Is Sagan's DQ good for Cycling?

LCD

Firstly I don't believe his actions warranted a DQ. However that's for another thread.

Is the DQ getting cycling coverage it otherwise wouldn't have gotten? Radio Nova is on in work all the time. Cycling is NEVER mentioned in the hourly sports bulletin, even Martin's 3rd on Monday didn't warrant a mention. Now Sagan is on the bulletin & the DJ has even mentioned it.

Cycling is getting non doping related media coverage, so for the sport as a whole is it good? Pro cycling teams after all are moving billboards. If Sagan had won 10 stages I don't believe it would get the same coverage outside of cycling media.

Beasty

In my view it's good for cycling - it sends out messages that such behaviour of deliberately endangering others is simply not acceptable, and that no-one is above such sanction.

Mr. Grieves

LCD wrote: »

Cycling is getting non doping related media coverage, so for the sport as a whole is it good? Pro cycling teams after all are moving billboards.

On this point about moving billboards, I doubt the coverage in non-cycling media puts the sponsors name in the mind of people, even if the sponsors are mentioned at all. The Irish Times were using the same picture of Dan Martin in a Garmin jersey for years which probably didn't delight his new team.

I find it annoying that the only time cycling pops up in conversation at work is when something unusual enough to be picked up outside cycling media happens. Like the motor-doping at the cyclocross Worlds or the level-crossing incident at Paris-Roubaix. But it's a niche sport in Ireland, so not that surprising. I'm not sure if this is a good or bad thing for cycling, it might be neither.

Weepsie

Yes and no. Yes as it's exposure, but it's still in the negative sensationalist mood

I don't really deliberately endangered anyone, I think Cavendish got himself stuck in a stupid position personally.

Cavendish's history shows you can get away with deliberately endangering cyclists too.

Lusk_Doyle

@ Beasty what race were you watching that enabled one rider in a line of 6 or so to be singled out and dq'd when following the wheels of those in front?

07Lapierre

Why wasn't Demare penalised?

REBELSAFC

Beasty wrote: »

In my view it's good for cycling - it sends out messages that such behaviour of deliberately endangering others is simply not acceptable, and that no-one is above such sanction.

I only wish the UCI had this attitude ten years ago. Do they even have that attitude now when it comes to more serious offences in the sport?

greenspurs

But its in the media because of more negative reasons again....

When it was announced after the stage that he was relegated to last , and docked 80 points i said "WOW- clamp down"...
But then to hear he was thrown out is seriously over the top (a bit like John Dekenkolb was when he rolled over Cav yesterday )
I think it is a bad decision...

The French champion , in the French Champions gear, riding for a French team , winning a stage in the Tour de France escaped punishment after performing a dangerous switch of lines during the sprint !? Why ? ...Hmmmmm .
Or is it you can swerve and switch in the spring , as long as no one comes down ??
Is it the action, or the result of the action that a penalty depends upon ??

07Lapierre

greenspurs wrote: »

But its in the media because of more negative reasons again....

When it was announced after the stage that he was relegated to last , and docked 80 points i said "WOW- clamp down"...
But then to hear he was thrown out is seriously over the top (a bit like John Dekenkolb was when he rolled over Cav yesterday )
I think it is a bad decision...

The French champion , in the French Champions gear, riding for a French team , winning a stage in the Tour de France escaped punishment after performing a dangerous switch of lines during the sprint !? Why ? ...Hmmmmm .
Or is it you can swerve and switch in the spring , as long as no one comes down ??
Is it the action, or the result of the action that a penalty depends upon ??

But being relegated to last is no deterrent to anyone unless your going for a GC spot. Sprinters go for stage wins. GC means nothing.

Edit: sorry, just noticed the 80pts penalty.. I assume that's Green Jersey points?

greenspurs

07Lapierre wrote: »

But being relegated to last is no deterrent to anyone unless your going for a GC spot. Sprinters go for stage wins. GC means nothing.

Edit: sorry, just noticed the 80pts penalty.. I assume that's Green Jersey points?

He was deducted points as well ......

mcgratheoin

greenspurs wrote: »

Or is it you can swerve and switch in the spring , as long as no one comes down ??
Is it the action, or the result of the action that a penalty depends upon ??

This is the nub of the issue for me. Similar to leg breaker tackles in football, and tackling in the air in rugby, the result seems to have had a huge bearing on the punishment. While accepting for example that murder should be penalised more than attempted murder, the concept makes me a bit uncomfortable. In this case (let's assume that Sagan's move was indeed as dangerous as the organisers decided) if Cav had sat up or backed off as Sagan moved over would we be having this discussion? (I'm aware that he probably couldn't have done either, but treat it as a hypothetical question)

It seems to me that the sport itself needs to take more responsibility for the safety of riders in sprints. Sagan's actions were not the worst we've seen in sprints, but the outcome was pretty bad and lucky not to be worse. As Matthews said "Certain riders race like idiots", the problem is that they are generally permitted to ride like that. When you toss in the ridiculous finishes that we see from organisers and the blatant disregard for riders' safety vis a vis road furniture/crowds on mountain stages etc.., it's hard to escape the conclusion that an accident like this has been coming for a long time but the organisers have thrown one cyclist under the bus to create the impression that safety is a priority.

Is it good for cycling? For generating external publicity it doesn't matter - people will have forgotten by the weekend. For the sport it's only good if it marks the start of a genuine clamp down on dangerous behaviour in the sprints.

REBELSAFC

07Lapierre wrote: »

But being relegated to last is no deterrent to anyone unless your going for a GC spot. Sprinters go for stage wins. GC means nothing.

Edit: sorry, just noticed the 80pts penalty.. I assume that's Green Jersey points?

No but the 80pt deduction would seriously hurt his green jersey ambitions

07Lapierre

REBELSAFC wrote: »

No but the 80pt deduction would seriously hurt his green jersey ambitions

Point taken...i'll read the full post before replying next time.

Weepsie

REBELSAFC wrote: »

No but the 80pt deduction would seriously hurt his green jersey ambitions

Sagan has won the green jersey by 141, 97, 149, 66 & 242 points over the last 4 years. Maybe there was a risk he would embarrass all the others by still winning it with the deduction.

rtmie

It is nigh impossible to determine objectively for definite fault/intent in the incident, Viz the stage 4 thread, Twitter etc incl people like Greipel flipping and flopping. Even more difficult to isolate fault purely to one cyclist, was the action independent or in response to an action of a 3rd cyclist in the sprint.

Can't help but feel that commisaires have made a rod for their backs. Will every sprint be looked at through this lens with the same DQ penalty? Can anyone clearly state the threshold for guilt/innocence or for DQ Vs deduction?
Seems a bit like the pulling and dragging at corners in soccer. Everyone knows rules been broken by all parties but no consistent rulings.

Beasty

Lusk_Doyle wrote: »

@ Beasty what race were you watching that enabled one rider in a line of 6 or so to be singled out and dq'd when following the wheels of those in front?

Would you, or any other poster around here, "appreciate" someone shoving their elbow in your face during a club league race resulting in you being off work for 3 months?

He was DQ'd quite rightly in my view for that behaviour. You are perfectly entitled to an alternative view, but the example Sagan set was atrocious in mine.

Beasty

greenspurs wrote: »

But its in the media because of more negative reasons again....

I would say exactly the opposite. The action taken sends a very positive (and powerful) message out to racers (at all levels), teams, spectators, sponsors and organisers that such behaviour will not be tolerated

greenspurs

Beasty wrote: »

Would you, or any other poster around here, "appreciate" someone shoving their elbow in your face during a club league race resulting in you being off work for 3 months?

He was DQ'd quite rightly in my view for that behaviour. You are perfectly entitled to an alternative view, but the example Sagan set was atrocious in mine.

To me, it looks like the elbow (and right knee) came out after he felt Cav hit him , in a movement to maintain his (sagans) own balance.

07Lapierre

Beasty wrote: »

Would you, or any other poster around here, "appreciate" someone shoving their elbow in your face during a club league race resulting in you being off work for 3 months?

He was DQ'd quite rightly in my view for that behaviour. You are perfectly entitled to an alternative view, but the example Sagan set was atrocious in mine.

I think Demane, Segan and Cav all showed poor sprinting behaviour. But only one rider was penalised.

Cav..went for a gap that was never there. Segan moved over to block Cav
and As for Demane! IMO he was lethal! (but got away with it)

Weepsie

07Lapierre wrote: »

I think Demane, Segan and Cav all showed poor sprinting behaviour. But only one rider was penalised.

Cav..went for a gap that was never there. Segan moved over to block Cav
and As for Demane! IMO he was lethal! (but got away with it)

He was moving over before the others went by him. As where the rider on front of him. Don't think he was blocking anyone. Cavendish has his head leaning into Sagan's shoulder too. Sagan did what he had to do to stop himself crashing. If you're going to DQ him, DQ Cavendish too, even if he is injured.

Maybe a penalty points system would be better.

07Lapierre

Weepsie wrote: »

He was moving over before the others went by him. As where the rider on front of him. Don't think he was blocking anyone. Cavendish has his head leaning into Sagan's shoulder too. Sagan did what he had to do to stop himself crashing. If you're going to DQ him, DQ Cavendish too, even if he is injured.

Maybe a penalty points system would be better.

Not blocking? when sprinting, what other reason is there to move left or right? Your supposed to sprint in a straight line.

Segan may not have known who was behind him, but he was certainly making sure whoever it was wasnt going to get by.

Djoucer

Neither good or bad.

It's a quiet sports news day hence the mention on radio. Same thing will happen when there is an incident at Wimbledon.

Would imagine Irish sports fans are well disposed to some argy bargy in cycling thanks to Kelly. No one is suddebly going to believe cycling is violent

Weepsie

07Lapierre wrote: »

Not blocking? when sprinting, what other reason is there to move left or right? Your supposed to sprint in a straight line.

Segan may not have known who was behind him, but he was certainly making sure whoever it was wasnt going to get by.

Neither Demare not Cavendish are taking a straight line either though. If it's the thing to throw at one rider, then throw it all of them as they are all doing it.

07Lapierre

Weepsie wrote: »

Neither Demare not Cavendish are taking a straight line either though. If it's the thing to throw at one rider, then throw it all of them as they are all doing it.

Agree: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=103999952&postcount=19

Lumen

Beasty wrote: »

Would you, or any other poster around here, "appreciate" someone shoving their elbow in your face during a club league race resulting in you being off work for 3 months?

You're right, this is exactly the same as a bit of elbowing in a club league race.

pelevin

How did you respond at the time to this Beasty? Obviously not comparable in terms of speed but Cav seems far more culpable in terms of clearly & solely being at fault. The rider he hit ended in hospital. Viviani also down but able to continue. I also think the footage from the front shows pretty clearly there was no elbow from Sagan to the face of Cav which you seem to be insisting on as being especially bad. In the Olympics where Cavendish is at the very least reckless & whilst hopefully wrongly but it appears intentional, the penalty was no penalty. Were you demanding at the time Cav be disqualified? Cav completely accepted blame for the incident and yet as said zero penalty.

Have to watch the link on YT.

Daroxtar

Cavendish

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mif_tnfKzMw

Sagan

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrPb_BMw9Lk

Cav is a snake. He's congratulating the commissars for their courage in sending Sagan home and then having a sly dig at Greipel for changing his mind after re watching the crash.

Somedude9

07Lapierre wrote: »

I think Demane, Segan and Cav all showed poor sprinting behaviour. But only one rider was penalised.

Cav..went for a gap that was never there. Segan moved over to block Cav
and As for Demane! IMO he was lethal! (but got away with it)

Damn right, but let's not forget Greipel neither, who was the catalyst for the ensuing chaos.

cajonlardo

Mr. Grieves wrote: »

On this point about moving billboards, I doubt the coverage in non-cycling media puts the sponsors name in the mind of people, .

Dunno, I remember the year that PDM tapes and videos sales spiked unexpectedly. Obviously the senior sales managers were keen to understand why. They traced it to the PDM team getting ill on the tour and the media speculation. Subconciously the brand name had been planted in buyers minds

Lemming

Weepsie wrote: »

He was moving over before the others went by him. As where the rider on front of him. Don't think he was blocking anyone. Cavendish has his head leaning into Sagan's shoulder too. Sagan did what he had to do to stop himself crashing. If you're going to DQ him, DQ Cavendish too, even if he is injured.

From different photo angles I've seen from rear-above, and front-aspect it looks like Cavandish was trying it on. At the very least he instigated the whole thing by trying for a line that wasn't there. It would appear that he then tries to push an opening by using his head to nudge Sagan out of the way. Whether or not Sagan used his elbow to regain balance, close out any perceived gap, or to shrug off Cavandish's contact, the point is that it was Cavandish that instigated the whole matter and then also first instigated contact, and from the forward aspect photos it looks deliberate. If Sagan is taking a DQ, then so too should Cavandish. Given that disgraceful youtube clip above I'd be considering handing Cavandish something a bit harsher than a straight up DQ from the TdF.

equivariant

Beasty wrote: »

Would you, or any other poster around here, "appreciate" someone shoving their elbow in your face during a club league race resulting in you being off work for 3 months?

He was DQ'd quite rightly in my view for that behaviour. You are perfectly entitled to an alternative view, but the example Sagan set was atrocious in mine.

I see two problems with this argument.

First, its not a club league race. No matter how much we like to think we are just like the pros in that league race, its a totally different ball game. There are a lot of things that happen routinely in pro sprints that I would not appreciate in a league race e.g. Demare closing the door on Bouhanni or Cavendish trying to push past Sagan just before the elbow. If someone tried to come past me the way that Cavendish tried to come past Sagan I would be livid. I would also be livid if someone stuck out an elbow just in front of my face. However I am not being paid to race and to take risks - all of those top sprinters are.
And I don't think that Sagan acted with malicious intent or even extreme recklessness in this situation by the standards that seem to apply in pro bunch sprints.

Second problem is that if we go for the whole "it sets a good example argument" then I'd expect at least 3 or 4 more DQs in this tour. And basically that would mean that the UCI have decided to change the sport. Bunch sprints will become much tamer and safer affairs. Maybe that is the right thing to do or maybe not, but presumably if they are going to make a huge change to way sprints are judged from now on there would have been some public announcement about that.