EXPOSING Tour De France’s Most CONTROVERSIAL Question
Vložit
- čas přidán 24. 02. 2024
- EXPOSING Tour De France’s Most CONTROVERSIAL Question
In early 2024, an idea came out from Team Movistar that got a blend of both positive and negative feedback. The team’s boss exposed an important question that’s kind of been in the Tour’s shadow for many years now: Should teams be allowed to replace sick or injured riders at the Tour de France and other grand tours? So naturally, the counter question is, how would this make the sport better, or perhaps, worse?
Do you want to see more? Subscribe now to watch WATTS anytime, anywhere: / @wattsyt - Sport
No. Absolutely not. No replacements.
However I do agree if a rider seeks medical attention and he comes in after the cut off time he should be allowed to continue racing the next day.
What rider wants to come in and ride with zero possibility of any individual reward? How would that even get recorded on their palmares? It seems incredibly unfair to any replacement rider. That alone makes this a terrible idea.
Most riders have no possibility of a reward. Domestiques! Servants! Work for the rider(s) who can actually win!!!
@@kokonanana1 All the winnings are pooled together and split among the entire team. Why else would a domestique care about going all out in support of the GC rider?
Professional cycling in the grand tours is 85% riders who come in with no expectation of individual reward.
It gets recorded in their palmares as last place in GC and if somehow a replacement rider would find themselves in podium positions they are ineligible and the next rider down takes the place officially - something cycling is not at all new to with the complicated points jersey rankings and GC timing.
It would not be unfair to the replacement rider; on the contrary - the status quo seems incredibly unfair to the entire team, support staff, sponsors, broadcasters, and fans when one of the key GC riders is out of the picture early. It almost always makes the race worse to watch, ruins months of 24/7 work by the team, and kills sponsor value when a team is basically dusted in the first week.
@@stevenmeyer9674 Prize money has relatively little to do with it. They just get paid a salary to do that job and a typical WT-minimum-salary domestique would be replaced by another rider if the team manager feels they aren't supporting to their full ability.
@@molybdnum they would still be paid from the pool of the teams prize money. Besides, they are talking about injured riders, not under performing
Replacements would dilute the drama….
Fresh & tired riders mixed together in the peloton = more crashes🚑
That is a stretch.
I agree for the time limit (2 one) but not for the repacing riders (1 one)
Moviestar should focus on a team strategy instead of their usual free for all approach. They finds ways to work against their race leader or flat out don't support them. I feel sorry for anyone who signs with them. Of course they would come up with an idea this stupid.
Unfortunately the controversial 'substitutions' proposal is completely overshadowing the logical timecut safety-improvement proposal. Personally I never want to hear that a rider broke their hip, got back on and rode to the end of the stage, and only got it x-rayed and diagnosed after crossing the line ever again. The actual impact of this change is limited since most riders who know they're heavily injured will DNF immediately - we'll mainly be seeing riders who know it hurts real bad but don't know exactly how messed up they are or riders who the race staff thinks may be concussed getting medical care sooner.
I like the idea of injured riders being given extra time to complete the stage, be nice if a teammate or two could drop back without penalty, too. But big picture, when are riders going to get ANY body armor/protection? Helmets are great, of course, and always being advanced, yet there is zero anything for the shoulders or hips or joints and that seems wrong. Plus, with tire touches always being a possibility, why not some sort of fender/bumper/paddle/guard to minimize a touch and possibly prevent a massive pile-up. Also, what about head units? Nobody ever admits to distracted driving yet a screen in front of a high-speed rider is not the safest and besides, their numbers could be relayed over the radio, if need be.
Not be allowed to win a stage? What lackey would waste their time doing that? Hardly surprising Movistar Koi is involved, they do dumb shit in Esports all the time.
This is GREAT! I have a better idea, let's just do the entire TDF on Zwift! God forbid anyone do anything dangerous,
Nope.
If there is a way to game the system, they'll find a way.
2 words ... Hammer series... They did a very valid point about make races special and specific for the teams... They you can add and twitch, and maybe you can try some minor races, Croatia, Volta, Tirreno, Norway... See how that goes... But then UCI has a very strict side patch everything that seems not going as traditional... Perhaps hammer series as it is/was ... Could be a thing... Yo develop via UCI perhaps we must forget they did it in the 1st place 😅
crickey brought in a similar rule a gew years ago, allowing subs for the first time in case of a concussion. they only allow 'like for like' replacements so not to change the make up of a team. maybe something similar could work here
just allow 10 riders to start rather than 8 and have 1 fewer team at the starting block
I think if managed correctly it would be a good thing. Test cricket recently allowed Substitutions for head injuries, this lead to Marnus Labuschagne re-invigorating his career due to oppurtunity he wouldn't have got.
I think in the case of concussion a substitue would be fine, we dont take brain injuries seriously enough. To get a substitue, it must be certified by an independant DR and the subsititue.
The pussification of cycling. In 1987 when Stephen Roche won the Tour de France, it was 25 Stages, now they want to lower it to 15 Stages, this is embarrassing, it's a Grand freaking Tour, let's just put skirts on them.
And the countering argument is that the bulk of the race looks more like a weekend century ride. Shorter races would make them more competitive. Oh, nobody is talking about lowering the TDF to 15 stages.
A lot reasonable arguments against, but I think it’s worth considering. Try it out with some lesser stage races.
Definite no to substitutions. It will change the sport fundamentally and diminish the fascination of the sport.
Replacements (with inevitable heavy regulation) would have little effect on race outcomes. If some are concerned about "fairness", they could look at a team/race salary cap or other ways to increase parity of the team rosters.
If the ones coming in could compete for stages or overall that would be a horrible idea!
If they are not allowed to win, that is less horrible, but still horrible.
Stupidest idea. Do not turn cycling into American football.
Who's the rider with no arms at 0:02?
Not sure, but his commitment to innovative weight reduction strategies is commendable.
Never gonna hapen. And it should not happen. Also, most crashes usually happens during the first week when everyone has too much energy.
Naaaa they gonna keep a leadout guy for last week. no.
No
It's not controversial, it's STUPID! Also, not a real question. It's a fallacy called begging the question. Replacing riders? Dumb. Why would legit professionals race someone who JUST tagged, to get in the race, having NONE of the mileage, wear-and-tear, or crashes that ALL of the other participants have. Yeah, REAL fair. Team's WOULD make a mockery of cycling grand tours, that's not even speculative.
not a good rule
What a dumb idea
I heard a lot of BS over the years. But this take the price.
EVERY SINGLE SPORT IN THE WORLD HAS SUBS...... think about that.
Every bit of this proposal sucks. Does this channel even like cycling?
Stupid idea the tour is the tour!!. Leave it alone!!. I know let's make the tour woke as is everything else. What next!!!. Old Patrick needs to retire ask a certain French man lol.