Everyone’s favourite no-nonsense referee, Pierluigi Collina, may soon be expecting a call from the UCI, after world cycling’s governing body announced this afternoon that it plans to go down the football route by introducing a yellow card system designed to dissuade riders and sports directors, as well as other drivers and motorbike riders, from engaging in dangerous behaviour during races.
The new yellow card method of clamping down on what the UCI calls “bad conduct” comes as part of a suite of new measures the governing body hopes will promote safety at professional road races, after an increasingly long string of high-profile and serious crashes and incidents and calls for change in recent years.
> Jonas Vingegaard warned about the descent of Basque Country horror crash half a year ago, but organisers “never gave an answer”, claims Safe Cycling CEO
Along with the introduction of yellow cards, the UCI says it will also test the effects of restricting the wearing of earpieces during races, while – in a bid to make bunch sprints safer and less stressful – modifying the current 3km rule for GC time gaps and simplifying the method of calculating time gaps in group sprints.
(Zac Williams/SWpix.com)
The new measures are based on recommendations from the UCI’s SafeR initiative, launched in June 2023 (just weeks after Gino Mäder’s tragic death at the Tour de Suisse) to help improve safety in the bunch and unite cycling’s key stakeholders in their approach to the issue.
> "Profound safety problem" in elite cycling, finds report... but riders union president says it's "getting safer"
According to the UCI, the yellow cards system will be introduced, first as part of a trial phase, on 1 August and will apply to both men’s and women’s professional road races.
While the cards won’t physically exist – so the prospect of a commissaire running after a grumpy DS brandishing a yellow unfortunately won’t come to fruition – they will be listed in the race communiqué and will, the UCI hopes, “have a dissuasive effect on anyone present in the race convoy (riders, Sport Directors, other drivers and motorbike riders, etc.) who might engage in behaviour that could jeopardise the safety of the event”.
“In addition, the system will aim to make all these people more responsible by introducing the monitoring of bad conduct over time and consequently encouraging respectful behaviour,” the governing body says.
To do so, anyone found guilty of breaching the UCI’s current safety rules could be on the receiving end of a yellow card (along with the traditional sanctions imposed), with two yellow cards at the same race leading to the individual being disqualified and suspended for a week.
Anyone who receives three yellow cards within a thirty-day period will also be suspended for 14 days, while six yellow cards in the space of a year will lead to a 30-day suspension.
Good job Roy Keane isn’t a cycling sports director, then.
The UCI says no sanctions, however, will be imposed during the trial period, but that they will come into effect, pending review, from 1 January 2025.
Meanwhile, in a move likely to garner favour with cycling traditionalists, the UCI has also decided to test the effects of a restriction on wearing and using earpieces in races at unspecified races this year.
“This decision is based on discussions on the subject within SafeR, which led to the conclusion that earpieces could be both a source of distraction for riders and a physical hazard because the radio units are mounted on their backs, and represent a risk when a large number of teams are simultaneously asking their riders to move up to the front of the race,” the UCI said, adding that other measures, such as limiting the use of earpieces to one rider per team, will also be considered.
(Zac Williams/SWpix.com)
The three-kilometre rule, introduced in 2005 and which allows a rider who has suffered a crash or mechanical problem in the final 3km of a race to be credited with the time of the group they were in at the time of the incident, will also be modified, allowing organisers to increase the buffer zone to 5km in certain circumstances before a race.
“This measure is intended to take account of the increase in traffic calming infrastructure – sources of danger for the pelotons – within an ever-greater radius of the race finish sites. Extending the zone in which the rule applies, when necessary, will reduce the pressure on riders during the phase of the race leading up to the final sprint,” the UCI says.
> “It’s the third day in a row and it’s breaking my balls a bit now”: Bloodied Remco Evenepoel rages against Vuelta safety chaos
And finally, in a similar bid to add some calm to the chaos of a bunch sprint (especially for GC riders), the method for calculating time gaps in mass finishes will be simplified, with gaps between groups only being counted after three seconds, instead of one.
The UCI continued: “This systematisation of the three-second rule is intended to simplify the calculation of time gaps at stages with an expected bunch sprint, to relieve the pressure on riders not directly involved in the sprint and to allow them to leave a certain margin with the front of the race – three seconds corresponding to a gap of 50 metres rather than 17 metres for a one-second gap – and to thus reduce unnecessary risk-taking, particularly for riders aiming for the overall classification.”
Both of these new sprint rules will be tested at the Tour de France before a final decision is made.
Along with these new racing rules, the SafeR project will also work with experts to carry out equipment studies (such as on hookless rims with tubeless tyres, after Thomas De Gent’s spectacular blowout at the UAE Tour, helmets, and skinsuits) in order to define what equipment issues are contributing to crashes, possibly leading to tighter regulations on manufacturers.
> Zipp "reaffirms" safety of its hookless rims, but now advises teams to use tyres no smaller than 29mm
“The safety of riders is a priority for the UCI, and it was with this in mind that we created SafeR, a structure dedicated to safety, bringing together the main stakeholders in professional road cycling,” UCI President David Lappartient said today.
“I am convinced that the measures announced today, which are the fruit of the work of this new body and which affect many aspects of the road racing ecosystem, will enable us to make progress towards a safer sport.”
“SafeR has provided a platform for me to address the riders’ number one concern: safety in races,” added Adam Hansen, the president of the CPA riders’ union.
“Feedback has shown that the majority of riders wanted the 3km rule extended to reduce stress during hectic race finales. I am thrilled that this will be tested at some sprint finals at the Tour de France, and I thank the UCI and ASO for allowing it.
“Additionally, a large survey conducted last year indicated the need for a yellow card system in cycling, which will be tested in the coming months before being implemented next year. These initial measures recommended by SafeR to the UCI demonstrate that riders’ requests are being heard and acted upon. It is crucial, and we are making significant progress in this area. There is still much work to be done, and I look forward to continuing the solid work that has begun.”
Add new comment
67 comments
Keir Starmer’s claim that Labour is “on the side of drivers”
Thanks Sir Keir, I was contemplating voting tactically for labour just to make sure the tory didn't get in, but not now. Green all the way.
If each of them individually has evens chance of racing, then surely the chance of both of them racing is 25% (unless they each refuse to race without the other).
.
'Keir Starmer’s claim that Labour is “on the side of drivers” slammed by cyclists who ask, “How about everybody else?”'
.
A Lay Bah government. A Laaaaaaay Bah government!
.
LOL!. Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.
.
Sadly with you on this one Flintshire, more in weariness than sorrow. Good tune though!
OTOH ... while they're wearing the clothes of the Conservative party, the eagle-eyed can discern some differences: for one there's less interest in stuff like shooting the "small boats" in the water (set an example to the others, that'll learn 'em). Though they were a bit cautious about wagging their finger at the Israeli government and saying "could you be a little bit more careful?"
A rather different take on Starmer's position from some of the media -
https://twitter.com/peterwalker99/status/1800914571135500689
One for the road.cc team tomorrow. Drunken idiot on a defective bike crashes into someone and breaks their hip. Apparently on the footway also - no mention of shared use. Although I can see some shared use signs in that general area the article doesn't make it clear exactly where this happened*.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx88g1v8en7o
8 months in jail (*after* a guilty plea, note), but I imagine all the usual suspects will be out in force.
Meanwhile - a similar sentance for a driver killing a motorcyclist this year in York, apparently which would have been suspended had the driver not collected a couple of speeding offenses after that.
Something something review of road law...
Anyway - hope you all get a ride in before then!
* Looks like some full-UK-standards-compliant hapless "paint infra" about this area e.g. here.
Oh, Horlicks!
There is no way at all that a LTN would stop someone driving from Point A to Point B if they chose to do so, it's just that they might not be able to take the most direct route.
Absolutely tragic case and every sympathy to this gentleman for his loss, the likes of which I can't possibly begin to imagine:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cd11gnqp27wo
However, it's strange that the BBC report this without noting the issue of the dangers of buying batteries off the Internet rather than from a reputable company or supplier and/or matching them with incompatible chargers, thereby feeding the "All ebikes/EVs are an accident waiting to happen" narrative. I've still yet to hear of an ebike fire caused by a correctly used reputable product with the correct charger, has anyone?
There is a link on the BBC report that takes you to another link from the Fire Brigade. This link gives fair and good advice on e Batteries. The BBC report does make it sound as if all e-bikes are a fire hazard. I have been dealing with e-bikes for over a decade now and I have never heard of a Bosch or Shimano better igniting.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2024/jun/12/general-election-r...
Could be a lot worse. I just hope they don't ever sound like marginalising non-car-users.
Could be a lot better. I just hope they actually do something for active travel instead of leaving to councils, some of which are useless. (Mine).
Politicians trying to win easy votes at election time - shocked!
SLAMMED
FFS this website has really gone to shit.
?
Ad hominum
Always was, always is, and always will be.
Let the wokist lefties have their little echo chamber here, it's funny to come back once in a while and check out their latest frothing nonsense.
Even better now there is an election on and the lefties are getting worked up about Captain Crasharoonie Snoozefests duff party leaning to the right haha.
Right_is_for_assholes
Who are Frothing Nonsense and why do I need to check them out? Are they any good?
1970s one hit wonders
Surely the ideal warmup act for Genesis P-Orridge's Throbbing Gristle?
Labour's plan to fix Tory potholes is pretty good though. Yes, they are Tory potholes. Local councils have had budgets halved since 2010 and road maintenance has been one of the main casualties.
Is it? Maybe good for a soundbite?
Fixing the road infra is needed and there's a maintenance backlog, yes. But as others point out it's a system issue. Both in terms of the funding (cut) and the wear and tear on the roads (growing because more journeys / heavier vehicles). And indeed we're on course to build more roads (because "we need more housing" / "fix congestion") - which means we're creating a bigger maintenance bill a decade or so on.
And the major parties are encouraging ("on the side of the motorist") or not addressing at least one cause of the problems...
Without looking at the system this amounts to temporarily alleviating symptoms - by literally pouring money into holes in the ground.
The root cause of more traffic because more people are obliged to travel from home to work due to planning law, guidelines and practice.
However it's ridiculously hard to solve centuries of construction and civil engineering that supports that planning.
Some countries have looked at the worsening public health data and decided that active travel infrastructure is not nice to have but a national priority.
Public funding of healthcare cannot keep up so its better value for tax payers to mandate all roads be built or improved with active travel infrastructure ie separate lanes for active travel.
It has taken decades for Finland to implement but nobody wants to go back.
Presently no UK politicians get this.
It's possible that at least some UK politicians "get it". I think it's more likely that transforming transport doesn't seem like a priority (that's political survival, then "events, dear boy"). And/or they've judged it's simply not politically possible for them to "get there from here".
I very much doubt we can "rewind" things. But certainly some places have "tamed the car, a bit" - and genuinely made "nicer places" where they were not before.
I do wonder. Having started out thinking "but it's just engineering!" and progressed through "OK, it's engineering and fighting the power of those profiting from motoring" I think it may be something to do with how our society and governence is structured. For example I didn't know what I didn't know about some of details of how Dutch places end up as they do. I'd assumed it was just "mandated" and centrally so - but the truth is much more complex. Probably more suited to the usual political pushing and shoving.
Not defending coucil budgets or lack of.. but in my experience I the quality of pot hole repair and road building/resurfacing is woefully lacking.
The contractors doing the road repairs are simply not doing a good enough job. It should not be the case that the same pot hole needs repairing year after year.. yet it seems that's exactly what's happening.
Imagine how much money is wasted on this. In my local county coucil there is a man in place who's job it is to ensure repairs are carried out correctly and yet, still we see, resurfaced roads which haven't fixed the existing issues underneath, the same pot holes being patched year after year.
Regardless of whose door 'blame' lies at, one thing is for sure, a lot of council tax is being wasted on shoddy workmanship on our local roads.
If only the people who use the roads and want them to be in tip top condition hadnt believed the politicians' lies about local authorities being able to deliver more for less. You may have more money in your pockets to buy stuff but the stuff of life - rivers, air, infrastructure and health care are all going to rack and ruin because "we" keep on voting for lower taxes. You can't have a Colnago for the price of a Carrera!
Watched a fine program about pest controllers on bbc2 a while back. Council bloke put it this way, he gets called out, stops the rats getting in tries to keep the rats away, it's his job. Company puts down poison, charges for it and then has to come back six months later. That's why contracting out works so well and generates profit...
In regards to Labour and Tories
George Orwell - Animal Farm
The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which."
It certainly does appear that Labour is just trying to do everything the Tories say that they will do, to try and poach their voters. Yeah, they try and put a nice 'friendlier' face on it, but still…
Hey - does anyone else remember when Labour was left of centre and you could see clear water (AKA the Lib Dems) between Labour and the Tories?
Pages