he seems to have a lot of mechanicals at crucial points.

Unreliable Hungarian technology

mfin

Rick Chasey wrote:

I can’t be the only one who was smiling when I saw Aru attack the mechanical. That’s the fun. We all need the villains.

Exactly, who would have swapped that little episode for watching another couple of minutes of nothing particularly happening?

People moaning and arguing based on their pissy whinging sense of right, righteous and wrong always makes for a bonus fun little sideshow too though.

RichN95.

Rick Chasey wrote:

Chris also seems to invite the kind of behaviour too; he seems to have a lot of mechanicals at crucial points.

The only other examples I can think of were a puncture at last year's Tour of Romandie and a puncture early in the 2012 Tour.

rick_chasey

RichN95 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Chris also seems to invite the kind of behaviour too; he seems to have a lot of mechanicals at crucial points.

The only other examples I can think of were a puncture at last year's Tour of Romandie and a puncture early in the 2012 Tour.

Ventoux too

No_Ta_Doctor

Rick Chasey wrote:

To feel hard done by as a fan is some of the fun in watching sport. To take that out with specific rulez for specific instances, unwritten or otherwise, is to deny you the darker pleasures. I mean, look at the 5 live phone ins after the weekend of football. Fans love revelling in their injustices, even if it winds them up.

The fun bit about any rule, unwritten or otherwise, is to test and break them.

I can’t be the only one who was smiling when I saw Aru attack the mechanical. That’s the fun. We all need the villains.

It’s the same opportunity for every rider in that respect, so it’s not unfair.

Chris also seems to invite the kind of behaviour too; he seems to have a lot of mechanicals at crucial points.

Of course fans feel like that, and yes, it's fundamental to most sports (I won't say all, but I can't think of any exceptions). But while you recognise that, you personally still watch as if it were a pantomime, part of the entertainment, while others are more emotionally invested in the villainy. I think that's the major difference.

RichN95.

Rick Chasey wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Chris also seems to invite the kind of behaviour too; he seems to have a lot of mechanicals at crucial points.

The only other examples I can think of were a puncture at last year's Tour of Romandie and a puncture early in the 2012 Tour.

Ventoux too

That wasn't really a mechanical now, was it

Edit: There was that time NIbali attacked him at the Tour of couple of years ago too.

FocusZing

Rick Chasey wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Chris also seems to invite the kind of behaviour too; he seems to have a lot of mechanicals at crucial points.

The only other examples I can think of were a puncture at last year's Tour of Romandie and a puncture early in the 2012 Tour.

Ventoux too

Bloody outrageous suggestion! I feel the need to do some fishing to calm down, and I don't even fish!

above_the_cows

Yadda yadda yadda. I find myself in the No tA Doc camp on this one, but that's not the issue, the issue it's the rest day and I have discovered by accident in my university magazine the World's Worst Named Cycling Team™.

Baby-Dump Cycling Team

http://www.folia.nl/actueel/112024/hvaer-lars-is-ploegleider-van-een-wielerploeg-en-wij-volgden-hem

Yes dump means something different in Dutch but even then I am left wondering if this is a place that sells surplus babies.

salsiccia1

TailWindHome wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Chris also seems to invite the kind of behaviour too; he seems to have a lot of mechanicals at crucial points.

Unreliable Hungarian technology

Hat

rick_chasey

RichN95 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Chris also seems to invite the kind of behaviour too; he seems to have a lot of mechanicals at crucial points.

The only other examples I can think of were a puncture at last year's Tour of Romandie and a puncture early in the 2012 Tour.

Ventoux too

That wasn't really a mechanical now, was it

Edit: There was that time NIbali attacked him at the Tour of couple of years ago too.

Ventoux was the ultimate mechanical.

Force majeure broke his bike.

buckmulligan

I think the fact that Aru felt the need to spin a load of "nonsense" to the media says it all really.

He claimed that he didn't see Froome have a mechanical issue, was planning on attacking there anyway and stopped attacking when he realised what was going on. I think it's pretty clear from the TV footage that he did see Froome have a mechanical, pushed past him to attack and then threw a tantrum when no-one else would help him make the move stick.

It was the same with Nibali in 2015, he claimed he didn't see Froome's mechanical on the Croix de Fer and then sure enough, the helicopter footage ends up on YouTube showing Froome dropping back, Nibali turning round to look at him two or three times to see what's going on and then launching himself up the road.

As Simon Yates said "absolute bullsh*t". The least he can do is be honest about it; if you're going to blatantly attack someone who has a broken bike then don't go and lie about it afterwards to try to cover your tracks, just say "tough luck, that's part of racing". I lost a lot of respect for Nibali that day and the same for Aru yesterday.

bobmcstuff

Above The Cows wrote:

Yadda yadda yadda. I find myself in the No tA Doc camp on this one, but that's not the issue, the issue it's the rest day and I have discovered by accident in my university magazine the World's Worst Named Cycling Team™.

Baby-Dump Cycling Team

http://www.folia.nl/actueel/112024/hvaer-lars-is-ploegleider-van-een-wielerploeg-en-wij-volgden-hem

Yes dump means something different in Dutch but even then I am left wondering if this is a place that sells surplus babies.

Baby poo is what comes to my mind when you say baby dump...

above_the_cows

bobmcstuff wrote:

Above The Cows wrote:

Yadda yadda yadda. I find myself in the No tA Doc camp on this one, but that's not the issue, the issue it's the rest day and I have discovered by accident in my university magazine the World's Worst Named Cycling Team™.

Baby-Dump Cycling Team

http://www.folia.nl/actueel/112024/hvaer-lars-is-ploegleider-van-een-wielerploeg-en-wij-volgden-hem

Yes dump means something different in Dutch but even then I am left wondering if this is a place that sells surplus babies.

Baby poo is what comes to my mind when you say baby dump...

Exactly. In Dutch it doesn't mean that. However even in Dutch it is still pretty bad, hence the surplus babies comment.

secretsqirrel

Aru & Froome both lied. Not sure why everybody is making goodies and baddies.
CF knew he was being attacked thats why he was pannicking and waiving his arms about. He said he wasn't aware.
CF shoved FA and said he lost his balance. FA said that's what happened :roll:
Whatever, it's been resolved and I would say they're even.

BTW, I screamed at Aru to get his head down and don't look back 'cos I wanted the drama and I like his Italian jersey.

CF flapping.....


PS Fuglsang is awesome

RichN95.

I reckon if Aru had kept going with one or two on his wheel, he would have blown up before the summit. He was 6km from the summit and 32km from the finish.

Frank Wilson

The unknown (to Aru at the time) was whether Froome was having a pre planned bike change for easier gearing for the incline. Think Quintana changed bikes a couple of times.

Lanterne_Rogue

Frank Wilson wrote:

The unknown (to Aru at the time) was whether Froome was having a pre planned bike change for easier gearing for the incline. Think Quintana changed bikes a couple of times.

This strikes me as unlikely, given the critical nature of the descent. Why risk ending up undergeared on the descent and possible chase? Why swap bikes when the pace is forming a selection and not at the bottom of the climb when you have longer to get back on?

blazing_saddles

RichN95 wrote:

I reckon if Aru had kept going with one or two on his wheel, he would have blown up before the summit. He was 6km from the summit and 32km from the finish.

On the evidence of what happened next, that's what I think too.

Richmond Racer 2

Fenton abusing the 'unwritten rules' re the MJ wearer, by slowing down the peloton so that his team mates could catch back up (last year's Tour?) doesn't really help his case


Chasey's right - we need villains. We need spice.

Richmond Racer 2

SecretSqirrel wrote:

Aru & Froome both lied. Not sure why everybody is making goodies and baddies.
CF knew he was being attacked thats why he was pannicking and waiving his arms about. He said he wasn't aware.
CF shoved FA and said he lost his balance. FA said that's what happened :roll:
Whatever, it's been resolved and I would say they're even.

BTW, I screamed at Aru to get his head down and don't look back 'cos I wanted the drama and I like his Italian jersey.

CF flapping.....


PS Fuglsang is awesome

A+ gif

blazing_saddles

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

Fenton abusing the 'unwritten rules' re the MJ wearer, by slowing down the peloton so that his team mates could catch back up (last year's Tour?) doesn't really help his case


Chasey's right - we need villains. We need spice.

So,you must be very disappointed that Froome didn't turn villain, back on La Toussuire, when he had the chance? :P

Richmond Racer 2

Blazing Saddles wrote:

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

Fenton abusing the 'unwritten rules' re the MJ wearer, by slowing down the peloton so that his team mates could catch back up (last year's Tour?) doesn't really help his case


Chasey's right - we need villains. We need spice.

So,you must be very disappointed that Froome didn't turn villain, back on La Toussuire, when he had the chance? :P

They were on the same team. Still think that was a dickish move, further reinforced up by subsequent shenanigans on and off the bike

But seriously, do we have to re-run 2012?

No_Ta_Doctor

Richmond Racer 2 wrote:

Fenton abusing the 'unwritten rules' re the MJ wearer, by slowing down the peloton so that his team mates could catch back up (last year's Tour?) doesn't really help his case


Chasey's right - we need villains. We need spice.

I'm all for having villains. But for that you need to have something villainous going on, which if there were no unwritten rules, we wouldn't have.

As for the example you give above, I'd like to think that's a trick he won't be able to play twice and get away with, or even that there have been small acts of payback since then (though Sky are rarely in the position of needing favours).

larkim

I like that cycling has some form of dignity which is unwritten but potentially challengeable. Adds some jeopardy to the situation. And I think that the right thing to do on Sunday was what Porte / Quintana forced Aru to do - wait. But...

What would be most interesting of course would be if Aru had a nearly identical issue and to see the response of Froome and the rest of the peleton. Is it just the MJ that gets the respect, or would a contender also be given the opportunity at a similar point on a climb.

I get that the MJ takes some leadership role when out on the road and they all decide to stop for a pee etc, but at the point at which all of the contenders are in the early onset of suffering on a climb, are all the top 10 in the GC required to respond to wait for others in the event of an issue?

RichN95.

larkim wrote:

I like that cycling has some form of dignity which is unwritten but potentially challengeable. Adds some jeopardy to the situation. And I think that the right thing to do on Sunday was what Porte / Quintana forced Aru to do - wait. But...

What would be most interesting of course would be if Aru had a nearly identical issue and to see the response of Froome and the rest of the peloton. Is it just the MJ that gets the respect, or would a contender also be given the opportunity at a similar point on a climb.

I get that the MJ takes some leadership role when out on the road and they all decide to stop for a pee etc, but at the point at which all of the contenders are in the early onset of suffering on a climb, are all the top 10 in the GC required to respond to wait for others in the event of an issue?

If one of the others, say Porte, had had the problem, I expect Sky would have kept tapping away at the same tempo. And I think very few would have had a problem with that. Similarly, if Aru and got Fuglsang to maintain the tempo Sky had been setting, I think very few would have complained.

I believe that many of them waited in part because they had no idea what to do without Sky leading them up the climb so wanted them back. (Like some sort of cycling Stockholm Syndrome)

Aru can pull that move if he likes, but persist and it will stick to him unflatteringly for the rest of his career, maybe life (ask any cricket fan what the name Trevor Chappell means to them).