Forum menu
Bah !
Just turned it on to see gwin come over the line 🙁
do they put up a highlights or owt ?
do they put up a highlights or owt ?
You can see the whole thing as a re-run on Dirt Mpora. Usually up by the following day.
would kryptonite work on him?
so.. taht was fun... good coverage, too.
'kin awesome!
Really enjoyed that one.
the guy is unstoppable....
thanks (geetee and) billy - great racing
Awesome racing, both the mens and womens races were wild.
Rock garden was so gnarly, brook macdonald and beaumont eating it big time!
Gwin was third at split one and still smashed it.
Rachel should have been DQ'd at least to keep consistency. At the end of the season, if it's still only a 30pt diff. then it'll be pinned on this decision. Every DQ decision in the future will be reflected back 'til today, as is the case with Peaty at La Bresse.
Brook Mac, endless embodiement of "go hard or go home".
It's only my second year following DH & the greatest attraction for me is the different styles of each rider and the hope that a Hart or Blenky can nick it from Gwin. Gutted for Stevie 'cause Gwin can be beaten.
Love it.
That was great. Loved the slow-mo replays on the rocks.
Gutted for Stevie Smith , thought he'd put a solid fast run in but that Gwin is fast (and dull)
Why are you gutted for Stevie Smith?
I watched Seasons this morning and it's an excellent documentary of how far Stevie Smith has come...
Nearly.
And so, to France.
lopes:
-"his fox suspension is working good through the rocks"
-"his rock shox suspension working good over those rocks"
-"... with his oakley goggles"
FFS.... shut up. does he recieve $$ every time he mentions a brand? WTF should the suspension be doing?
rubbish commentator, IMO....
i thought it was funny how Warner kept cutting him off during the ladies XC....
HaHa Alpin, every rider down Warner did a "SORRY BRI, BUT..."
Lopes: blaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah.
Warner: awwwwwesoooommmmmmmmmmmmee.
Lopes: blaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah.
Warner: "Sorry, Bri, but, AWESOME!"
Lopes: That was a good run blaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah
Warner: At least on Freecaster I can make Gary Glitter jokes.
Who's up in the box for Val D'Isare?
PLEASE GET LOPES OUT OF THE BOX!! Catching backside.... pedals..... fox suspension.... oakley lense....... SHUT THE **** UP
Warner to Lopes at MSA
Ever won a World Cup Bri?
Nope?
It's hard
4x is intense said Lopes
LOOSE AS JORDAN so said Warner...in the Freecaster days
Get Chris Ball in.
4.1.035 If a rider exits the course for any reason, he/she must return to the course at the same point from which he/she exited. If the president of the commissaires panel deems that the rider gained advantage, the rider is disqualified (DSQ).
No advantage, no DQ. Looks like the decision on Peaty last year was the mistake rather than this one
... assuming you satisfy the other element and "return at the same point from which you exited"No advantage, no DQ
(unless, of course, they wrote the second bit specifically to make that term utterly redundant; she clearly gained an advantage by rejoining lower down compared to walking back up to the exit point)
Scaredypants is right.
Second sentence doesn't even make sense
C in UCI stands for ****
She didn't gain an advantage by cutting the tapes though, she didn't take a short cut and that is the point. Peaty basically cut a corner so the decision was obvious.
Anyway as with all sports refs decision is final.
FFS she gained a huge time advantage by breaking the rules and not re-entering where she left.
T Hannah won, E Ragot still leading and R Atherton DSQd is how it should have been called.
Yes Lopes is rubbish at commentating, perhaps not quite as bad as page, but still cack. He has the unique talent of making DH sound dull.
As far a Atherton being DQ'ed, Shoulda, woulda, coulda. The UCI make it up as they go along.
Maybe if she was riding for monster, they would have stuck to the rules.
Bollocks Gary, gaining an advantage is cutting the tape and gaining time not nearly binning it and speaking off track. Basically, doing an HB is cheating, running wide and not making a real effort to stop going off is cheating (like Peaty keeping it lit in La Bresse) and basically totaling yourself off the outside of a track and nearly coming to a standstill is not.
How can you gain an advantage over a competitor and lose 5s at the same time? Chris Ball has already posted on his Twitter feed that it was the correct call man's anyone that says otherwise is a *****
*this bit may be added 😉
The rule makes no sense at all. How can you exit the course, re-enter at the same point AND gain an advantage? The second sentence is redundant.
The first sentence is the rule, but it appears that what they meant was actually you can rejoin the track anywhere you like, so long as you don't gain an advantage. That needs to be qualified with the reference point for the judgement of advantage, is it an advantage compared with not crashing, or compared with not having to rejoin where you left.
It would still be a very subjective rule, so perhaps the best approach is to just delete the second sentence and enforce it as is?
The wording is fine, the first sentence defines when an 'incident' has occurred. The second sentence describes the action that will be taken when that 'incident' occurs.
4.1.035 If a rider exits the course for any reason, he/she must return to the course at the same point from which he/she exited.
If the rider does not comply with this rule, as happened with R. Atherton entering the track after the pole the following will happen:
If the president of the commissaires panel deems that the rider gained advantage, the rider is disqualified (DSQ).
So a rider can exit the track as many times as they please as long as they re-enter at the same point and no action will be taken. If they do not enter at the same point then the panel will decide whether or not a advantage was gained. As R. Atherton exited the course by accident and wasn't looking to gain any sort of advantage over her competitors and there was obviously no tactics involved it was deemed to be within the rules.
Mark, when in he last 20yrs of WC DH as the rule been interperited this way?
Never before is the answer.
C Ball didn't make the rule.. he's merely voiced an opinion via twitter (seems a dumb thing to do in this situation to me)
GW... according to Chris Ball speaking on the vitalmtb photostream, it's been re-interpreted that way since they had a number of incidents which put the rule into question.
And isn't he the technical bod for gravity sports at the UCI, so would most likely have a hand in writing/changing these rules?
Did they move the goal posts before or after Rach cut the course?
How can you cut a corner on the outside?
You can tell you haven't raced in nearly 10 years 😉
"he she must return to the course at the same point....."
That is completely unambiguous, yet completely at odds with the interpretation of the rule. It is very poorly written.
You're right that the second sentence describes what will happen when the first action occurs, but it's irrelevant because you can't gain an advantage by going off the course and rejoining at the same point and you "must return to the course at the same point."
I don't have any issues with the interpretation as applied, but there doesn't need to be as much interpretation if the rules are written properly in the first place.
I'm with GW on this she may have been 5 seconds up when she cut the tape but not re-entering at the same point, and then winning by 0.2s then I would say she gained at the very least a 0.2s advantage...
Realistically exiting the tape and having to walk back/re-enter should have put her back to about 7th ~ 10th ish, so yeah she clearly gained an advantage...
Stop and walk back re-enter where you exited, that's always been the rule as far as most people are concerned, has anyone contested the UCI judgement on this decission yet?
The last thing DH needs is Commissaires giving favourable judgements to certain riders, its not Road cycling FFS...
didn't mention a corner, she went through the tapes on pretty much a straight.(had she managed to land the jump properly and stay online) did you not watch it?
Still In the huff with intrnetzspoiler posterz ?
[b]must[/b] return to the course at the same point
She didn't, so DQ.
I vote simple DQ, I don't think she was on such a steep part as to endanger herself to get back to the original point she left the track etc.
GW - Member
didn't mention a corner, she went through the tapes on pretty much a straight.(had she managed to land the jump properly and stay online) did you not watch it?
Still In the huff with intrnetzspoiler posterz ?
Old age must be having an effect on you 🙄 it's kinda impossible to cut (i.e. make shorter) a course that's straight. Even the jump was hipped to the right, the corner caught many people out over the weekend - you even saw several getting squiffy into the drop because of it through race runs.
Posting the results before it was televised is still ****ing retarded. Both on RM and Dirt, especially the latter if they want you to link to the coverage through their site.
We can agree to disagree...... but I'm right (even though Tracey Hannah is my woman in the fantasy league) 😛
You can agree to disagree if you like, you're perfectly entitled to beieve anything you want no matter how glaringly wrong it happensd to be. 😉
there is no mention of "corners" or "shortening the course" as it's irrelivent to the rule, this is the same rule the UCI have always upheld in every WC final in the 20yrs I've watched WC DH racing, until the farcicle "rule change" used during yesterday's race.[b]4.1.035 If a rider exits the course for any reason, he/she must return to the course at the same point from which he/she exited.[/b]
When exactly did this "rule change" come into effect?
And more importantly, when were all the top riders/teams informed of the "rule change"?
IMO the answer to both is yesterday!
my view on this has nothing to do with preference towards any rider but consistency, if a new rule in any sport comes into effect it should be made clear to every competitor/team as and when it is to change. and certainly not halfway through a season seconds after the longstanding rule is broken.
UCI shower of ****s
So if Bull Dog has broken the tape having his monster crash yesterday he should've gone back up the hill - dream on 😉
And more importantly, when were all the top riders/teams informed of the "rule change"?
You think they bother reading the memos (or can actually read)? What makes you think they aren't informed? They sign up to the rules every time they enter a race (just like the shit storm surrounding course cutting at Enduros). The fact the Chris Ball is saying that they obviously haven't bothered reading the rules says quite a lot. And if they did read them but didn't understand, why wasn't it questioned earlier? etc, etc
The consistency between Rach's and Peaty's incident is there. Peaty kept on the gas instead of obviously trying (ie throwing out the anchors) to get round the pole iirc, Rach was lucky she stayed on at all. Very different incidents - Peaty lost next to nothing, Rach lost 5s
P.S. Chamberlain wasn't as wrong as you are right now 😉
P.P.S. have you watched the Dirt edit yet to see your non-corner?
P.P.P.S Possible uplift at Inners this weekend (if there even is one) if you want a proper fight
No matter how monsterous the crash or how far you're flung down the hill, if you still want a time that has always been the rule..
I didn't mention Peat at all. WC racers have clambered back up to rejoin tracks through broken tapes following this rule for as long as the WCs been running.
Haven't watched again but I will concede the straight had a slight bend to it 😉
Aye, def up for some[s] fisting [/s] DH this w/e. What day?
Rules change, but then I am trying to teach an old (like so old it should just be put down) dog new tricks here 8)
Er, scratch that plan at the moment. No uplifts till the end of the month
Remember Gwin in Champery? He crashed and lost a load of time, and rejoined further down the track because he couldn't physically get back to where he left it. That was in qualifying but if he hadn't been protected, he'd have been out of the race. (he did lose quali points IIRC)
He certainly didn't gain an advantage by crashing but he did gain an advantage by rejoining further down- because he couldn't have completed his run otherwise. Just like Rachel gained an advantage by not having to stop, push back up and rejoin where she was supposed to.
UCI set the rules, they can change them. But it's not right to enforce a rule one way and set a precedent and an expectation, then change the enforcement without changing the rule or at least making the change clear.
Obviously I'm not a world cup racer 😉 But even at grassroots level this gets drummed into riders. I've seen people push back up to rejoin where they left and lose tons of time, where they could have claimed "no advantage". What happens if it's off camera? Who decides if there was an advantage then? There might be one marshall with line of sight to make that call.
GW , was gutted for smith as i wanted him to win!Great result for him though
Dude, but dude, like, that was just so gnarly, like, dude.
[url= http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-cool11.gi f" target="_blank">http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-cool11.gi f"/> [/img][/url]
UCIThe last thing DH needs is