when a crashed rider tries to get back to the pack he’ll suck any draft that comes his way happens any race day anywhere UCI as corrupt as Fifa,these gentlemen mostly never suffered on a bike but gamble out their politics on the green table
Exactly! Especially when crash occures due to race organizers negligence, like it happened when they allow a car to be parked on the course and did not bother to warn cyclists.
I don't think they're corrupt, just obsessed by the rules and failing to see why the rules were made. Full of their own ego and inflated sense of importance they rigidly try to follow the rules. Laws should be obeyed, rules should be interpreted. Riders should have way more influence on cycling than a bunch of old men.
right decision of UCI. When you fall, if you are overtaken by all the cars of the other teams, according to the regulation, you can use the car train to get back into the group. This means that you can do in-out-in-out in behind cars (as Roglic did, it was about taking-letting-taking-leaving); here happened a different thing: the machine of his team cut the air continuously for 2 minutes. they should have considered this both the athlete and the director of his team.
Its really weird, like he was absolutely smashed from the crash and only drafted in catching up to the peloton. UCI looks like they are being overly discretionary with evidence that isn't apparently available.
There are clips available that show he drafted considerably longer behind team car . Him getting back to the pack affected the result . The fault was the amount of time it took to pull him from the race
The winners from the Sept competition are 1. Cameron Gray (Lesmahagow); 2. Stew Powell (Malvern) 3. Debra Sluz Parker (Cranbrook). Congrats! Thanks to everyone who entered here and on fft.tips/strava.
Cheating is unlawfully gaining an advantage on some other riders. If there are situations which are not strictly regulated and someone decides to gamble hoping to get away with something with the purpose of getting an unfair advantage then I would consider it cheating. The rules on the Dutch rider were applied unreasonably strictly in my opinion.
So who the F care??? He crashed, it's not like he got dropped, he's in disadvantage not like he's taking advantage of anyone or anything. Just turn your brain on
this where the rules are open to interpretation. yes he drafted for several minutes, but other riders have done so trying to catch up after a crash without penalty. UCI is too concerned about not looking dumb. and not enough concern about fairness.
Although the UCI are dodgy I’ve been following their bullshit since the Obree days. I actually agree with them on this but they could of handled it better. If he was drafting behind race support vehicles and not making a determined effort over a prolonged amount of time till he rejoined the race then he should be disqualified. The UCI should of disqualified him mid race. The UCI should have say a drafting vehicle so it allows the rider to rejoin the race as quickly as possible in the event of a crash.
Proper presentation of this. I see nothing in that long video clip that merits disqualification. He cleverly radioed the team car back after initially passing it, then took a bottle. That's creative, but nothing wrong with it. Utter joke. The UCI is no longer fit for purpose. Now headed by an ASO lapdog, with his major concerns about sock length, whilst the financial structure of the sport slowly collapses and professional riders lose their livelihoods. The goose is cooked. It's over. At least under Cookson, some things were going the right way. Worse than FIFA.
They have since released the full video. I also didn't believe what was seen it that video was worthy of being DQ'd, having seen the full video, the 2 whole minutes prior to that above, I am now in agreement that the DQ is justified.
Okay, now I found the "full" video. I don't know. The UCI did themselves no favours by not releasing the footage at first. That's certain. I would still be inclined to say the DQ had to happen during the race. Doing it after he won was simply too late. His very presence in the race screwed up the revised overall anyway. How would the race have ended if he hadn't been there at all? These kinds of decisions are simply awful. Formula 1 has had similar problems over the last few years, leading to real fury amongst fans.
won the race but robbed by some, probably, non cycling suits. Most of us couldn't get back in after such an incident or if we did would blow up on the next hill. It's not like it's not a great effort to get back in even with some help.
The rules are too ambiguous and enforced erratically. The UCI needs to implement a standard for these situations. In crit racing you often get a free lap in the first half or 2/3rds of the race after a crash or flat. My crazy idea would be to have a dedicated moto that would be the only legal means of getting a pull back to the front. After a crash everyone would have to line up behind the moto to get their "free lap". At some point during the race the moto is pulled and no vehicle drafting whatsoever is allowed.
Here's the full incident twitter.com/Cyclingnewsfeed/status/1177926227983765504 My problem now is that he had to be DQ'd during the race, at least before the finishing circuit. His presence at the finish influenced the overall, and may well have changed it. He shouldn't have been there at all. Also, there needs to be real clarity on drafting after accidents. How much of this kind of footage is there from hundreds of professional bike races over the last decade, which we never see and where commissaires didn't do anything? Regardless, the UCI has far bigger internal problems than just this, and as an organisation, it is not fit for purpose. But it isn't "just" the UCI. It's also the ASO and the whole structure of professional cycling, which is financially unsustainable.
Pro cycling is an entertainment business that creates a spectacle by leveraging super-human performance against concepts like "fair" competition, then sells advertising based on the size of the spectacle created. A wise viewer recognizes that whatever is determined to be good for business is ultimately going to be determined to be "fair". As far as what "cheating" is, it's not clearly defined, but rather its one of those "you know it when you see it" type of things. I think that most people would generally define it as operating outside of the rules to gain an unfair advantage. But it also seems that the culture of the sport has as much to say about what cheating is as the actual rules themselves, which is why it is so hard to get a consensus of opinion on what cheating actually is. For example, if its against the rules but everyone does it (epo in 1999), is it cheating? If no one does it, but its not against the rules (attacking a Grand Tour leader after a mishap), is that cheating?
@FastFitnessTips Your video clip doesn't show the full extent of the drafting. Maybe you should have viewed the video listed below. Do you still have the same opinion now? Also, how do you think #29 felt when he was passed? ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-8C4DuvqSpqQ.html
Like TUEs it's not cheating unless "we" (the UCI) determine it's cheating and you don't have expensive lawyers to appeal ... and folks wonder why cycling fans have no respect for the UCI?!
Drafting a team car is normal practice as riders get back to the front. Holding the car, or if the team car that is being drafted is passing other cars, yeah, that would be cheating. Just look at the rear bumpers of various team cars, they all have tire scuff marks from various riders drafting very closely for several moments at a time.
My company rules that are approved by the government are there only for one reason. For firing employees at any given time. Most people are bending most of these rules everyday yet business as usual... Rules are put only to hold them against you whenever you’re accidentally pushed in front of the camera.
More complete footage here: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-lf60ZHNtnGk.html ps. 20% of our trainingpeaks plans using coupon "youtube" LINK: fft.tips/tpp
It seems that Eekhoff was just a bit too blatant about it - but it certainly seems to confirm the idea that the UCI is basically trying to manage the image of both cycling and itself - I mean, we all know what really goes on don't we? (I can remember the same debate back in 2003 when it was very clear Armstrong was artificially augmented, and even before that with Indurain!) This basically means that the UCI is a political venture - in terms of psychological space, this is the basis for neuroses - the obvious gap between truth and image, the denial of that gap, and the huge investment of time and energy in the maintenance of image, along with an utter abandonment of any concept of internal consistency which was never really established in the first place. This is what makes Armstrong such an interesting case - unlike Virenque et al who simply said sorry, won't do it again - Armstrong threatened to blow the lid on the whole thing, he refused to play the UCI's game of maintaining the pretence that we all know to be a false front, but which is basically the only glue we have which stops the whole thing falling apart.
Nibali was using to advance. Nils crashed and didn’t pass following car. It like crits when u crash u jump back in where u were. I see no foul on his or the team car follow. He was still pedaling not being drug.
You've gathered part of the evidence and invited a discussion. Not smart. Gather it all, or at least a lot more, such as here: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-lf60ZHNtnGk.html Eekhoff may as well just have climbed inside his team car. They are describing it as a 10km single car tow. He's not even pedaling some of the time. Wholly crap.
The whole sport of cycling is getting to be a turn off for me. I can't sit here and list everything I've witnessed, read, and heard about over the last two decades I've followed racing but I don't get the same enjoyment from watching Pro racing anymore. Plus, the cost of subscriptions to the Networks that broadcast is in excess of $200 a year so I could watch races is not a good value. I can watch so many other more exciting sports for a lot less money. UCI, you have lost my interests and won't be getting another penny from me.
Here's the perspective of someone who is almost certainly, a current, World Tour pro. cyclingtips.com/2019/09/the-secret-pro-drafting-cars-happens-nils-eekhoff-should-be-world-champ/
You'll also notice in the comments below that it is, indeed, mentioned (as hearsay, but nevertheless), that this kind of drafting does indeed happen hundreds of times each year in pro races, with not a word said about it. The UCI would have opened up a can of worms, were it not for the fact that they will go straight back to completely ignoring drafting again when the new season starts. Not fit for purpose. Get rid of the lot of them.
I like most of your videos but I recommend that people pass on this one. Instead of answering your own question you give two cases where the UCI banned someone and then ask the question, "What is cheating in professional cycling?" to your viewers. Most people come here because they want an expert's answer to your own question, not to read lots of amateur comments.
@@Fastfitnesstips I agree but you could have at least gone over the most common UCI violations and given examples of riders getting penalized for them. Aliens came to earth looking for intelligent life. They read the youtube comments section and left immediately. I hope you understand my point.
Nothing wrong with opening up a conversation--especially where there is a lot of ambiguity involved. Nothing wrong with an "expert" saying, I don't know all the answers--perhaps I can learn something from you all. Kind of cool for a change.
@@stevenr5149 RU-vid is one of the worst places to open up a discussion. I've been on RU-vid since it's creation and the number of intelligent posts is pathetic. Most people are looking for an informative video, not an open discussion on the topic. If people want to have an intelligent discussion, I recommend Quora. There are lots of good intelligent posts there (the questions sometimes aren't though, but the answers are often brilliant).
One way of looking at it. Was that rider going to win anyway? Then fine the rider or don't give full points for the win, and warn them--maybe. In this case, it sucked that the rider crashed and hurt himself--but he probably would have not won without drafting the team cars. So disqualify in that situation. A perfect solution would be to take away the exact time that rider gained from cheating. Quantum computing not there yet--LOL. If riders know there are reliable/consistent penalties for cheating, they will stop. As long as some percentage of people think they can get away with it--they will cheat. Cyclists are people.
