Dylan Groenewegen Suspended until May 2021

blazing_saddles
blazing_saddles Posts: 21,812
edited November 2020 in Pro race
Or so I have just heard.

Nothing in English yet, so:

https://www.wielerflits.nl/nieuws/dylan-groenewegen-geschorst-tot-begin-mei-2021/

The international cycling union UCI will announce the suspension of Dylan Groenewegen at the end of this week. Last week, an independent arbitration committee determined the penalty. WielerFlits has now understood that Groenewegen will be suspended for nine months. This means that he is not allowed to take action until May 6, 2021.

With this scenario, Groenewegen could in principle still start in the Giro d'Italia, which starts on May 8. The Amsterdammer will still have the opportunity to appeal this sentence. This way he can go to the sports tribunal CAS in Lausanne. This is an extremely severe penalty for an incident in a sprint. This seems to set a precedent for sprinters' misbehavior.
"Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.
«134

Comments

  • Way too harsh
  • gweeds
    gweeds Posts: 2,564
    Does he ever come back from this? Mentally it's going to be huge.
    Napoleon, don't be jealous that I've been chatting online with babes all day. Besides, we both know that I'm training to be a cage fighter.
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,149
    neonriver said:

    Way too harsh


    Agreed. The UCI trying to load all the blame onto him and not their dangerous finish with dodgy barriers.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • salsiccia1
    salsiccia1 Posts: 3,725
    RichN95. said:

    neonriver said:

    Way too harsh


    Agreed. The UCI trying to load all the blame onto him and not their dangerous finish with dodgy barriers.
    Careful now. Someone will be along to tell you that it's Jakobsen's fault for not bunny-hopping the barriers.
    It's only a bit of sport, Mun. Relax and enjoy the racing.
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 40,471
    It needed sanction but that is ridiculous. Even the amount he has already missed feels excessive. Fair enough if the UCI want to put down a marker but now they have to be consistent if anyone else does the same move even if the outcome isn't as serious.
  • Alex Dowsett raised a point in his latest vlog about Sagan. In whichever finish it was (11?) at the Giro, Sagan.
    veered from one line to another, moving a good 3 metres laterally yet wasn’t penalised. He wondered if it was only dangerous if someone came down as a result of the movement or should it perhaps all be treated the same? It looked far worse, (albeit I only saw the DG incident very briefly) than this crash and his move that put Cav out of action in the Tour. Always diff to judge I reckon.
    Erhaps need the riders, teams involved in the actual race to make a decision?
  • gsk82
    gsk82 Posts: 3,464
    That's punishing the outcome, not the action. Terrible decision, made purely to appease social media types
    "Unfortunately these days a lot of people don’t understand the real quality of a bike" Ernesto Colnago
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,149
    gsk82 said:

    That's punishing the outcome, not the action. Terrible decision, made purely to appease social media types


    It's to divert attention from the UCI's terrible recent safety record. Remember when Evenepoel went off the bridge and they launched an investigation into Evenepoel.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • Alex Dowsett raised a point in his latest vlog about Sagan. In whichever finish it was (11?) at the Giro, Sagan.
    veered from one line to another, moving a good 3 metres laterally yet wasn’t penalised. He wondered if it was only dangerous if someone came down as a result of the movement or should it perhaps all be treated the same? It looked far worse, (albeit I only saw the DG incident very briefly) than this crash and his move that put Cav out of action in the Tour. Always diff to judge I reckon.
    Erhaps need the riders, teams involved in the actual race to make a decision?

    As always seems to be the case, consequences get punished rather than actions
  • gsk82
    gsk82 Posts: 3,464
    RichN95. said:

    gsk82 said:

    That's punishing the outcome, not the action. Terrible decision, made purely to appease social media types


    It's to divert attention from the UCI's terrible recent safety record. Remember when Evenepoel went off the bridge and they launched an investigation into Evenepoel.
    To appease social media types
    "Unfortunately these days a lot of people don’t understand the real quality of a bike" Ernesto Colnago
  • This is such a shocking decision. As has been mentioned, we will be able to find several examples which are just as bad, if not worse, just without the terrible consequences of this incident.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,568
    Ugh the guy’s already missed this season. I don’t think Jakobson was pushing for it too?
  • Dorset_Boy
    Dorset_Boy Posts: 6,917
    Poor decision, agreed. He should be allowed to race from the end of this season not have to wait until May.
  • Reading around, the decision has been pretty much universally condemned.
    "Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.
  • DeVlaeminck
    DeVlaeminck Posts: 8,731
    Out of interest what do people think would have been appropriate ?
    a) relegated
    b) DQ from race
    c) Ban of 1-4 weeks
    d) 9 months
    e) 2 years

    And should subsequent offences attract harsher penalties as doping can?

    I'm torn between b and c and undecided.
    [Castle Donington Ladies FC - going up in '22]
  • So social media types can overthrow the decision that social media types demanded?
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,149

    Out of interest what do people think would have been appropriate ?
    a) relegated
    b) DQ from race
    c) Ban of 1-4 weeks
    d) 9 months
    e) 2 years

    And should subsequent offences attract harsher penalties as doping can?

    I'm torn between b and c and undecided.


    C) plus a little interest. Up to two months
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 40,471
    RichN95. said:

    Out of interest what do people think would have been appropriate ?
    a) relegated
    b) DQ from race
    c) Ban of 1-4 weeks
    d) 9 months
    e) 2 years

    And should subsequent offences attract harsher penalties as doping can?

    I'm torn between b and c and undecided.


    C) plus a little interest. Up to two months
    Yeah top end of c) I think - something along the rugby sanction process would be good where you have a starting point then mitigation or aggregating factors than decrease or increase the sanction.

    I don't think the outcome should be taken into account but the potential to do harm should be e.g. a equally severe change of line is a small group, uphill sprint would have a lower sanction than a full bunch, downhill sprint like we had here. The aggravating factor for me in this particular case was that he appeared to check his shoulder, see someone coming up fast inside him and closed the door. It felt deliberate, not to cause a crash and injure another rider but certainly to disrupt someone who was going faster.
  • bobmcstuff
    bobmcstuff Posts: 11,196

    So social media types can overthrow the decision that social media types demanded?

    Not everyone on social media holds the same opinion...
  • So social media types can overthrow the decision that social media types demanded?

    This is social media - did you demand it?
  • Well reading above the comments it says the UCI likely caved to social media pressure.

    Now it's widely condemned.
  • Out of interest what do people think would have been appropriate ?
    a) relegated
    b) DQ from race
    c) Ban of 1-4 weeks
    d) 9 months
    e) 2 years

    And should subsequent offences attract harsher penalties as doping can?

    I'm torn between b and c and undecided.

    f) a system where the tariffs and the criteria to be applied are set in advance and open for all to see, rather than pulled out of the ass when something finally needs to be seen to be done. Obviously this is cycling and it wouldn't happen, but...

    Fwiw I'm not necessarily of the opinion that it's too harsh, but I do think there needs to be consistency and openness in the decision making. At the moment most riders would (rightly?) assume they're unlikely to cop the same penalty, so the deterrent effect isn't particularly large despite its magnitude.
  • I think it's a good decision. He tried to use his bike and his elbow to put his opposition into the barrier. Set a tough example or this will keep happening, it will save riders having to take a couple of months off to recover from their injuries.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,568

    I think it's a good decision. He tried to use his bike and his elbow to put his opposition into the barrier. Set a tough example or this will keep happening, it will save riders having to take a couple of months off to recover from their injuries.

    Do we need to do this again?
  • gsk82
    gsk82 Posts: 3,464

    Well reading above the comments it says the UCI likely caved to social media pressure.

    Now it's widely condemned.

    Social media condemns everything
    "Unfortunately these days a lot of people don’t understand the real quality of a bike" Ernesto Colnago
  • I think it's a good decision. He tried to use his bike and his elbow to put his opposition into the barrier. Set a tough example or this will keep happening, it will save riders having to take a couple of months off to recover from their injuries.

    Do we need to do this again?
    Hopefully not if an example is set.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,568

    I think it's a good decision. He tried to use his bike and his elbow to put his opposition into the barrier. Set a tough example or this will keep happening, it will save riders having to take a couple of months off to recover from their injuries.

    Do we need to do this again?
    Hopefully not if an example is set.
    So what Dylan did minus the consequences has happened *multiple* times since
  • I think it's a good decision. He tried to use his bike and his elbow to put his opposition into the barrier. Set a tough example or this will keep happening, it will save riders having to take a couple of months off to recover from their injuries.

    Do we need to do this again?
    Hopefully not if an example is set.
    So what Dylan did minus the consequences has happened *multiple* times since
    I'm not looking for an argument, that's my opinion. Set an example, see if it makes a difference to an idiots mentality of trying to put a fellow cyclist into a barrier and possibly hospital too!

    If they can't lead by example, make them the example.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,568
    You’re not following the argument.