PCM.daily banner
28-07-2021 23:54
PCM.daily
Users Online
· Guests Online: 41

· Members Online: 1
AB Normal

· Total Members: 148,170
· Newest Member: Damedolla
Donate
View Thread
PCM.daily » Off-Topic » Cycling
 Print Thread
News in November
FreitasPCM
Groenewegen should first focus on the psychological recovery from the aftermath of the crash because if he is a sane human being he must be in shambles since August. Don’t think he’ll go for the Tour, perhaps the Vuelta if Jumbo doesn’t decide to run GC with Roglic. But again depending on his mental and physical comeback.
 
Ollfardh
Wilier wrote:
Ollfardh wrote:
cunego59 wrote:
Ollfardh wrote:
Miguel98 wrote:
Groenewegen has been suspended until May 5th 2021.

I can try to understand the decision made by the UCI, but I can't help but feel that this was very much a case of the consequence of his action instead of his actual action.


If Jacobsen would've died (which wasn't that far off apparently), we would have said it was too little. I think the punishment is fair, he'll be back in time for Le Tour.

Which underscores that this is a punishment for the consequences, not for the offense, doesn't it? I agree that it's good to have a warning example, but it means very little if line deviations without a crash continue to go somewhat or completely unpunished.


No, as I said, it's a fair punishment for the risk. I can immediatly remember a few other sprints with DSQ this year, Sagan in le Tour, Bennett in Vuelta and Alaphillipe in L-B-L. None of them were close to being as dangerous as what Groenewegen did.

He doesn't get punished because of Jakobsen's injuries, but because of the danger of his actions. This was just always going to end bad.


Don't agree. If Jakobsen got away with minor injuries we wouldn't be talking about this. The injuries of Jakobsen are the reason for the lengthy ban. Otherwise we should be seeing these lengthy bans more often. These sort of manouvres in a mass sprint are very common and all of them are a potential disaster if you're unlucky.


But how was Jakobsen ever going to walk away from that with minor injuries?

This was simply the most criminal move I've seen in a sprint for years. You can't compare that to Sagan's or Bennett's small headbutt.
Changed my sig, this was getting absurd.
 
Wilier
Ollfardh wrote:
Wilier wrote:
Ollfardh wrote:
cunego59 wrote:
Ollfardh wrote:
Miguel98 wrote:
Groenewegen has been suspended until May 5th 2021.

I can try to understand the decision made by the UCI, but I can't help but feel that this was very much a case of the consequence of his action instead of his actual action.


If Jacobsen would've died (which wasn't that far off apparently), we would have said it was too little. I think the punishment is fair, he'll be back in time for Le Tour.

Which underscores that this is a punishment for the consequences, not for the offense, doesn't it? I agree that it's good to have a warning example, but it means very little if line deviations without a crash continue to go somewhat or completely unpunished.


No, as I said, it's a fair punishment for the risk. I can immediatly remember a few other sprints with DSQ this year, Sagan in le Tour, Bennett in Vuelta and Alaphillipe in L-B-L. None of them were close to being as dangerous as what Groenewegen did.

He doesn't get punished because of Jakobsen's injuries, but because of the danger of his actions. This was just always going to end bad.


Don't agree. If Jakobsen got away with minor injuries we wouldn't be talking about this. The injuries of Jakobsen are the reason for the lengthy ban. Otherwise we should be seeing these lengthy bans more often. These sort of manouvres in a mass sprint are very common and all of them are a potential disaster if you're unlucky.


But how was Jakobsen ever going to walk away from that with minor injuries?

This was simply the most criminal move I've seen in a sprint for years. You can't compare that to Sagan's or Bennett's small headbutt.


I've seen worse moves that went unpunished just because a rider was lucky enough to escape with no lifethreatening injuries.
 
ivaneurope
In other news, Danilo Hondo (implicated in the Aderlass scandal nearly 2 years ago) has admitted that he and Alessandro Petacchi were using banned substances from Dr. Mark Schmidt.
i.imgur.com/rrQH4R2.png
i.imgur.com/KoxIGiG.png
 
Ollfardh
Wilier wrote:
Ollfardh wrote:
Wilier wrote:
Ollfardh wrote:
cunego59 wrote:
Ollfardh wrote:
Miguel98 wrote:
Groenewegen has been suspended until May 5th 2021.

I can try to understand the decision made by the UCI, but I can't help but feel that this was very much a case of the consequence of his action instead of his actual action.


If Jacobsen would've died (which wasn't that far off apparently), we would have said it was too little. I think the punishment is fair, he'll be back in time for Le Tour.

Which underscores that this is a punishment for the consequences, not for the offense, doesn't it? I agree that it's good to have a warning example, but it means very little if line deviations without a crash continue to go somewhat or completely unpunished.


No, as I said, it's a fair punishment for the risk. I can immediatly remember a few other sprints with DSQ this year, Sagan in le Tour, Bennett in Vuelta and Alaphillipe in L-B-L. None of them were close to being as dangerous as what Groenewegen did.

He doesn't get punished because of Jakobsen's injuries, but because of the danger of his actions. This was just always going to end bad.


Don't agree. If Jakobsen got away with minor injuries we wouldn't be talking about this. The injuries of Jakobsen are the reason for the lengthy ban. Otherwise we should be seeing these lengthy bans more often. These sort of manouvres in a mass sprint are very common and all of them are a potential disaster if you're unlucky.


But how was Jakobsen ever going to walk away from that with minor injuries?

This was simply the most criminal move I've seen in a sprint for years. You can't compare that to Sagan's or Bennett's small headbutt.


I've seen worse moves that went unpunished just because a rider was lucky enough to escape with no lifethreatening injuries.


Name one.
Changed my sig, this was getting absurd.
 
Gustavovskiy
For instance Bos vs Impey Tour of Turkey 09 - a far more violent and wreckless attitude resulted in a laughable 1 month ban
Manager of pcmdaily.com/images/mg/2020/Micros/duo.png Duolingo pcmdaily.com/images/mg/2020/Micros/duo.png
 
Ollfardh
Gustavovskiy wrote:
For instance Bos vs Impey Tour of Turkey 09 - a far more violent and wreckless attitude resulted in a laughable 1 month ban


I think we all agree there that 1 month was a joke there, but still, I think what Groenewegen did was much more dangerous because the speed was so much higher (downhill approach + full sprint).
Changed my sig, this was getting absurd.
 
Wilier
Ollfardh wrote:
Gustavovskiy wrote:
For instance Bos vs Impey Tour of Turkey 09 - a far more violent and wreckless attitude resulted in a laughable 1 month ban


I think we all agree there that 1 month was a joke there, but still, I think what Groenewegen did was much more dangerous because the speed was so much higher (downhill approach + full sprint).


The speed was extremely high and therefore it was more risky, yes. But that's because the the finish was ridiculously placed on/after a downhill. You can't expect the a sprinter to slow down, because another rider will glady take the risk to win.

About the move. Yes, it was illegal and dangerous, but also something I see more often. I don't disagree with the big punishment. It's just that I have no faith in UCI being consequent and I fear the punishment was only because of the severity of the injuries. Imo these moves should be punished harder than just a relegation and/or DSQ.

The right course of action should be for the riders and teams to protest any kind of dangerous finish. Though actually it should not be up to the riders to guarantee the safety. UCI and race organisers should guarantee that. No more dangerous sprint finishes. Also the barriers need improving. It should not be possible for a driver to go through them and the barriers should not come onto the road.
 
Ad Bot
Posted on 28-07-2021 23:54
Bot Agent

Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09

IP: None  
TheManxMissile
Wilier wrote:
About the move. Yes, it was illegal and dangerous, but also something I see more often. I don't disagree with the big punishment. It's just that I have no faith in UCI being consequent and I fear the punishment was only because of the severity of the injuries. Imo these moves should be punished harder than just a relegation and/or DSQ.


I said this previously, this is very much a punishment not in proportion to the act. This was done by the UCI to send a message out more for PR service than actual impact against the rider.

The UCI have been closing in on irregular sprinting, and we have seen a measurable increase in riders receiving fines and DQ's/relegations over the last few years. This is the UCI's primary method of dealing with this issue and it will continue in this fashion.

The right course of action should be for the riders and teams to protest any kind of dangerous finish. Though actually it should not be up to the riders to guarantee the safety. UCI and race organisers should guarantee that. No more dangerous sprint finishes. Also the barriers need improving. It should not be possible for a driver to go through them and the barriers should not come onto the road.


I mean, the riders were "happy" to protest a wet day in the Giro. The problem is the peloton will never be united on this issue. For a historical idea, look at how long it took to get the peloton to agree about wearing a helmet! Maybe we'll get there but honestly it will take another decade at least to unite the peloton.

Moving to the basis of rules from the UCI. The UCI rules are sort of there. The issue here for the UCI is enforcement vs race organisers.
Can the UCI challenge ASO or RCS? Not really, the power there is with the organiser. This is know long running battle.
Can ASO/RCS pay for better barriers/safety? Yes... but they won't. They'll argue this was a freak occurrence and point to a ton of other finishing crashes there were "fine". Let alone a smaller race organiser who's budget will already be super tight. (having worked on RideLondon several years ago now, and a few other events bits, barriers are f*cking expensive! and even if you hire the right kind you are still relying on them being set-up correctly. Long point cut short, there are a ton of ways saying "well just do it safer" doesn't really work)
i.imgur.com/UmX5YX1.jpgi.imgur.com/iRneKpI.jpgi.imgur.com/fljmGSP.jpgi.imgur.com/qV5ItIc.jpgimgur.com/dr2BAI6.jpgimgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpgi.imgur.com/C1rG9BW.jpgi.imgur.com/sEDS7gr.jpg
 
Ollfardh
Of course the finish was dangerous as heck (exactly one year after Bjorg Lambrecht died by the way), but the circumstances are what they are. UCI is part of the problem here as well and only punishing Groenewegen but not themselves is very wrong, but in the end it all came down to a decision Groenewegen made. He knew how fast he was going therefore he knows how fast Jakobsen was going when he pushed him in the barriers.

It really was the most dangerous thing I've ever seen in a sprint (and I'm old enough to remember Abdoujaparov). I completely agree with the 9 month ban (and let's face, it's only 3-4 months in reality) on the condition other sprint incidents also get harder bans.
Changed my sig, this was getting absurd.
 
Shonak
https://www.cycli...-tribunal/

Freeman has been accused by the General Medical Council of ordering testosterone patches in March 2011 'knowing or believing' they were to be used to enhance the performance of an athlete. He denies this and has claimed they were for former British Cycling and Team Sky coach Shane Sutton to treat erectile dysfunction. Sutton furiously denied the banned substance was for him when questioned early in the hearing.


I would also deny :lol:
pcmdaily.com/files/Awards2016/team.png
pcmdaily.com/files/Awards2017/manager.png

"It’s a little bit scary when Contador attacks." - Tommy V
 
ringo182
Shonak wrote:
https://www.cycli...-tribunal/

Freeman has been accused by the General Medical Council of ordering testosterone patches in March 2011 'knowing or believing' they were to be used to enhance the performance of an athlete. He denies this and has claimed they were for former British Cycling and Team Sky coach Shane Sutton to treat erectile dysfunction. Sutton furiously denied the banned substance was for him when questioned early in the hearing.


I would also deny :lol:


To be fair, using them for Erectile Dysfunction can be classed as performance enhancing :lol:
"Ringo is exactly right", Shonak - 8 September 2016
 
ringo182
https://www.cycli...e-in-2011/

Let the speculation begin. Who do you think it was?
"Ringo is exactly right", Shonak - 8 September 2016
 
FreitasPCM
You know, I tried doing a small piece of research yesterday but couldn’t come up with any names that retired mid-2011 stating “lack of motivation reasons.” Perhaps someone from the smaller teams back in the day.
 
ringo182
FreitasPCM wrote:
You know, I tried doing a small piece of research yesterday but couldn’t come up with any names that retired mid-2011 stating “lack of motivation reasons.” Perhaps someone from the smaller teams back in the day.


Could even have been a track, MTB or Cyclo-Cross rider I guess.
"Ringo is exactly right", Shonak - 8 September 2016
 
Marcovdw
Sipke Zijlstra most likely. He lives in Burgum, where the out-of-competition doping check took place (source: https://twitter.c...4640271360 )
Manager of Minions
 
Jump to Forum:
Similar Threads
Thread Forum Replies Last Post
News in 2021 Cycling 270 23-07-2021 16:16
News in December Cycling 20 23-12-2020 10:48
General Football News Football 675 25-11-2020 20:17
News in October Cycling 21 02-11-2020 14:20
News in September Cycling 60 01-10-2020 22:52
Login
Username

Password



Not a member yet?
Click here to register.

Forgotten your password?
Request a new one here.
Latest content
Screenshots
Sprint close-up
Sprint close-up
PCM 08: Beautiful Screenshots
Fantasy Betting
Current bets:
No bets available.
Best gamblers:
bullet roturn 3,151 PCM$
bullet df_Trek 3,049 PCM$
bullet fintas 3,020 PCM$
bullet jseadog1 2,900 PCM$
bullet baseba... 2,863 PCM$

bullet Main Fantasy Betting page
bullet Rankings: Top 100
ManGame Betting
Current bets:
No bets available.
Best gamblers:
bullet jseadog1 2,700 PCM$
bullet df_Trek 2,700 PCM$
bullet Marcovdw 2,600 PCM$
bullet baseball... 2,600 PCM$
bullet valverde321 2,500 PCM$

bullet Main MG Betting page
bullet Get weekly MG PCM$
bullet Rankings: Top 100
Render time: 0.15 seconds