105 replies to this topic Post Order

[TNT1]

MorewoodMad, on 02 July 2011 - 08:50 , said:

Correct. So if that last crash didn't happen, both Contador and Schleck would have the same time tonight. Schlock did in fact wait for Contador. He could have easily been 40 secs up the field and could Contador. They both should have been on the front when both crashes happened.

Absurdly, I agree. Shoulda, woulda, coulda. It is what it is. Let the best rider win.

[MorewoodMad]

TNT1, on 02 July 2011 - 08:47 , said:

Yeah, which is why I am against the "inside the last whatever many kms" rule.

I hear what you're saying, it would certainly spice things up to have the tour contenders either staying out of the way for the first 12 stages or actually riding on the front in the last km.

Edited by MorewoodMad, 02 July 2011 - 08:59 .

[River Rat]

Big Ed, the issue for me is twofold: what happened to Conty today was a matter of application of rules not only to Conty but to numerous riders. What Conty did last year was well within the rules but it did go against the grain when it came to honour.

[Big Ed]

River Rat, on 02 July 2011 - 08:57 , said:

Big Ed, the issue for me is twofold: what happened to Conty today was a matter of application of rules not only to Conty but to numerous riders. What Conty did last year was well within the rules but it did go against the grain when it came to honour.

I just think Schleck should have told the other riders to stop racing because some of the favourites were left behind - Contador was not the only one that kept on riding when Andy lost his chain last year. I am not a fan of either but feel Contador was harshly treated last year after that stage. Really looking forward to the rest of the tour - Think Sam Sanchez and Contador will have to attack hard to get rid of the Schlecks.

[Christie]

The "crash in the last 3km" is a good rule, but as far as I know it counts only for sprint finishes, so that GC contenders don't have to fight it out with the sprint trains.
The question here a 3km rule should count if the race finishes on a climb. I think the organizers would prefer if somebody else won instead of Contador, so it was an easy descision for them to make.
I think Conto will lose more time tomorrow in the TTT. I doubt if he will be able to get that much time back - it makes this TDF more interesting, though.

[Hephaestus]

I just think that the women spectator in the MTN shirt made this year's TdF a whole lot more exciting!

[GrumpyOldGuy]

Christie, on 02 July 2011 - 09:20 , said:

The "crash in the last 3km" is a good rule, but as far as I know it counts only for sprint finishes, so that GC contenders don't have to fight it out with the sprint trains.
The question here a 3km rule should count if the race finishes on a climb. I think the organizers would prefer if somebody else won instead of Contador, so it was an easy descision for them to make.
I think Conto will lose more time tomorrow in the TTT. I doubt if he will be able to get that much time back - it makes this TDF more interesting, though.

I didnt see the stage I just read the report but I dont think its a calamity, if it happened with three or four days of racing left then Yes, I think he would be concerned, but over three weeks 80 odd seconds is not a really big blow,....I am sure 'Berto would have preferred it differantly but it wasnt due to any inability,... its just the knocks I guess.

Edited by GrumpyOldGuy, 02 July 2011 - 10:28 .

[TMobile]

WHERE'S A GOOD BUTCHER WHEN YOU NEED ONE!

Attached Images

• 

[Lucky Luke.]

Contador should not have been sitting near the back of the bunch. Simple as that. Raises questions about the strength of his team and his leadership skills that he was positioned where he was. It's great that he's now under pressure to take back the time. Let the race begin.

[CC307]

http://www.facebook....&type=1

The TTT 2009

Edited by CC307, 03 July 2011 - 11:53 .