Lance Pissed at Evans???

rejobako

My take: It would seem a triviality for Armstrong to concern himself with Evans' little lunge across the line. Evans wasn't going to gain time on the elite group he was coming in with, but it seems fair to suggest that he had the right to up the pace to gain a few seconds on Vino and the others for whom he is fighting for a top 10 GC placing. That being said, I suppose Armstrong probably felt a bit perplexed as to why Evans would decide to showboat like that considering Evans had been content to draft all the way into the finishing stretch.

And although this little incident has become fodder for the anti-Armstrong crowd, Armstrong himself has said nothing publicly about the incident (at least to my knowledge). Evans said Armstrong asked him "what was that for?" and characterized Armstrong as "pissed" at him. Perhaps, although from what I saw of Armstrong's demeanor after they finished that day, and the fact that he didn't find it necessary to comment on the incident, seems like Evans is the one who has overdramatized Armstrong's reaction (just as Evans overdramatized the finish itself . . . hmmmmmm).

As an aside, there has certainly been a lot of discussion about rider etiquette since Hincapie outfoxed Pereiro last weekend. Seems like every day there's another wrinkle to the issue of when it's OK to "suck wheel" and when it is not. Apparently, since I see that there is a lot of support for Evans latching on to the back of Armstrong's wheel to move up in the top 10 on GC, I will presume that those same people no longer have an issue with Hincapie trying to move into the top 20 by doing the same thing . . .

Or maybe the answer is even simpler than that -- you "wheelsucker" snobs may simply have a rather glorified idea of what riders should be doing in pursuit of a successful finish. In virtually every case, wheelsucking is only frowned upon by the guy who is disadvantaged by the maneuver. The other guy and his supporters will always be able to find a reason to suggest it was permissible.

limerickman

With respect, you're trying to equivocate between what was a "sprint" incident for a very minor place on stage, with a stage win (OP and GH).

I would also dispute the people here are supporting CE : it seems to me that
posters here wonder why LA would say, what CE claimed that he (LA) said.

thebluetrain

He equivocated that CE wheelsucked on the LA/Basso group to move up on GC. Why is it ok for CE to wheelsuck to move up on GC and not one accuses or critisizes him of it but GH gets blasted for it on a stage win? Wheelsucking is wheelsucking, right?

limerickman

Did you see stage 18 ?
CE worked at the front of the chasing group to the foot of the last climb.
The final 10kms, he didn't go to the front of the LA/Basso/JU group.
At the end of the stage, he pipped LA for a minor placing on the stage.

Compare and contrast that to what Hincapie did last weekend :
GH didn't do any pull whatsoever on the stage.
The only time he came to the front was with 2kms to go to fight for a stage win, wheelsucking against the rider who had ridden at the front for a major part of the day.

mareblu

When did this ll happen, on yesterday's stage or today's?

__________________

roadhog

This is all sort of ridiculous in my opinion, and if Lance truly was angered by it then he was ridiculous in this situation as well. Who cares!? I was impressed with CE hanging on to the 3 "usual suspects" like he did. He was probably just exhilerated by the company.

Also, I think we should consider that while we have hours and hours to sit around and think strategy and what is proper, the riders themselves decide things in fractions of seconds at times, and after riding for hours in sweltering heat, etc. Consider the final of this stage. CE just crested a serious hill with the best three riders in the Tour. It's a grandstand home stretch on a wide runway of an aerodrome. For two days he has had great success climbing the GC standings. Two close competitors (Vino, Landis) are behind him somewhere. He's going full out towards the line with a company of great riders. He's fired up about the time he's gaining and the company he's with, and perhaps didn't give the "properness" (if there is such a thing) of any other part of the situation a thought.

Now, is it so unreasonable to think he is enthusiastic enough to dig deep and give it all he's got at the end to put an exclamation point on the time he has gained througout the last km's? Come on! We should be happy for this guy, not be-grudging him. It was a great day for him. And LA was in no way threatened by anything that happened.

musette

Maybe Evans is trying to highlight to people (by linking himself with more newsworthy LA) that he was able to hang with LA and the best on that climb. Maybe it's Evans' attempt to generate free publicity for himself and/or try to frame himself as a better climber than he is. Since Evans knows he himself is not likely to grab many headlines for his non-win, he tried to stir things up and have people write and talk about his having pipped LA.

thebluetrain

Everything GH did before the final climb on his stage win was by the book tactics that no one can dispute. Everything CE did before the last climb on the stage was by the book tactics that no one can dispute. Had GH done a pull before that last climb everyone on this forum would be calling him a moron for doing it. Yes the break had a 17 or 18 min gap on the peleton but at the bottom of the climb the gap if I remember right was around 6:30. So anything before that last climb of GH's stage win and the last climb of CE's move up on GC is irrelevant. The way I see it CE wheelsucked on the final climb of a stage to overtake riders on the GC but no one here jumped him for it like they did GH. And yes I saw the stage.

rejobako

I think the question in your second paragraph may be answered by your comments in the first. Armstrong, knowing Evans had been sitting behind him during the entire finishing stretch, was probably wondering what purpose there was in Evans coming 'round to lunge him out at the end for what amounts to a no-bonus no-time-gap consequence. Evans describes Lance as "pissed", but to my knowledge, the only thing we know that Lance said or did after the stage was to ask Evans "What was that for?"

Seems like a legitimate question, one which Evans answered by saying:

"I can sit on the climb in the headwind, but I can't come 'round. But if you put a finish line in front of me, I have to sprint for it - I'm a bike racer... sorry Lance."
Quizzed on what Armstrong said to him, the Australian replied: "What was that for?"

So what did you say? "I couldn't think of any answer straight away... it's hard after a finish like that!" exclaimed Evans with a smile.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/road/200...esults/tour0518

(Lest you embark on a context-hunting mission, I will acknowledge now that Evans made other comments in the linked article -- I am only quoting what I believe to be relevant to the point of the discussion.)

From what I can tell, Evans acknowledges that his lunge at the finish was more of an instinctive act than one which had any implications on his GC time, because with respect to the latter criterion, what Evans did made no sense. Which is probably why Armstrong asked him why he did it in the first place. If Armstrong was more than a little annoyed, then I agree he's a bit oversensitive to the incident. But by him simply asking a question, I don't see a reason to embark on the typical Lance-bashing occurring earlier in this thread. (Not by you.)

rejobako

True; my involvement in this thread was not to begrudge Evans, but simply to point out that the only thing anyone knows that Lance did in response to Evans was to ask him "what was that for?" And that question has prompted a multi-page thread with spittle-coated accusations of "bully" and a "control-freak".

Armstrong may be both of those, but I don't think yesterday's developments are evidence of it.

renoster

This is all a bit trivial.
Not sure how many bonus seconds were involved, but that may have been a factor. Cadel took an opportunity to get some limelight, and some exposure for his sponsors, and Lance was probably a bit irritated, in an immediate post-finish frame of mind, but probably did not consider it a huge deal, just making a fairly benign comment.

A small incident has been blown up in the media and two teams are playing the airtime.

All in my own cynical "its all about the sponsors" opinion.

musette

No bonus seconds were involved.

But Voeckler is angry at A Merckx and CSC:

"Much of the angry rider's beef was directed towards Merckx, who he accuses of not having pulled his weight before the final ascent to the Mende aerodrome. Someone else earned the Voeckler wrath. Asked by French sports daily l'Equipe if everyone else in the ten-man group collaborated, he replied "not Luke Roberts, of CSC," before unleashing a scathing diatribe against the Danish team's directeur sportif. "However much Bjarne Riis might criticise the French, say that we're badly positioned on our bike, too fat of whatever, at least we, the French, when we're in front, ride a good pace.""

wolfix

rejobako

wolfix: interesting perspective. I found it interesting that although Evans justified his actions by saying he was just instinctively racing for a finish line, he also included an apology in his comments, which lends credence to your post.

And again, I cannot overemphasize the fact that this "controversy" has been stirred up by Evans, not Armstrong, who hasn't said a public word to anyone about Evans' actions. If Evans breached any unwritten rules, the matter is apparently going to be handled in-house among the cyclists themselves, which is as it should be.