Mac66
Senior Member
- Location
- Newbury-ish
In light of the recent Tdf race neutralisation, are team and even individuals agreements a good or bad thing in cycling?
Are they just a romantic ideal that has no place in modern sport? After all shouldnt the aim be to win? Winning "fairly" may have the moral high ground, but a win is a win. No awards for "fairest" cyclist/team.
Are they just self serving and hypocritical? It could be argued that a large number of teams had an interest in seeing the stage neutralised on grounds of time losses. Boassen-Hagen was attacked during his comfort break not so long ago. Where is the consistency in decisions about whether it is good form to attack or not? There doesn't appear to be any.
Lady luck doesn't play favourites. If you are attacked during a misshap, you will get the chance to attack when someone else is in trouble.
Don't these just cheat the fans?
As for me, well on the whole I am for them. Rose-tinted romantic duffer? Probably .
Are they just a romantic ideal that has no place in modern sport? After all shouldnt the aim be to win? Winning "fairly" may have the moral high ground, but a win is a win. No awards for "fairest" cyclist/team.
Are they just self serving and hypocritical? It could be argued that a large number of teams had an interest in seeing the stage neutralised on grounds of time losses. Boassen-Hagen was attacked during his comfort break not so long ago. Where is the consistency in decisions about whether it is good form to attack or not? There doesn't appear to be any.
Lady luck doesn't play favourites. If you are attacked during a misshap, you will get the chance to attack when someone else is in trouble.
Don't these just cheat the fans?
As for me, well on the whole I am for them. Rose-tinted romantic duffer? Probably .