why? it's letsrun not letscycle.
looked straight down on my bike today and can confirm you can see to level with your back wheel, so I change my opinion and agree with most other people that say he knew he was there.
why? it's letsrun not letscycle.
looked straight down on my bike today and can confirm you can see to level with your back wheel, so I change my opinion and agree with most other people that say he knew he was there.
gbnfhmn wrote:
the video shows he couldn't have known when he started moving right because he was completely behind him
Again, I can't believe someone would be ignorant enough to think this.
again, why? it's letsrun not letscycle.
HLq wrote:
Salvatore Stitchimo wrote:
I'm insane? Where in my post/statement do I say this should be an isolated penalty for this incident alone? I guess I'm missing that part. Where do I say - this is a 12 month offense, but only for Groenewegen because he's a d$ck? How could you possibly know what my stance is on punishment for dangerous and potentially life threatening actions in the sport of cylcing.
So you're advocating a 1-year ban for anyone who does this regardless of outcome? That would be a very unusual position that I've not seen anyone advocate for. I think maybe you aren't very familiar with cycling and just how common this is. If you retroactively gave a year long ban to everyone who's done this over the past year but managed to get away with it because there wasn't a crash, then there would be no sprinters left unbanned in the peloton.
If that really is your position, then I'll give you credit for being consistent at least. But it's still insane because it's completely unnecessary and it raises the stakes way higher than they need to be. If the ban is 1-year, then the stakes are so high that it becomes extremely, extremely, extremely important that every single decision is perfect with no mistakes. With such a severe punishment it would be extremely critical that no one be punished who shouldn't be, and there would be a massive, massive fight over any kind of borderline case. There would probably be court cases and expensive legal battles over every single incident.
It's insane to advocate for such a high-stakes scenario when it isn't even necessary. Just consistently DQ everyone who does this, and then it doesn't matter if you mistakenly DQ an innocent person every now and then. The result is that riders will learn that there's no point in continuing to do this if they are sure to be DQed. You don't need a 1-year ban to discourage this behavior. You just need a consistently applied DQ regardless of outcome and riders will learn they have nothing to gain from it. But as long as people continue the "no blood no foul" attitude, then riders have a lot to gain if they can manage to get away with it without causing a crash.
Or just scale the punishment based on the severity of the outcome....
I don't see why the only options would be "no blood no foul" or "same punishment for an infraction regardless of the consequences". You could easily have a third option where harmless infractions have minor punishments (e.g. a DQ), and harmful infractions have progressively more severe punishments depending on the degree of harm. It seems like this 3rd option would avoid this ridiculous scenario you've drawn up while still changing rider behavior for the better.
Ok I have three points I want to make that I think haven't been brought up yet:
1. "He couldn't see the guy behind him" -- sometimes you can tell where someone is by the sound their bike makes, sometimes you can just get a glimpse. Maybe the wind was blowing from the left and knew the guy would try to pass on the right. Regardless, you're supposed to hold your line and this is obviously not what happened.
2. "He was putting down so much power he was just swerving all over the place, bad luck he ended up taking the guy out." -- then kick him out of the peloton, if he can't control his bike he shouldn't be sprinting.
3. The lean-in/hip-check/whatever: I actually can't fault Groenewegen for this one, I think he actually did the right thing here. When you and the guy next to you are falling, sometimes the only way to save it is for the two of you to lean into each other. When you start bike racing and learn to get comfortable in tight packs and bumping up against people, this is one of the first things you learn. In this case there was just no saving it, but at least he gave it a shot. In fact, Groenewegen himself fell as he crossed the finish line because he was hoping the other guy would lean into him and it didn't happen. It looked to me like Groenewegen went from swerving across the road to damage control, and basically had the worst possible outcome in both cases.
Criminal charges should be filed. The rider who rode the other guy into the barrier needs to be banned from cycling, and jailed for years.
I can't believe no one has stated the obvious: The photographer on screen left who got trucked probably has some awesome pics!
Watched this again and that was terrible. There is no place in sport for that recklessness. The guy should be out of the sport.
Emma Coburn to miss Olympic Trials after breaking ankle in Suzhou
Jakob on Oly 1500- “Walk in the park if I don’t get injured or sick”
VALBY has graduated (w/ honors) from Florida, will she go to grad school??
Congrats to Kyle Merber - Merber has left Citius for position w/ Michael Johnson's track league
2024 College Track & Field Open Coaching Positions Discussion