crash involving riders and race vehicles

[roadrash]

that problem already has a solution does it , that's good to know

 

[Dogtrousers]

Why treat race vehicle related incidents differently from any other crashes?

It just introduces an extra ambiguous layer of complication. Why is it different from a bollard or barrier related incident? (Both the direct responsibility of the organisers) Or a crowd or dog related incident? Or just a touch of wheels?

What is the motivation behind this? To be fair to riders who crash through no fault of their own? But the vast majority of riders who crash are blameless. The majority are brought down by other riders, who were in turn were brought down by something else. So what's the difference between a rider who is brought down by another rider who struck/was struck by a vehicle and a rider who is brought down by another rider who had a lapse of concentration and clipped their wheel? IMO it doesn't make any sense to single out crashes with one particular root cause for special treatment.

As to neutralising the race, I don't know enough to say but surely the circumstances in which this would be practical are limited. On a flat stage with the group all together, no real problem. But with the race strung out going up a climb, as with the Blockhaus on Sunday I would imagine it would be very difficult.

 

[roadrash]

I imagine it would be impossible to restart every rider in the same time differences as before the incident , even if it could be done it would still cause problems, some riders waiting a hell of a long time to restart in which time they have cooled down etc

 

[T.M.H.N.E.T]

Neutralising the race after a race vehicle incident is concentrating on the issue -

That's reactive, after riders have been on the deck. Now try a proactive solution to lessen or indeed prevent the number of moto/vehicle related stories in the past two years or so

 

[iandg]

I think (with my limited poor knowledge of the rules etc) that there are very strong arguments on both sides?

We have seen urine sprayed into rider's faces. We have seen a camera car wipe out two big names? We have seen the recent Giro incident. Is it such a leap to consider that external factors could become the overall deciding factors in who wins and who loses? when will we see a 'fan' make a decisive input to a race and determine the winner? what if a team car takes somebody out? What if a 'neutral' car breaks down in a steep climb causing a split? etc etc....

There was a famous one in 1975

 

[suzeworld]

IT was heart-breaking to see G on the floor in that recent crash, but even so I didn't think the race should have been stopped. Movistar were pulling really hard and stretching everyone out, at that point ... they were entitled to press on, and usually that is my view.

I have liked it in some past Grand Tours when the courtesy of race-leaders has been to back-pedal if they heard a close contender was involved in an incident, but I wouldn't blame any race-leader who kept going at whatever he was doing at that time. Quintana could come off in the TT - we wouldn't expect everyone else to hold up for that length of time to "level the field" - cycling isn't a level field, it is an organic and dangerous sport and that has effects in the outcomes.

 

[roadrash]

so far 12 votes for stopping the race and 16 against stopping the race, ......oh and 1 don't know

 

[mjr]

That's reactive, after riders have been on the deck. Now try a proactive solution to lessen or indeed prevent the number of moto/vehicle related stories in the past two years or so

No, the penalty for the race organiser is afterwards, but they'll find the proactive solutions so we don't need to be all nanny state about that.

 

[T.M.H.N.E.T]

Ask Stig Broekx, Peter Sagan, Elia Viviani amongst others what the penalty is for riders.

 

[mjr]

Why treat race vehicle related incidents differently from any other crashes?

Because they're not part of racing and being hit by a car or moto is much more dangerous than most racing collisions.

It just introduces an extra ambiguous layer of complication.

Actually, it removes one ambiguity. The provision to neutralise the race for this is already there, with the ambiguous complication of it being at the discretion of the race director.

What is the motivation behind this? To be fair to riders who crash through no fault of their own?

No, to protect all riders from the race motor vehicles.

 

[FishFright]

Over the years I've seen many similar incidents on Grand tours with hardly a ripple on forums but now it's happened to Sky it seems things need to change .

 

[mjr]

Ask Stig Broekx, Peter Sagan, Elia Viviani amongst others what the penalty is for riders.

Sure, and at the minute, the race goes on like nothing happened and people see it as part of racing. We need to make it disrupt the race for the organisers so that they'll start to take it seriously every time, instead of the current rubbish where it tightens up for a few races after a bad incident and then it's back to the same old problem again.

 

[T.M.H.N.E.T]

Over the years I've seen many similar incidents on Grand tours with hardly a ripple on forums but now it's happened to Sky it seems things need to change .

Eh it's been happening with frightening regularity for the past two seasons, not just to SKY.

In fact, was the first rider down in this case not from Sunweb?

 

[roadrash]

Eh it's been happening with frightening regularity for the past two seasons, not just

to SKY.

In fact, was the first rider down in this case not from Sunweb?

beat me to it

 

[mjr]

Over the years I've seen many similar incidents on Grand tours with hardly a ripple on forums but now it's happened to Sky it seems things need to change .

I'm not a particular fan of Sky and I first said race vehicle management needs to change years ago, on another long lost cycling forum.