Dylan Groenewegen Suspended until May 2021
Comments
-
They set an example in August of DQing from the race, yet there has been several examples since of similar incidents.
I would say that hasn't made an example, and neither will this harsh penalty0 -
I guess the problem with a 4 week sanction would be that Groenewegen broke his collarbone and therefore unable to ride in any case. So, it would have been a sanction in name only.
I seem to recall there was talk at the time that he would ride competitively again until Jakobsen.
Well, Fabio may not be ready to compete, but he's ready to get back on his bike.
Obviously I am using hindsight here, so about 12 weeks would have nicely covered the recovery period.
Pross mentioned rugby sanctions. 4 weeks is usually given for "technical" red cards.
12 weeks is the normal suspension for a more severe infringement."Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.0 -
DG is super cut up about this. He knows the guy fairly well.blazing_saddles said:I guess the problem with a 4 week sanction would be that Groenewegen broke his collarbone and therefore unable to ride in any case. So, it would have been a sanction in name only.
I seem to recall there was talk at the time that he would ride competitively again until Jakobsen.
Well, Fabio may not be ready to compete, but he's ready to get back on his bike.
Obviously I am using hindsight here, so about 12 weeks would have nicely covered the recovery period.
Pross mentioned rugby sanctions. 4 weeks is usually given for "technical" red cards.
12 weeks is the normal suspension for a more severe infringement.
He’s already missed this season - this achieves nothing as per my above statement riders still do the same move DG did0 -
Whilst I agree you shouldn't punish the consequences (though this is commonplace with laws) I do think you've underplayed his actions in this crash throughout and the circumstances of each crash also needs to be considered e.g. as I've said above the speed of travel and space available for avoiding actionrick_chasey said:
So what Dylan did minus the consequences has happened *multiple* times sincefocuszing723 said:
Hopefully not if an example is set.rick_chasey said:
Do we need to do this again?focuszing723 said: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.
0 -
Yes.rick_chasey said:
DG is super cut up about this. He knows the guy fairly well.blazing_saddles said:I guess the problem with a 4 week sanction would be that Groenewegen broke his collarbone and therefore unable to ride in any case. So, it would have been a sanction in name only.
I seem to recall there was talk at the time that he would ride competitively again until Jakobsen.
Well, Fabio may not be ready to compete, but he's ready to get back on his bike.
Obviously I am using hindsight here, so about 12 weeks would have nicely covered the recovery period.
Pross mentioned rugby sanctions. 4 weeks is usually given for "technical" red cards.
12 weeks is the normal suspension for a more severe infringement.
He’s already missed this season - this achieves nothing as per my above statement riders still do the same move DG did
That's kind of what I am saying, since 12 weeks would have that symmetry to both FB getting back onto the bike and the end of this odd season.
We have a rather well known rugby player in the family now. He had a 4 week suspension (the only one in his career) as the laws now don't allow for such an outcome to be deemed accidental. (which it clearly was) He was also super cut up about it.
If you are going to argue that sanctions are a waste of time because riders won't change their ways, then to me, that's only going to result in much more severe sanctions, as the UCI has to be seen to be doing something.
Much like when riders complain about safety issues and the UCI carry out a bit of "cosmetic" work.
Not sure if you meant it like that, or are you saying that Groenewegen should have been let off altogether?"Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.0 -
Having a tariff system as in rugby makes a lot of sense. The action has to be looked at first and the consequences have an impact on the severity of the punishment.
In rugby these things do and have had an impact on player behaviour over a short space of time, so there is no reason to think that the same wouln't be true in cycling IF the punishments are handed out regularly and consistently.
I think Rick has felt the DQ was sufficient punishment, but then isn't Dylan 'one of his men'?0 -
Two things to add here.
First off, regardless of whatever sanction was handed out, DG was under team suspension until the outcome was known.
Hence my suggestion of 12 weeks covering these bases.
"Team Jumbo-Visma stands for fair sportsmanship, within the rules. With his move Dylan broke a sports rule and that’s unacceptable. We have decided that Dylan will not start in a race until the judgment of the disciplinary committee to which the UCI has handed over the incident."
Secondly, although everybody here agrees that it was too harsh, the punishment wasn't a UCI decision.
According to reports from Wielerflits, an "independent arbitration committee" determined the ban, which will be imposed retroactively from August and run through to May 6, 2021. On the day of the crash, the UCI stated that the incident had been referred to the Disciplinary Commission, though the process now looks to have been outsourced."Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.0 -
Feels like traffic offences where the same manouevre carries different penalties depending on the outcome.
It's possible to argue the outcome indicates this was more dangerous than other offences, but that suspension is way over the top. The rugby example is good - you don't have to actually injure someone for the offence to get the same sanction. Then you just have to decide what the offence is that warrants a harsher sanction than a DQ. I've no idea how you'd do that.0 -
Yep, that was the sort of law I referred to above. Causing death by dangerous driving carries a harsher sentence than dangerous driving (which seems logical) and the sentencing guidance will have mitigating and aggrevating factors that move it from the starting point. The same with assault, ABH, GBH, manslaughter - they could all stem from exactly the same incident with differing consequences.kingstongraham said:Feels like traffic offences where the same manouevre carries different penalties depending on the outcome.
It's possible to argue the outcome indicates this was more dangerous than other offences, but that suspension is way over the top. The rugby example is good - you don't have to actually injure someone for the offence to get the same sanction. Then you just have to decide what the offence is that warrants a harsher sanction than a DQ. I've no idea how you'd do that.0 -
I mean, in hypothetical setting (and I’m not blaming Fabio at all here) but if Fabio backs out then there is no monster crash despite the illegal move by Dylan.
By punishing consequences you don’t deter the move which puts riders in the dangerous position, which doesn’t seem right to me.
Either you chalk it up as an accident or you punish the move the same each time - else there is no deterrence to said move.
I’m fine with punishing Dylan if from now on that move is always punished.1 -
Difficult to be consistent ."If I was a 38 year old man, I definitely wouldn't be riding a bright yellow bike with Hello Kitty disc wheels, put it that way. What we're witnessing here is the world's most high profile mid-life crisis" Afx237vi Mon Jul 20, 2009 2:43 pm0
-
Was good to see Rui Costa get relegated in the sprint yesterday in the Vuelta. Moved across Rog's line and made Magnus Cort go wide to get round him1
-
Hadn't realised that had happened until just now, but totally agree. It was a shockingly bad deviation.takethehighroad said:Was good to see Rui Costa get relegated in the sprint yesterday in the Vuelta. Moved across Rog's line and made Magnus Cort go wide to get round him
0 -
The consequences do play a role. What if Fabio had been killed? You still think Dylan should only have a 4 week ban?Pross said:
Whilst I agree you shouldn't punish the consequences (though this is commonplace with laws) I do think you've underplayed his actions in this crash throughout and the circumstances of each crash also needs to be considered e.g. as I've said above the speed of travel and space available for avoiding actionrick_chasey said:
So what Dylan did minus the consequences has happened *multiple* times sincefocuszing723 said:
Hopefully not if an example is set.rick_chasey said:
Do we need to do this again?focuszing723 said: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.
What Dylan did was illegal and he is smart enough to know that smashing someone in the barriers at 80kmh is dangerous shit. He should have been thrown out of the sport permanently.1 -
Throwing him out permanently would have gotten the message clear to everybody.rick_chasey said:
DG is super cut up about this. He knows the guy fairly well.blazing_saddles said:I guess the problem with a 4 week sanction would be that Groenewegen broke his collarbone and therefore unable to ride in any case. So, it would have been a sanction in name only.
I seem to recall there was talk at the time that he would ride competitively again until Jakobsen.
Well, Fabio may not be ready to compete, but he's ready to get back on his bike.
Obviously I am using hindsight here, so about 12 weeks would have nicely covered the recovery period.
Pross mentioned rugby sanctions. 4 weeks is usually given for "technical" red cards.
12 weeks is the normal suspension for a more severe infringement.
He’s already missed this season - this achieves nothing as per my above statement riders still do the same move DG did
The UCI have been punishing people this year for people deviating from the line such as Peter Sagan and Alaphilippe. But they did not do the same shit Dylan did, which was smashing someone in the barriers.
Although Peter Sagan should have been punished more harsh because he clearly did it on purpose to WvA. Julian looked more like an accident so that penalty was ok.1 -
So what, are you suggesting speeding at 90mph and not being given a sanction is an excuse for someone who's involved in an accident whilst driving at 90?rick_chasey said:
So what Dylan did minus the consequences has happened *multiple* times sincefocuszing723 said:
Hopefully not if an example is set.rick_chasey said:
Do we need to do this again?focuszing723 said: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.
0 -
Youre right, the riders arent really that interested in riding safely. Are you advocating a lifetime ban for him? To make the others take notice?takethehighroad said:They set an example in August of DQing from the race, yet there has been several examples since of similar incidents.
I would say that hasn't made an example, and neither will this harsh penalty
0 -
webboo said:
well he has a relevant view. albeit he's committed the crime of not agreeing with the forum cognoscenti
0 -
This isn't the BBC where we have to accept nutters' views as 'balance'. Let's be honest, a lifetime ban is a particularly extreme view.david37 said:webboo said:
well he has a relevant view. albeit he's committed the crime of not agreeing with the forum cognoscentiIt's only a bit of sport, Mun. Relax and enjoy the racing.2 -
It's troll 101 to go down the "they don't like a dissenting voice" then when you call a troll a troll they'll say "see, told you so".1
-
So, make a judgement mistake in a fraction of a second, during the heat of battle and get a lifetime to reflect upon it?
Sounds as if David would prefer it if the UCI were being run by Joe Stalin.
"Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.0 -
Given he or she is a triathlete I wonder if they would agree that verging off your line and giving someone a kick or whack on the head in the swim. What would be the sanctions of such behaviour as it clearly effects the outcome of races.0
-
Getting kicked or whacked in the head during the swim is really, really common. It is very difficult *not* to get hit in the head during an open water swim in most events...webboo said:Given he or she is a triathlete I wonder if they would agree that verging off your line and giving someone a kick or whack on the head in the swim. What would be the sanctions of such behaviour as it clearly effects the outcome of races.
It's also not usually a huge deal either.0 -
Having participated in one or two I am aware of this but it does effect ones efforts to go in a straight line. Very similar to the effect of someone pulling on your jersey pocket in a sprint.bobmcstuff said:
Getting kicked or whacked in the head during the swim is really, really common. It is very difficult *not* to get hit in the head during an open water swim in most events...webboo said:Given he or she is a triathlete I wonder if they would agree that verging off your line and giving someone a kick or whack on the head in the swim. What would be the sanctions of such behaviour as it clearly effects the outcome of races.
It's also not usually a huge deal either.0 -
If you do this shit on the high-way in a car and it was clearly on purpose, you go to jail.blazing_saddles said:So, make a judgement mistake in a fraction of a second, during the heat of battle and get a lifetime to reflect upon it?
Sounds as if David would prefer it if the UCI were being run by Joe Stalin.
And you will most likely spend your lifetime financially supporting the victim if he has a loss of salary due to his injury you inflicted (which your insurance most likely will not cover since you did it on purpose).
This is not just a “judgment mistake” since Dylan has done this shit multiple times in the past. It is not his first time. He is a straight up scumbag and you people should not defend pieces of shit like him.
If Dylan still races for Jumbo-Visma next season, I will boycott all of their sponsers.
0 -
Smashing someone in the barriers on purpose at 80kmh and by accident kicking someone in the head in swimming are two different things.bobmcstuff said:
Getting kicked or whacked in the head during the swim is really, really common. It is very difficult *not* to get hit in the head during an open water swim in most events...webboo said:Given he or she is a triathlete I wonder if they would agree that verging off your line and giving someone a kick or whack on the head in the swim. What would be the sanctions of such behaviour as it clearly effects the outcome of races.
It's also not usually a huge deal either.
Especially since the 1st case is lethal and Dylan knew exactly what he was doing.
0 -
Do you think they will notice if you do.zest28 said:blazing_saddles said:So, make a judgement mistake in a fraction of a second, during the heat of battle and get a lifetime to reflect upon it?
Sounds as if David would prefer it if the UCI were being run by Joe Stalin.
If Dylan still races for Jumbo-Visma next season, I will boycott all of their sponsers.0 -
Hardly trolling to present a legitimate opinion.Pross said:It's troll 101 to go down the "they don't like a dissenting voice" then when you call a troll a troll they'll say "see, told you so".
All this heat of the battle and momentary loss of judgement etc etc is fine if you want to see this sort of thing continue. I think the UCI has made a good decision albeit a tough one.
These guys are professionals if they cant act like one or lose control of themselves at key times then they put all the other riders at risk of serious injury, they risk the future of the sport by repelling sponsors other than elastoplast and redbull. There is necessarily an element of danger and risk it doesn't need to be magnified by people who have no self control.
0
