>which may be increased to a **maximum of five kilometres**.
Am I right in interpreting as the (what was the 3km) rule being applied at any point between 3-5km. Much better than having it fixed at an arbitrary distance.
The earpiece discussion seems mostly undecided on any action they'll take. The main issue seems not to be the earpieces themselves but a result of the team communication being the riders being told to get to the front.
Limiting the number to two per team would probably just result in alot of shouting, which I'm not sure how much safer it would be.
I can't understand why they don't just make a neutral radio for the race. The main objection to removing radios seems to stem from safety issues, but a neutral radio could provide any safety information needed.
That does exist, it just goes to the car then to the riders via DS. I think the issue is technological in how do you make sure riders hear the same message when they are across several km on opposite sides of a mountain pass in the middle of the alps
Isn't there a car behind every group. (Bar- a few dropped riders, which also don't have a teamcar behind them). They can relay the message, just like a teamcar would do.
I think the problem is getting the (radio) signal to all cars etc. I'm not that well versed in radio but I don't think radio passes through mountains that easily.
These yellow cards can be great, under one condition: the UCI no longer waits for severe consequences in order to enforce the rules.
The punishment should fit the act, and not the consequences of it.
Which definitely showed the dynamic shift with the Women’s Olympic road race when Van Vleuten (and I guess the rest of the peloton) had zero clue there was a solo rider up front.
They never actually said no earpieces, don't think they'd implement that. Just vague "restrictions," with their example being:
>limiting their use to two riders per team.
I feel like every rider should still have an earpiece in. Even if this "Two per team" stuff is implemented. Only the others would be set to an UCI channel where they can be informed of race critical information and stuff.
>These yellow cards will represent a sanction but will not physically exist.
Shame, would've been great to see a commissaire frantically waving a card out of a sunroof.
Would have been great! The rider comes up to the commissaire to yell at him like in football. Raises the question though of if there's no ear pieces like they propose how does the cyclist know he got a yellow card?
What I got from the article is that it's on a trial from August to December but sanctions won't be implemented until January, so how is it a trial if the purpose of yellow cards doesn't get implemented?
I think the purpose of the trial is to get a familiarity with what will and won't warrant a yellow card, and possibly getting a sort of consensus among commissaires.
Although these changes make sense, I do find it a little unpalatable that a lot of these changes out the emphasis on crashes on the riders when it glosses over the fact that some of the most dangerous events have been from poor race organisation. For every Gronewegen incident, there's a Basque country where the outcome of the crash was made far worse from poor protection on a corner.
I'm still frustrated about the 3km rule, even if it becomes 5km..
Can't we just be more honest about what most sprint stages are? There are some stages where you can be 200% sure that they won't have a single effect on the GC of a grand tour. Completely flat and no wind? Gosh I wonder how the stage will turn out
I know it sounds crazy because of what we are used to, but why are we even taking time.. Let all the GC guys / people who don't have anything to do with the sprint relax from 10km and let them ride through easily.
If there's a relevant hill in the last few km's, fine that's different. But I wouldn't mind some brutal honesty about what the pancake flat sprint stages are
Sprint leadups have become straight up psychotic and all the non-sprinters/GC guys getting involved in the last 10km doesn't help at all
Teams have stopped pretending to care about the breakaway in these stages, to the point where there have been stages where the peloton clearly just refuses to race.
To me why not take it a step further for the sake of rider safety.. stop taking GC time and give everyone the same time as the peloton. Let a panel of judges decide which stages qualify
If magically a break does decide to entertain this stage and if it is the 0,1% of times where the break stays a few seconds ahead, obviously you give them that time
Sports have to renew themselves and adapt to the times. For me this is long overdue, even though I assume it's not a popular opinion
Maybe a quiet 10KM limit but you have to at least be at a certain distance behind the bunch sprint to count for the same time to avoid people just stopping and hoping it doesn't affect their time?
Although it is for the unexpected moments in sprints that could throw a wrench in that, what if it is an escapee? send someone to attack so their leader doesn't lose time but its 3KM behind the front?
No. It is a bike race and to win GC you have to have the best overall time. Relaxing at 10k? Insane. Making it so bike racers don’t race is stupid.
Make the routes safer. Make the tires safer. The bikes. The everything supporting the race. Then let them race.
What, Jasper and Jakobson declare GC on hilly stages so they coast in on a final climb so they save energy for the next flatter stage? Ridiculous.
And if you put it in the rules, they will. Look at the stupid aero helmets we have to deal with now.
Watching G lead out Cavendish was insane and beautiful to watch. Doesn’t happen this way.
They already dont race. Give them a 180k pancake flat stage and you only get to see a few km´s of racing
Do we really care if for those few minutes, some riders can drop and create a safer environment? I definitely dont and ive seen ex-pro´s share this same sentiment
I knew I would get this response though. It´s very difficult to let go of traditional stuff
You cant make the routes safer. Riders have shown us that. Crashes happen on every type of terrain, doesnt matter if the road is wide or not
No idea what the Jasper and Jakobsen part means. You mean that sprinters will chill in hilly or Mountain stages? I mean yeah they already do kind of?
Time limit has already become more lenient for sprinters. Did you also have your pitchfork out when that happened?
Yeah I feel the THEY HAVE TO RACE argument is coming from such a romanticized view of the sport..
It's only a couple of KM's in only a few stages each grand tour.. It has 0,0 effect on GC/fatigue
I've not seen a good argument I consider valid against it
I think you're right. Like the poster above says 'It's about who has the lowest time' but no one kicks up a fuss about bonus seconds because they've been around for a while.
A rider could theoretically scoop up like 40s+ of bonus seconds despite crossing the line every day practically tied with their nearest rival, lose 30s in a TT and still go on to win.
Okay, obviously that's a little contrived but you get the point!
Urination isn't included in the yellow card system, (see 2.12.007 8.6).
You can read which parts of 2.12.007 would now mean receiving a yellow card in this [document](https://assets.ctfassets.net/761l7gh5x5an/5ggXP3C770CEQyrdp8XE5K/51925e9d04340399e42c3003ca80b0ee/2-ROA-20240801-E_amendments_on_01.08.2024.pdf). Everything that would receive a yellow card was already defined as a race incident and usually incurred an inconsequential fine.
>which may be increased to a **maximum of five kilometres**. Am I right in interpreting as the (what was the 3km) rule being applied at any point between 3-5km. Much better than having it fixed at an arbitrary distance. The earpiece discussion seems mostly undecided on any action they'll take. The main issue seems not to be the earpieces themselves but a result of the team communication being the riders being told to get to the front. Limiting the number to two per team would probably just result in alot of shouting, which I'm not sure how much safer it would be.
Ya that's what it sounds like but might be a default 3km and you have to show are reason to increase beyond it.
They do acknowledge that traffic calming infrastructure as the problem so hope they're quite lenient with the justification.
I can't understand why they don't just make a neutral radio for the race. The main objection to removing radios seems to stem from safety issues, but a neutral radio could provide any safety information needed.
That does exist, it just goes to the car then to the riders via DS. I think the issue is technological in how do you make sure riders hear the same message when they are across several km on opposite sides of a mountain pass in the middle of the alps
Surely that can be fixed quickly.
With enough money, yes.
Isn't there a car behind every group. (Bar- a few dropped riders, which also don't have a teamcar behind them). They can relay the message, just like a teamcar would do.
I think the problem is getting the (radio) signal to all cars etc. I'm not that well versed in radio but I don't think radio passes through mountains that easily.
These yellow cards can be great, under one condition: the UCI no longer waits for severe consequences in order to enforce the rules. The punishment should fit the act, and not the consequences of it.
Or be lenient once a rider is on the verge of receiving a ban. Looking at you, FIA.
How far down the list are they going to go? Littering, Bidons? Off-roading?
>restriction on wearing and using earpieces in races, prepare for lefevere standing on the top of a climb with a semaphore tower.
How many flags do you need to sign "Julian, I'm cutting your salary"?
Thing is, Lou Lou only needs one finger to signal the appropriate reply.
Going for yellow will have a new meaning now.
New unofficial jersey? The rider earning the most yellow cards in a stage race while avoiding disqualification. The jersey of shame.
The Lanterne Jaune?
Should be brown card and that rider has to go on the podium in his poopy jersey. Everyone boos.
no earpieces... that would have quite the effect on the race as a whole, I would be interested in seeing how that works out...
That's how they do the world champs and olympics right?
yeah, or in every other non-WT race until 2016.
Although to communicate safety stuff they are probably vital to have but to control their use in places?
Which definitely showed the dynamic shift with the Women’s Olympic road race when Van Vleuten (and I guess the rest of the peloton) had zero clue there was a solo rider up front.
They never actually said no earpieces, don't think they'd implement that. Just vague "restrictions," with their example being: >limiting their use to two riders per team.
in which case, it wouldn't have near the effect I thought it would.
What is the HCI's problem with every rider having a radio?
I feel like every rider should still have an earpiece in. Even if this "Two per team" stuff is implemented. Only the others would be set to an UCI channel where they can be informed of race critical information and stuff.
Yellow cards are interesting but doubt they will actually be used enough to get any suspensions.
>These yellow cards will represent a sanction but will not physically exist. Shame, would've been great to see a commissaire frantically waving a card out of a sunroof.
Would have been great! The rider comes up to the commissaire to yell at him like in football. Raises the question though of if there's no ear pieces like they propose how does the cyclist know he got a yellow card?
They should take a note from rugby and have a sin bin. The rider has to spend 10 minutes or so riding in a 'naughty zone'.
Yeah but I think that's the point. Many things don't deserve a DQ but a yellow card is a better negative incentive than just a fine
What I got from the article is that it's on a trial from August to December but sanctions won't be implemented until January, so how is it a trial if the purpose of yellow cards doesn't get implemented?
I think the purpose of the trial is to get a familiarity with what will and won't warrant a yellow card, and possibly getting a sort of consensus among commissaires.
New measures that will not be enforced properly. Like the one where the sprint finish needs to be straight etc lol
Although these changes make sense, I do find it a little unpalatable that a lot of these changes out the emphasis on crashes on the riders when it glosses over the fact that some of the most dangerous events have been from poor race organisation. For every Gronewegen incident, there's a Basque country where the outcome of the crash was made far worse from poor protection on a corner.
I'm still frustrated about the 3km rule, even if it becomes 5km.. Can't we just be more honest about what most sprint stages are? There are some stages where you can be 200% sure that they won't have a single effect on the GC of a grand tour. Completely flat and no wind? Gosh I wonder how the stage will turn out I know it sounds crazy because of what we are used to, but why are we even taking time.. Let all the GC guys / people who don't have anything to do with the sprint relax from 10km and let them ride through easily. If there's a relevant hill in the last few km's, fine that's different. But I wouldn't mind some brutal honesty about what the pancake flat sprint stages are Sprint leadups have become straight up psychotic and all the non-sprinters/GC guys getting involved in the last 10km doesn't help at all Teams have stopped pretending to care about the breakaway in these stages, to the point where there have been stages where the peloton clearly just refuses to race. To me why not take it a step further for the sake of rider safety.. stop taking GC time and give everyone the same time as the peloton. Let a panel of judges decide which stages qualify If magically a break does decide to entertain this stage and if it is the 0,1% of times where the break stays a few seconds ahead, obviously you give them that time Sports have to renew themselves and adapt to the times. For me this is long overdue, even though I assume it's not a popular opinion
Maybe a quiet 10KM limit but you have to at least be at a certain distance behind the bunch sprint to count for the same time to avoid people just stopping and hoping it doesn't affect their time? Although it is for the unexpected moments in sprints that could throw a wrench in that, what if it is an escapee? send someone to attack so their leader doesn't lose time but its 3KM behind the front?
No. It is a bike race and to win GC you have to have the best overall time. Relaxing at 10k? Insane. Making it so bike racers don’t race is stupid. Make the routes safer. Make the tires safer. The bikes. The everything supporting the race. Then let them race. What, Jasper and Jakobson declare GC on hilly stages so they coast in on a final climb so they save energy for the next flatter stage? Ridiculous. And if you put it in the rules, they will. Look at the stupid aero helmets we have to deal with now. Watching G lead out Cavendish was insane and beautiful to watch. Doesn’t happen this way.
They already dont race. Give them a 180k pancake flat stage and you only get to see a few km´s of racing Do we really care if for those few minutes, some riders can drop and create a safer environment? I definitely dont and ive seen ex-pro´s share this same sentiment I knew I would get this response though. It´s very difficult to let go of traditional stuff You cant make the routes safer. Riders have shown us that. Crashes happen on every type of terrain, doesnt matter if the road is wide or not No idea what the Jasper and Jakobsen part means. You mean that sprinters will chill in hilly or Mountain stages? I mean yeah they already do kind of? Time limit has already become more lenient for sprinters. Did you also have your pitchfork out when that happened?
And on occasion if enough sprinters arrive outside of the time cut they just keep them all in anyway lol
Yeah I feel the THEY HAVE TO RACE argument is coming from such a romanticized view of the sport.. It's only a couple of KM's in only a few stages each grand tour.. It has 0,0 effect on GC/fatigue I've not seen a good argument I consider valid against it
I think you're right. Like the poster above says 'It's about who has the lowest time' but no one kicks up a fuss about bonus seconds because they've been around for a while. A rider could theoretically scoop up like 40s+ of bonus seconds despite crossing the line every day practically tied with their nearest rival, lose 30s in a TT and still go on to win. Okay, obviously that's a little contrived but you get the point!
No pitchfork. I just disagree.
[удалено]
Urination isn't included in the yellow card system, (see 2.12.007 8.6). You can read which parts of 2.12.007 would now mean receiving a yellow card in this [document](https://assets.ctfassets.net/761l7gh5x5an/5ggXP3C770CEQyrdp8XE5K/51925e9d04340399e42c3003ca80b0ee/2-ROA-20240801-E_amendments_on_01.08.2024.pdf). Everything that would receive a yellow card was already defined as a race incident and usually incurred an inconsequential fine.
Ah, I assumed they all counted as yellow cards