You are reading a single comment by @The_Kindness_of_Trees and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
-
I don't know... I mean, when Contador went down, was there anybody at the front 'directing' the guys at the front to slow down?
I am not sure what you mean by the contradiction either. Surely the point is that because there's no rule, Froome almost guilt-tripped people into stopping when they didn't have to. Moreover, the point of the article is that the peloton missed an opportunity, so you are both essentially in agreement about it being up to the peloton to decide on how to react.
It appears to me that you are maybe too keen to label any sort of view that could be construed as a bit anti-Froome as fervently anti-Froome.
The_Kindness_of_Trees
It's a bit daft really. Opens by saying there's no rule that says they have to stop and then contradicts itself by Froome abused the power of the yellow jersey. It's one or the other so trying to claim both arguments just makes the author a twat.
There's plenty of occasions where one or a group of riders will call a stall to the race and it will be agreed. The most common is the natural break. Occasionally, a rider who has pissed off the peleton will be ignored and left to sort themselves out and effectively punished by having to chase back on. But here's the thing, while there's no rule saying the peleton has to wait for a stricken rider, there's also no rule saying they can't ask for it. If the peleton then comes to the collective decision to wait or not then that's their choice. Whether or not you respect Froome's decision to call for a stop is irrelevant really. As spectators, we should be respecting the peleton's decision to wait. They're the athletes and they're choosing how they want to race. This article is just anti-Froome spectator bedwetting and that's just fucking sad.