It seems as if chaos has made some sort of deal with this year’s Vuelta a España, at least judging by the race’s opening three days, which featured enough racing and off-road drama to fill at least a dozen grand tours (despite the notable absence of a doping raid – though we did have one of those over in Germany, so there’s that).
First, there was an unexpected and rather apocalyptic summer storm and the farcical nighttime TTT through the sodden, pitch-black (and otherwise lovely) streets of Barcelona, which saw – or more to the point, didn’t see – punctures, crashes, and a classic Remco rant.
(ASO/Charly Lopez)
Then, on Sunday’s second stage heading back into the Catalan capital, we had yet more flooded roads, rider protests, crashes, tacks being thrown onto the road by independence-hungry locals, remonstrations from wannabe patrons urging the peloton’s little people to slow down, a GC neutralisation, and the strange sight of most of the race sitting up in the final ten kilometres – while the commissaires consulted with fans over who would be leading their race. Yep.
Oh, and the ridiculous sight of Jumbo-Visma’s bus ‘doing a GreenEdge’ and getting stuck after hitting a tree:
Fast forward another 24 hours and race barriers and tents were being blown across the road at the mountain top finish in Andorra, and then defending champion Remco Evenepoel – seconds after blowing Jonas Vingegaard away to take an ominously strong stage win – crashed straight into a female team staffer just after the finish line.
While some pointed out that the Belgian champion could have avoided his collision with the soigneur had he, like everyone else, applied the brakes in time after celebrating – and that he would have crashed straight into the barriers, anyway – the sight of a bloodied Remco on the ground once again called into question the safety standards at the Vuelta.
(Rafa Gomez/SprintCyclingAgency)
Not least from Remco himself, of course.
“Again, there are some safety questions,” the Soudal-Quick Step rider said soon after the incident, which must be stretching the Vuelta’s headline grabbing moments of madness into double digits by now. “50 metres after crossing the line I crash into someone.
“It’s the third day in a row and it’s breaking my balls a bit now. I’ve had enough.”
Thankfully, a little later on Evenepoel toned down his trademark brand of brashness, and offered up a more light-hearted assessment of this latest slice of Vuelta drama.
“There was not enough space after the finish line, and I went between the cameras and soigneurs,” he said. “But it’s only some skin and meat gone from my head. But that’s good because it’s less weight for the uphills.”
Now, with some kind of sprint – and a chance for the GC contenders to finally relax – on the cards today (at least in theory), can we please, please just have one normal day at the Vuelta? Is that too much to ask?
Add new comment
45 comments
I don't know if I'm the first to consider it but maybe Jeremy Vine is putting his tongue in his cheek, metaphorically?
By suggesting that drivers pull over for cyclists (when they are in slower moving traffic areas like central London) maybe JV is trying to show how ridiculous the argument is that some drivers want cyclists to move out of the way when they (drivers) incorrectly believe they are faster?
Case in point: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7enDsD5bpc&pp=ygUIc2EwNSBvemM%3D(link is external)
Presumably we should all be sensible when cycling/driving and just do both with everyone's safety in mind (when moving through slow traffic) rather than just trying to get everywhere as fast as possible?
Agree.
I think he's trying to recast the debate.
It's like CycleGaz putting a car framing on his videos.
GWR Passenger's Charter - "In accordance with the National Rail Conditions of Travel we will refuse to carry a bike if it is unsafe to do so".
RE "Really ‘secure’ bike stands":
The photo TallBikeGuy has posted - they might not be bolted down, but at least with that design if you've locked the bike to the rack, they're staying attached. The problem with "bolted down" ones is that if you can just unscrew the rack, you can then slide the rack out from the lock and then ride off with the bike, or at least carry off the bike (depending on how it was locked). It would be much harder to steal a bike still attached to the rack, short of lifting the whole thing into a van (not impossible my any means, but less likely. And if they've brought a van, they will probably have an angle grinder so the rack becomes pretty moot anyway - they can just cut the lock).
And whilst Edinburgh might have been in the news recently, it's not a new problem - see e.g. Cambridge several years ago.
There's an article in today's Sun, referencing a paywalled article in the Torygraph, with Nick Freeman advising people on the loopholes they can use to avoid ULEZ fines.
I am so glad that this 'top lawyer' and 'road safety campaigner' cares about air pollution too.
That "ebike" - Great Scott, if Doc Brown made ebikes...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPIXeYqtBWU
The train manager was worried it had a flux incapacitator.
I've seen a couple of comments on Twitter about signage for the ULEZ and it might not be to standard, giving drivers a loophole to escape a fine. Unfortunately the links were to the sun and telegraph, so not that reliable.
Anyone seen anything substantive ?
There has been a lot of coverage in the tabloid end of the internet, saying that "dozens" of ULEZ cameras and signs have been vandalised.
This from the same end of the internet which always complains about XR, JSO, etc, taking "direct action"...
BlackBeltBarrister has ben commenting on Youtube. and he is quite sane though sightly chases populist stories.
Frankly I'm with GWR.
The distinction isn't between "e-bikes" versus "e-scooters"; it's between devices built to a high standard and certified as safe, versus devices built on the cheap with low quality components and minimal quality control or safety testing.
I'm confused by Mr Palmer's comments. He talks about the "highly regulated e-bike industry" and yet surely he realises that doesn't mean you can cobble together a frankenbike as he appears to have done, and still expect it to be safe just because it's a "bike" and not a "scooter"?
If you "looked the type" I could easily imagine someone perceiving a terrorist threat with that object. They might be right either way...
After my recent out-of-step posts, following the image of that e-bike, I'm happy to report I'm back on parade ... 😀
At some point, age can't be an excuse for jeopardizing the safety of others.
The risk might be low, but it's not zero, and that contraption world certainly present a number of elevated risk factors.
Frankly, it's monstrosities like it that spoil it for people with good quality, competently built, well maintained devices and, similarly to eScooters, result in access being denied enMass.
That eBike is an absolute travesty of engineering and aesthetics. It's got no place on public transport.
Agreed. That just screams "fire hazard". Saw the headline and was expecting some jobsworth, but I'm 100% with the train manager on this one.
...not to mention that Ledbury to St Leonard's, via London must be stretching the financial viability of fast food delivery.
Wasn't enMass a girl group in the middle nineties? What do they have to do with eBikes? Although, there was that one time when their set, set a stadium (literally) on fire...
What was the other member of the group riding? I have visions of an 80 yr old giving a "backy" to another 80 yr old on that contraption.
I was just thinking that. Reading it again, it sounds like it wasn't necessarily part of their transport, he just took it along for a jolly: "So, two and a half hours late, we arrived at our destination, and I was able to enjoy a long cycle ride around Romney Marsh the following day". I bet Mrs P was cursing him.
This was in the Observer over the weekend:
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/aug/26/more-than-150-car-model...
Forest rangers continue to report "significant accumulations of excrement that can only come from some pretty big critter"
I love how they've decided "iPhone 14 Plus" (one size variant in a near-constantly spawning range of phones) is a more useful reference than "16.35cm". However, for this to be really useful to me, I'm going to need to know how many Nokia 3310s you used to be able to get between some early noughties car doors.
I thought that Nokia 3310 was a measure of weight/mass?
Been away for a few days. Who are the current trolls please?
It's been very pleasantly quiet with Nigel banned again and our American and Australian representatives being silent for some reason. Unfortunately JC4PM/username has staged a renaissance this morning, always going to be too good to last I suppose.
Unfortunately for the rest of us mere mortals, Rendel Harris (the road.cc fake profile) is still here.
Beatlejuice
Isn't that a bit cruel, making juice out of beatles?
Efficient - you only need 4 (ish... for pedants) and you get a lot of pop!
Pages