# What a finish to the ENECO Tour!



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

Schumacher gets clipped by a spectator about a 100 meters from the line and shoots across the road taking Hincapie out in the process. He then finishes in 3rd in the sprint giving him enough bonus seconds to overtake Hincapie and win the Tour.

Still in the judges hands. Sucks for George but it doesn't seem quite right if they DQ Schumacher as he was clearly hit and nearly went down himself.

Edit: An unhappy looking Schumacher was awarded the win. Hincapie was pissed at Schumacher after the finish but the replay clearly showed it was unintentional. Realistically, Hincapie was unlikely to come around Schumacher anyway, as Schumacher had the inside line on the sweeping corner, they were only about 100 meters from the line, and Schumacher has a better sprint than Hincapie. Even without the incident, Hincapie would have probably loss the Tour to Schumacher due to the bonus seconds available at the finish.


----------



## MB1 (Jan 27, 2004)

*I love the real world.*

No one can make stuff like this up.

LOL


----------



## divve (May 3, 2002)

He's been declared the winner (Schumie).


----------



## zosocane (Aug 29, 2004)

Tough luck for George. Lots of second places for him this year. He would have beaten Schumacher to the line. Oh well, that's racing. I'm just glad he didn't get seriously hurt


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

fornaca68 said:


> He would have beaten Schumacher to the line.


I doubt it. Schumacher is a handy sprinter, Hincapie typically doesn't even get decent results when he sprints out of small groups. Hincapie has a reputation as a sprinter that is about a decade out-dated!

Not to mention they were getting awful close to the line, Hincapie would have had to take the wide line around the outside of the bend in the road and he was blocked in by the Saunier Duval (?) rider that was sitting next to Schumacher.


----------



## DriftlessDB (Jul 29, 2005)

Man, that sucks for George. Sounded like a very exciting stage from the text coverage on Eurosport. Nibali went at around 11K to go and then it was attack after attack. Good Stuff!!

Dave


----------



## dagger (Jul 22, 2004)

*Headline*

"Hincappie screwed again" has been the headline all year. I am not saying schumie screwed him...maybe just bad luck.


----------



## sploush (May 7, 2006)

Dwayne Barry said:


> I doubt it. Schumacher is a handy sprinter, Hincapie typically doesn't even get decent results when he sprints out of small groups. Hincapie has a reputation as a sprinter that is about a decade out-dated!
> 
> Not to mention they were getting awful close to the line, Hincapie would have had to take the wide line around the outside of the bend in the road and he was blocked in by the Saunier Duval (?) rider that was sitting next to Schumacher.


I agree Hincapie would not have beaten Schumacher in the sprint, however if he had finished third and Schumacher second, he would have won the tour. That is because Schumacher would have only gotten 2 more seconds of bonus more than Hincapie.

It really sucks for him! tough luck!


----------



## MB1 (Jan 27, 2004)

*It may not be that bad for George afterall.*

This years "Pro Stage Race" theme seems to be "Bust the Winner for Dope".

George could be declared the winner a couple of months from now. Stranger things have happened.


----------



## Madmax (Jan 1, 1970)

Easy to critique after the race but it seems Disco could have done a better job in controlling the race to ensure Schumacher was not in a position to get the bonus points. Perhaps they could have put a guy in the break. Maybe they tried and were unsuccessful.


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

Dwayne Barry said:


> Schumacher gets clipped by a spectator about a 100 meters from the line and shoots across the road taking Hincapie out in the process. He then finishes in 3rd in the sprint giving him enough bonus seconds to overtake Hincapie and win the Tour.
> 
> Still in the judges hands. Sucks for George but it doesn't seem quite right if they DQ Schumacher as he was clearly hit and nearly went down himself.
> 
> Edit: An unhappy looking Schumacher was awarded the win. Hincapie was pissed at Schumacher after the finish but the replay clearly showed it was unintentional. Realistically, Hincapie was unlikely to come around Schumacher anyway, as Schumacher had the inside line on the sweeping corner, they were only about 100 meters from the line, and Schumacher has a better sprint than Hincapie. Even without the incident, Hincapie would have probably loss the Tour to Schumacher due to the bonus seconds available at the finish.


Actually No.
George might not have made it around Schumacher but all he needed was finish 3rd if Schumacher finsihed 2nd and I think he would have doen that easily add to that Georg can sprint he might have made it by. While Schumacher move was unintentional he chose that line and did not keep it causing George to crash so he should have benn DQed, George got robbed.


----------



## wilier (Mar 16, 2002)

*Hold Your Line*



32and3cross said:


> While Schumacher move was unintentional he chose that line and did not keep it causing George to crash so he should have benn DQed, George got robbed.


Agreed: the main point is not if George would have past Schumacher in the sprint. As all of us who race know - it does not matter if he hit some rough stuff, or got blocked in, or got hit by a fan (as happened to Booned and Thor in the TDF). You MUST HOLD YOUR LINE!!!!!

If you do not hold your line, you should be DQ'd.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

wilier said:


> If you do not hold your line, you should be DQ'd.


If you see the video, you'd know Schumacher not holding his line was involuntary. When the fan clips his arm, it pulled his arm turning him into the barriers, he almost went down which is what caused him to shoot across the road.

I'm sure this was taken into consideration. It wasn't like he got touched, freaked out and swerved across the road.


----------



## T-shirt (Aug 15, 2004)

*It does seem a little unfair...*

Congratulations Schumacher


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

T-shirt said:


> Congratulations Schumacher


To borrow a autosports racing term, I think this just has to be called a "racing incident" with no one at fault, but Hincapie clearly coming up on the short end of things.


----------



## DriftlessDB (Jul 29, 2005)

T-shirt said:


> Congratulations Schumacher



Excellent Photoshop!!!! Turkish GP this weekend.:thumbsup: 

Dave


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

Dwayne Barry said:


> If you see the video, you'd know Schumacher not holding his line was involuntary. When the fan clips his arm, it pulled his arm turning him into the barriers, he almost went down which is what caused him to shoot across the road.
> 
> I'm sure this was taken into consideration. It wasn't like he got touched, freaked out and swerved across the road.


Agreed he got hit and hit someone else he should have been DQed because thats what the rule book says. His riding was dangerous and Hincapie paid the price for that, of course he did not mean for that to happen but he should not profit from it but he did.


----------



## fleck (Mar 25, 2005)

wilier said:


> If you do not hold your line, you should be DQ'd.


Nice idea but the world doesn't work this way.
So many little things happen in racing, this is one of them.
sucks for george but its the way it is.


----------



## ebroil (Feb 10, 2003)

Dwayne Barry said:


> If you see the video, you'd know Schumacher not holding his line was involuntary. When the fan clips his arm, it pulled his arm turning him into the barriers, he almost went down which is what caused him to shoot across the road.
> 
> I'm sure this was taken into consideration. It wasn't like he got touched, freaked out and swerved across the road.



But what about the fact that he chose to ride close to the barriers? This certainly isn't the first time a fan has interfered with a race reaching past the barriers. In any other situation, you'd be responsible for the line you chose.

For example, let's say the fan knocked Schumacher off his bike, and Hincapie rode past and won the race. They wouldn't place Schumacher in third, or whatever, as if he had completed his sprint. So, if he has to suffer the consequences of a fan crashing him out, why doesn't he have to suffer the consequences of a sprinting irregularity caused by a fan?

As far as the involuntary aspect of it, he'd be held responsible if he changed his line due to a strong breeze, right?

Anyway, I certainly see the argument for not relegating him. There's just something really unplesant about the guy in second crashing out the guy in first, then taking the jersey.


----------



## SilasCL (Jun 14, 2004)

32and3cross said:


> Agreed he got hit and hit someone else he should have been DQed because thats what the rule book says. His riding was dangerous and Hincapie paid the price for that, of course he did not mean for that to happen but he should not profit from it but he did.


This must be a new rule, I don't remember Lance being DQed from the Luz Ardiden stage in the 2003 tour. Very similar circumstances...

Sounds like George got a real big taste of bad luck, for the second time this year.

I don't 100% agree with the officials though, while you shouldn't relegate Schumacher, it seems unfair to give a time bonus. I don't think there is a good solution though.

Silas


----------



## wilier (Mar 16, 2002)

dfleck said:


> Nice idea but the world doesn't work this way.
> So many little things happen in racing, this is one of them.
> sucks for george but its the way it is.


It doesn't? How many times has McEwen been relegated to last because his change of line interfered with another in the final srpint?

Now I haven't seen the video - just read race reports. It sounds like he was forced to change his line after a fan almost caused his bike to go down (to avoid crashing himself). Perhaps that makes a diference to the judges. However, in the past, even if there is no crash, if you interfere with another sprinter's line, you get relegated.

The world does work this way.


----------



## yarble (Dec 16, 2005)

jfgkfg


----------



## Kenacycle (May 28, 2006)

Man, George totally got robbed.. I feel his pain


----------



## I am The Edge (Jul 27, 2004)

you photochop pros crack me up. thanks t-shirt!


----------



## Einstruzende (Jun 1, 2004)

Paolo Bettini Vs Baden Cooke @ 2005 Giro.

Bettini changed line, Baden Cooke crashed, Bettini gets relegated.

Sounds like the same situation to me. Does it matter why a person changes their line? Seems to be it should be tough luck for Stefan.

(Might be being a bit of a homer with this argument ;D)


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

Einstruzende said:


> Does it matter why a person changes their line? Seems to be it should be tough luck for Stefan.
> 
> (Might be being a bit of a homer with this argument ;D)


Yes of course it matters! If rider A "changes his line" and causes B, C, D to react violently to avoid hitting him, or if there is a crash and you swerve to miss it only rider A gets DQ'd or in the latter example those trying to avoid the wreck don't get DQ'd if they happen to cause someone else to crash. 

In this case, a spectator hit Schumacher causing him to swerve violently. I can't believe someone would equate what happened here with McEwen or Bettini taking someone into the barriers to impede their sprint.


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

SilasCL said:


> This must be a new rule, I don't remember Lance being DQed from the Luz Ardiden stage in the 2003 tour. Very similar circumstances...


Not quite, its an old rule you can't change your line in the last 200 meters of the race, On Luz Ardiden Lance A) was more than 200 meters from the finish and )B did not veer 4-6 feet over crashing Mayo he just crashed and Mayo crashed into him. Had Lance veered 6 feet over and crashed Mayo but stayed upright himself you might have seen him get a fine for danagerous riding.


----------



## rssljhnsn (Jul 5, 2003)

*Simple question*

Could the judges have been faulted by simply negating the time bonuses? In essence developing a new precedent whereas if a race's outcome is altered by events out of a rider's control all time bonuses are eliminated. Arguments could be made ad infinitum about who was wrong, right, screwed, lucky, unlucky, etc., etc,... It is hard to argue that a fan caused rider A to change line causing rider B to crash.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

rssljhnsn said:


> Could the judges have been faulted by simply negating the time bonuses? In essence developing a new precedent whereas if a race's outcome is altered by events out of a rider's control all time bonuses are eliminated. Arguments could be made ad infinitum about who was wrong, right, screwed, lucky, unlucky, etc., etc,... It is hard to argue that a fan caused rider A to change line causing rider B to crash.


I think the most equitable solution would be to award the win to both Schumacher and Hincapie but there doesn't seem any provision to do that.

Hincapie was pinned against the barriers behind both Schumacher and Mori with less than 100 meters to go. It's all fine and good that Hincapie thinks he could have got by both of them or at least Mori but who can say what would have happened?


----------



## Bianchigirl (Sep 17, 2004)

Beloki goes down, Armstrong is forced to go cross country to avoid him and thus deviates from the course as set - for which a rider can be fined, DQed, docked time. Instead the race commisaires used common sense and looked at the mitigating circumstances and took no action - same here. Tough luck for Hincapie but thems the breaks...


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

Bianchigirl said:


> Beloki goes down, Armstrong is forced to go cross country to avoid him and thus deviates from the course as set - for which a rider can be fined, DQed, docked time. Instead the race commisaires used common sense and looked at the mitigating circumstances and took no action - same here. Tough luck for Hincapie but thems the breaks...


Once again not the same thing at all. Not within the 200 meter limit of a finish. Beloki did not deviate form his line ules by deviateing you mean slide across the ground . Armstong did not crash someone else veering into the feild.

This was not the race commisaires using commen sense this was and exampleof them ignoring their own rules and allowing one rider to profit from the misfourtune of another even if it was unintentional. 

Go back and watch the stage that the regalted Thor on at this years tour he barely moves off his line and is reacting to a move another rider made and he gets relegated. Here Schu swerves over 6 feet cause he hit a spector and crashes Hincapie. Schu choos a tight line and got hit and crashed Hincapie and profited from it. Hincapie rode a completely clean line got taken out in a way no one could avoid and loses out to the guy who crashed him. Thats not the breaks thats bullsh!t.


----------



## Bianchigirl (Sep 17, 2004)

But you accept without argument that Hincapie, a man who hasn't won a sprint finish in a good while, would have either outsprinted Schumaker or at least finished one place behind him?


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

Bianchigirl said:


> But you accept without argument that Hincapie, a man who hasn't won a sprint finish in a good while, would have either outsprinted Schumaker or at least finished one place behind him?


He won 2 at the start of the season, and yes I think he would have gotten at least second to Schumaker. But that is not the point Schumaker deviated from his line crashed Hincapie and was basicly rewarded for it. We don't know what would have happened in the sprint but you can assume tha George would have lost and say the rulling made is ok based on that.


----------



## ultimobici (Jul 16, 2005)

32and3cross said:


> Hincapie rode a completely clean line got taken out in a way no one could avoid and loses out to the guy who crashed him. Thats not the breaks thats bullsh!t.


Maybe George should give Robbie McEwen a call and learn how to ride in a bunch sprint?


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

ultimobici said:


> Maybe George should give Robbie McEwen a call and learn how to ride in a bunch sprint?


In all likelyhood put in the exact same position Robbie would have hit the ground too as would have almost anyone. 

George is know as a good bike handler he did not fall over because he can't handle his bike he fell cause his front wheel got comepletely taken out, its not something you can ride yourself out of. George had a clear line and was riding straight Schu came off his line and rode into Geroge not the other way around.

Saying that George should learn how to ride a bunch sprint show how little knowlage you have of what your talking about. George started out as bunch sprinter and know how to ride em hes just not really fast enough to win aginst pure sprinters as hes more of a classics guy.


----------



## wipeout (Jun 6, 2005)

Bianchigirl said:


> Beloki goes down, Armstrong is forced to go cross country to avoid him and thus deviates from the course as set - for which a rider can be fined, DQed, docked time. Instead the race commisaires used common sense and looked at the mitigating circumstances and took no action - same here. Tough luck for Hincapie but thems the breaks...


But were the results "common sense" in this case? Obviously not. :mad2:


----------



## TypeOne (Dec 28, 2001)

*I'll say it again -*

Hincapie was Seahawked. Now I know the NFL needs to hire refs full-time, because they are apparently serving with the UCI, too. Great review of the tape, guys.


----------



## upstateSC-rider (Aug 21, 2004)

Has anyone seen a video of this finish anywhere? Can't find one but I'd like to see for myself what happened.

Lou.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

upstateSC-rider said:


> Has anyone seen a video of this finish anywhere? Can't find one but I'd like to see for myself what happened.
> 
> Lou.


I saw it on Cyclingtv, I'm sure it's up in their highlights section now. It's pretty obvious a spectator hits Schumacher almost causing him to crash.


----------



## SilasCL (Jun 14, 2004)

Dwayne Barry said:


> I saw it on Cyclingtv, I'm sure it's up in their highlights section now. It's pretty obvious a spectator hits Schumacher almost causing him to crash.


Hmm, not really any way you can DQ him then.

Many of the reports said something like Schumacher swerved to avoid the specator, which apparently is not entirely true. If he hit a spectator, then he is no more at fault for the crash than Hincapie, and the results should stand.

Silas


----------



## ultimobici (Jul 16, 2005)

32and3cross said:


> In all likelyhood put in the exact same position Robbie would have hit the ground too as would have almost anyone.
> 
> George is know as a good bike handler he did not fall over because he can't handle his bike he fell cause his front wheel got comepletely taken out, its not something you can ride yourself out of. George had a clear line and was riding straight Schu came off his line and rode into Geroge not the other way around.
> 
> Saying that George should learn how to ride a bunch sprint show how little knowlage you have of what your talking about. George started out as bunch sprinter and know how to ride em hes just not really fast enough to win aginst pure sprinters as hes more of a classics guy.


Sorry, I forgot to put the "tongue in cheek" icon in my post.

However, if Schumacher was hit by a spectator, he can't be DQ for veering off his line. If he was avoiding being hit, then maybe there's a case for it.

I suspect that if RM was in GH position, whiner that he is, he'd have been more understanding of the situation.

BTW, I can't remember GH as a bunch sprinter at all. Can you post a link to his sprinting palmares? He is however the nearly man of the classics. Much hyped but just falls short or has bad luck.


----------



## philippec (Jun 16, 2002)

Looking at the tape can be instructive -- Schumacher did not swerve to <i><b>avoid</b></i> being hit by a spectator... he swerved <i><b>because and as a direct mechanical result of being hit by a spectator</b></i>. That makes all the difference. The judges' decision was right and unfortunately that sucked for George.

The logic behind the thinking that Schumi should have been DQ'd for being hit by a spectator because he should assume responsibility for taking a "risky" inside line can be naturally extended to George's responsibility in his own accident for not having foreseen that the inside line taken by Schumi was potentially sketchy and therefore not having moved himself further outside of the turn to a "safer" position... which, of course, is complete nonsense. 

When racing, sh!t happens.

A+

Philippe


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

ultimobici said:


> Sorry, I forgot to put the "tongue in cheek" icon in my post.
> 
> However, if Schumacher was hit by a spectator, he can't be DQ for veering off his line. If he was avoiding being hit, then maybe there's a case for it.
> 
> ...


Go look it yourself not that hard - you can start with the 2 srints he won at tour cali this year. He started his career as Motorolas sprinter.


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

philippec said:


> Looking at the tape can be instructive -- Schumacher did not swerve to <i><b>avoid</b></i> being hit by a spectator... he swerved <i><b>because and as a direct mechanical result of being hit by a spectator</b></i>. That makes all the difference. The judges' decision was right and unfortunately that sucked for George.


We disagree then. Schumaker took his problem and made it George's and was rewarded for it, it was lame call by the refs and make the win pretty meanless in my opion.



philippec said:


> The logic behind the thinking that Schumi should have been DQ'd for being hit by a spectator because he should assume responsibility for taking a "risky" inside line can be naturally extended to George's responsibility in his own accident for not having foreseen that the inside line taken by Schumi was potentially sketchy and therefore not having moved himself further outside of the turn to a "safer" position... which, of course, is complete nonsense.
> 
> When racing, sh!t happens.
> 
> ...


Actually that was not my logic, my logic was the rules say you can't move off you line in the last 200 meter, which Schumacker did.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

32and3cross said:


> my logic was the rules say you can't move off you line in the last 200 meter


Clearly there are times when riders move off their line for various reasons and are not DQ'd.


----------



## philippec (Jun 16, 2002)

32and3cross said:


> the rules say you can't move off you line in the last 200 meter, which Schumacker did.


To be semantically precise, Schumaker did not <i>move</i> off his line... Schumaker <i>was moved</i> off of his line ... a point on which the rules are silent and which was, in my opinion, correctly dealt with by the judges.

Let's take a hypothetical yet plausible scenario here.

4-way sprint, last 200 metres. 

Roo-boy McEwen hits the sprint early on the inside, trailed initially and on the outside by Boom-boom Boonen, "Fear me for I am the hammer of the gods" Hushovd and "Oh my god, what I am doing here" Alexandro Valverde.

Boonen blasts up to McEwen's side, shoulder to shoulder with Hushovd with Valverde a half bike length back on the outside. McEwen senses danger and in a not fully uncharacteristic fit of adrelaline-fueled frenzy headbutts Boonen sending the flying Flandrian careening into Hushovd who gets pushed into Valverde's line taking out the young Spaniard's wheel and causing Valverde to go down hard breaking his clavicle (sound familiar??). By your logic, Hushovd and possibly Boonen should be DQ'd for having (been) moved off their line.

That simply is not going to happen.

I think, however, we can agree that McEwen gets DQ'd and is made to wash the entire peleton's socks by hand with only the help of his toothbrush!

In the present case, replace the spectator with McEwen and keep the same kinetic effects (McEwan pushes into Schumacher thus pushing Schumi into Hincapie's line) and I don't think we would be having this discussion. Schumacher would not be DQ'd.


----------



## ultimobici (Jul 16, 2005)

32and3cross said:


> Go look it yourself not that hard - you can start with the 2 srints he won at tour cali this year. He started his career as Motorolas sprinter.


Tour of California I'll give you. 

Motorola's sprinter? Wasn't very effective was he? He was a domestique then more likely working for Phil Anderson, Steve Bauer & Andy Hampsten, not to mention an up and coming Texan. More recently he was a domestique deluxe in the same mould as Sean Yates. That is not a slight but a very high compliment as Yates was LA's right hand man at Motorola as well as being touted as a Paris Roubaix contender.


----------



## upstateSC-rider (Aug 21, 2004)

Dwayne Barry said:


> I saw it on Cyclingtv, I'm sure it's up in their highlights section now. It's pretty obvious a spectator hits Schumacher almost causing him to crash.


Thanks, just watched it. GH was definitely robbed but not intentionally. Schumacher didn't look to happy about the whole thing either.


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

philippec said:


> snipped a bunch a convoluted crap having little to do with the facts at hand


Dude whatever


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

ultimobici said:


> Tour of California I'll give you.
> 
> Motorola's sprinter? Wasn't very effective was he? He was a domestique then more likely working for Phil Anderson, Steve Bauer & Andy Hampsten, not to mention an up and coming Texan. More recently he was a domestique deluxe in the same mould as Sean Yates. That is not a slight but a very high compliment as Yates was LA's right hand man at Motorola as well as being touted as a Paris Roubaix contender.


We were not talking about his ability to win a sprint but rather his ability to ride in a sprint. Hes clearly able to handle his bike just not fast enough to beat the real sprinters in Europe.


----------



## philippec (Jun 16, 2002)

32and3cross said:


> Dude whatever





32and3cross said:


> snipped a bunch a convoluted crap having little to do with the facts at hand





32and3cross said:


> my logic was the rules say you can't move off you line in the last 200 meter


Ok, fair enough.

Let me put this in more simple terms: Your logic is not logic at all, it is an incorrect interpretation of the rules. Schumacher was pushed off his line by a bystander and was not responsible for this movement. Ergo, he was not DQ'd.

A+

Philippe


----------



## ultimobici (Jul 16, 2005)

philippec said:


> Ok, fair enough.
> 
> Let me put this in more simple terms: Your logic is not logic at all, it is an incorrect interpretation of the rules. Schumacher was pushed off his line by a bystander and was not responsible for this movement. Ergo, he was not DQ'd.
> 
> ...


If the roles had been reversed we would not be having this discussion.

More likely, it would have been titled "Hincapie wins in thrilling last kilo drama!"

As far as GH bike handling skills are concerned, PR a few years ago - didn't he end up in a ditch? 

When all is said and done, Schumacher was forced off his line and he cannot be held accountable for the consequences however unfortunate they are for GH. As they say "That's bike racing" - get over it.


----------



## wipeout (Jun 6, 2005)

ultimobici said:


> If the roles had been reversed we would not be having this discussion.


Duh, yes we would. S'matter with you...everyone likes a good controversy. Race leader gets taken down by the second place rider, wins GC by a second. Guarantee it would get talked about, bucko.


----------



## ultimobici (Jul 16, 2005)

wipeout said:


> Duh, yes we would. S'matter with you...everyone likes a good controversy. Race leader gets taken down by the second place rider, wins GC by a second. Guarantee it would get talked about, bucko.


Not with as much rancour. US rider robbed arouses more indignation then US rider benefits from crash. Fewer calls for DQ I suspect.


----------

