Bjarne Riis, the manager of NTT Pro Cycling, has accused Sir Dave Brailsford of being “selfish” over comments he could withdraw Team Ineos from the Tour de France if he felt the health of staff and riders were at risk.
Speaking a couple of weeks ago about competing in a rescheduled Tour de France later in the year, Brailsford said: “We would reserve the right to withdraw the team should we deem it necessary.
“Whilst the race is on, we will plan to participate, but equally we will monitor the evolving nature of how things play out, as we did prior to Paris-Nice. This is a sensible, responsible and reasoned approach.”
Brailsford said that Ineos would, “monitor the situation very carefully and of course take note of national guidance and all advice.”
Sky Sports reports that Riis has taken issue with his rival’s stance, arguing that all those involved in the sport should ‘stick together’.
"I cannot imagine [Tour de France director] Christian Prudhomme would want to stand at the head of the Tour not feeling it is safe," he said.
"I know him well enough to know he will not do that, the UCI will not allow it. I trust these people to have the right authorities behind them and take the right decision. We should follow that. I disagree with Dave Brailsford when he said we should decide if it's safe or not.
"It's not up to him to decide... Now is the moment cycling should stick together by doing the right thing and not thinking of yourself in terms of what is best for your team, but what is best for the sport.
"I think the UCI, the teams, the riders should stick together...and do what is best for cycling and not just individuals. I gave the example of Brailsford before and I was not very happy about his comments because I think it was selfish.
"It is not about what is best for them and what they think, it is about what is best for our sport."
There are currently doubts over whether the Tour de France will be able to go ahead on its rescheduled start date of August 29.
French Prime Minister Edouard Philippe said earlier this week that there could be no team sports until September at the earliest, yet at the same time the country’s sports ministry says it does not envisage the postponement or cancellation of the race.
The ministry has said that “adjustments” might be made to the event and that “there will be regular contact to refine any decisions.”
> Chris Froome says people writing him off could work to his favour at Tour de France
Add new comment
6 comments
Brailsford and Ineos are the employers of their riders, and as such they have a duty of care not to put them in unnecessary danger, and that must be their decision, not that of Amaury Sport who clearly have massive ulterior motives to get some sort of race on as soon as they can. Oh, and self-confessed dope cheat Rijs telling people they must respect the rules and the sport is definitely one to file in the "fuck off" column.
Riis in 'unprincipled prick' shocker...
Perfectly reasonable and considered statement from Brailsford...meaning someone who wants publicity will use it to further their own agenda. #because
Whether you think Brailsford is a good guy or not, he has a legal duty to protect the health and safety of the people working for him. If he chooses to withdraw Team Ineos to protect his staff, then he should be supported for making a very difficult decisions. Riis doesn't have a clue and should keep his opinions to himself.
Yeah and especially since there's so many asthmatics in the team.
Is this the same Riis who so prominently led from the front in 'doing the right thing ... for the sport' and who showed what it means to 'stick together ... and do what is best for cycling' by taking massive doses of EPO and raising his blood hermatocrit to life-endangering levels in order to win the Tour?
Brailsford can be a less than inspiring person at times, but on this one he's surely taking a resonable position in reserving the right to make a decision with his team on safety grounds. A DS might take a decision to pull a team, or order them not to race, if they felt the course or conditions had become dangerous, so they should be able to reach that judgement if they judge the wider circumstances have the same result.