simply appalling sprint finish at tour de poland - should criminal charges be filed?

He could see the guy coming up on his right for sure, and from the video is clearly first cutting into his room to pass, then intentionally giving him a hip- which in normal cases would be dangerous enough, but with a metal barrier its only going to have one outcome.

That said, re comments on the safety of barriers itself, you would think that at least in those high speed tight areas, they would have barriers that offer protection and are overlapping such that you are not going to hit it head on.

A coronial investigation , here at least (in case of fatalities) would probably lay more blame and recommendations towards the organisers (for death/injuries), even if from a sporting perspective the rider deserves a sanction.

there's no doubt it was deliberate. I've seen other sprinters make similar moves on many occasions.

the big difference here was the downhill 80 km per hour finish and those crappy barriers.

race organisers and the UCI have a lot to answer for.

Sprintgeezer wrote:

It was absolutely intentional, and totally blameworthy.

Every sprinter at that level knows what is acceptable and what is not. This was not, it was a joke. Yes everyone who fouls so flagrantly should be tossed for 4 years because of the potential danger.

If only the world was as black and white as you think it is. You would think someone old enough to call themselves a "geezer" would have learned better by this point in their life.

This specific incident may be clear, but what are you going to do with the borderline, debatable cases? If you're handing out 4 year bans, then it is extremely crucial to get every decision correct with no mistakes, and not every case is obvious or clear-cut. You can be sure there would be serious legal action over every remotely debatable case. So why go that route when it isn't even necessary? You don't need 4 year bans to discourage a behavior. You just need a consistently-applied penalty that at least negates any benefits gained.

But whatever, it doesn't matter to me. I don't really care that much about the sprinting part of cycling, so I don't really feel like wasting anymore energy arguing about it. If people want sprinting to be completely consumed by endless debates and infinite slow-motion replays examining in minute detail whether a rider deviated from his line by more than a millimeter or not and therefore deserves to be banned for the rest of his career or not, then be my guest.

I bet Salvatores voting habits lean left of center.

You would think that someone who arrogates to criticize would have effective reading comprehension skills.

This specific incident IS clear. “Everyone who fouls so flagrantly” means every incident that is clear. That IS black and white. I said NOTHING about debatable cases. Try to read carefully after your knee initially jerks, and before you hit the post reply button.

Less brutally, of course debatable cases should be adjudicated. Obviously. 4 years ban is fitting—intentional, fastest and most dangerous part of the race amounts to a constructive intent to injure. The blatant violators need to be thrown out, whether apologetic or not after-the-fact. There are plenty of other riders in the world just waiting to take their place—remember, they are just one member of a team, which team is responsible for them even being in a position to contest a sprint finish.

This mess is like my car accident where the guy PIT’d me at 100km/h, how can we really know who made the first foul, did I hit quarter panel to his front first or did he try to PIT me.

Just as in my example I have no idea for the cycling race, and I have zero clue about what it’s like to race road bikes at 50+km/h

I can't believe you are actually clueless enough to suggest that Groenewegen didn't know about the approaching rider.

Chances this was accidental contact are ZERO.

These types of dirty tactics are not uncommon in sprint finishes.

Cavendish's leadout man, Renshaw, was once kicked off the Tour de France for less. The Technical Director noted "This is a bike race, not a gladiator's arena."

If you vary line in the Sprint finish, you are liable for what goes down. UCI regulations:

2.3.036 Sprints

Riders shall be strictly forbidden to deviate from the lane they selected when launching into the sprint and, in so doing, endangering others.

Ernest wrote:

Chances this was accidental contact are ZERO.

These types of dirty tactics are not uncommon in sprint finishes.

Cavendish's leadout man, Renshaw, was once kicked off the Tour de France for less. The Technical Director noted "This is a bike race, not a gladiator's arena."

If you vary line in the Sprint finish, you are liable for what goes down. UCI regulations:

2.3.036 Sprints

Riders shall be strictly forbidden to deviate from the lane they selected when launching into the sprint and, in so doing, endangering others.

+1

Thanks for posting the regulation. I've heard Phil Liggett and the late Paul Sherwen discuss it many times.

fisky wrote:

Ernest wrote:

Chances this was accidental contact are ZERO.

These types of dirty tactics are not uncommon in sprint finishes.

Cavendish's leadout man, Renshaw, was once kicked off the Tour de France for less. The Technical Director noted "This is a bike race, not a gladiator's arena."

If you vary line in the Sprint finish, you are liable for what goes down. UCI regulations:

2.3.036 Sprints

Riders shall be strictly forbidden to deviate from the lane they selected when launching into the sprint and, in so doing, endangering others.

+1

Thanks for posting the regulation. I've heard Phil Liggett and the late Paul Sherwen discuss it many times.

I still say having the barriers right up against the course is asking for trouble. There needs to be a line on the road the last 500 meters or so on both sides a few feet from the physical barriers. Call it a no ride zone and any rider who crosses it to pass a rider is penalized. Yeah it opens up some camera reviews when it happens but thats better than riders hospitalized.

You usually have individual decisions, luck, and background conditions. Here it was said above that they were going 80 km/h downhill. They were too tightly packed, way too many in contention, and the course was way too narrow. The barriers were also unsecured and where were the bales of hay?

How is it possible that we can have these big cycling events where the riders are in close contact for the entire race, with crowds watching, etc. Yet running races are all cancelled?

the video shows he couldn't have known when he started moving right because he was completely behind him

Yes mate I am extremely familiar with cycling and know exactly how common crashes - especially under sprint finish conditions are. But similar to a flagrant helmet to helmet hit on a defenseless player in the NFL, what is it going to take to discourage riders before someone dies?

You are advocating a simple DQ? Okay quick question here - if Jakobsen had been paralysed by this incident (or potentially died it was that bad) what then? A DQ? What about the official that nearly had his head taken off?

If Groenewegen hold his line like he's entitled to do then this doesn't happen. If Jakobsen then causes a pile up by riding like an a$$hole then he disappears for 12 months. Why is this equation so difficult for you to comprehend? But blatantly squashing a guy into a barrier at 65km/h is f%$king idiotic and right now there is no genuine incentive to not do this. How do I know this? As you pointed out it happens all the freaking time!

Yeah in a reasonable world it's not so drastic - but cyclists at this level aren't reasonable they are borderline psychotic. It's why they stick anything and everything in themselves in the pursuit of victory, why they stick little motors in their bottom brackets, rear wheel hubs and why they subconsciously think elbowing a competitor into a fence at dangerous speed for an automobile is acceptable "riding".

I don't even understand what you are trying to contend here if you are campaigning for safe riding.

I agree with Sal, but there is more to it than this. Sport does not exist in a bubble. Reckless endangerment, or however it is described in a country's legal system, is often a crime. Deliberately closing someone down into a barrier is proven after the fact by the consequences (English law always benefits from hindsight).

Not only can you be prosecuted for such behaviour, but also the organizers can be liable after the event.

Cyclists and organisers need to be protected from the lunatics by properly functioning and applied rules, including fairly draconian sanctions where repeatedly shown necessary.

gbnfhmn wrote:

the video shows he couldn't have known when he started moving right because he was completely behind him

No, with the rocking and rolling of body, you can see the movement out of the corner of your eye. He wasn't head down, bum up.

Runner10287 wrote:

I still say having the barriers right up against the course is asking for trouble. There needs to be a line on the road the last 500 meters or so on both sides a few feet from the physical barriers. Call it a no ride zone and any rider who crosses it to pass a rider is penalized. Yeah it opens up some camera reviews when it happens but thats better than riders hospitalized.

It is safer with proper barriers that are close up. The barrier itself should not be the danger. It will take deaths, if this is not enough, for more logistics and money to get safer barriers.

They should overlap in direction of travel, and covered by multiple layers of softer then smoother material, and should stay upright.

It will cost a heck of a lot more but only needed at finish lines and as per risk management.

Defund cycling!