Said the on-site surgeon, quoted in "French police fear woman who caused the Tour de France's worst-ever crash with placard written in German is UNTRACEABLE and has flown home" (Daily Mail).
I hadn't blogged about this incident yet, though of course, I've watched the video. Many times, in fact.
I'm not too interested in this dumb lady, and I don't particularly care whether she's caught or not. Can't they use computerized facial recognition? The article makes it sound like they're looking for someone based on her clothes and glasses.
I'm blogging today because I'm fascinated by the loony heroism of getting up and finishing the race with "hip and chest injuries" or a dislocated shoulder. Did somebody pop that shoulder back in for Hirshi, or did he just ride with a shoulder out of joint?
I'm not going to look to see if anyone is saying that that the cyclist who ran into the sign could have avoided the catastrophe. He seems a bit as if he's not paying enough attention. And these cyclists are choosing to ride very close together. They're taking the risk of losing control if one cyclist falls. And what's with leaving the fans in a position to jump out into the road with their wacky little signs? Either control the boundary between fan and competitor or expect the competitors to look out and maintain control. Leave untraceable German lady alone!
UPDATE: They've now arrested a woman.
Posts
7 comments:
Temujin says: "They sound like hockey players."
Yeah, they're tough guys.
Bryant writes:
A few thoughts on the bike crash you blogged about.
First off, the tour route this year is ~2,200 miles long over three weeks. It really isn't feasible to block off that much road. They do add the barricades for the last few kilometers of the race because that is when the speed really ramps up.
Secondly, the guy who hit the sign is not at fault. It is hard to tell from the video but they are probably going around 25 mph. There are spectators all along the road and I'm sure that many of them get out of the way just as the peloton is getting to them, so he probably assumed this person would as well.
Lastly, the doctor quoted in the article seems like a moron. The adrenaline rush might help them get back on their bike, but it quickly dissipates and you are left with the pain. I'm speaking from experience, having been involved in crashes during a bike race. Racing bikes without crashes is really about who can suffer the most, so these guys are experts at suffering and know how to push through the pain. If they had any injuries that could be dangerous to ride with, the team doctor would have them stop.
Parting thought - I don't think they actually *want* to catch the spectator, but they want the appearance of trying in order to discourage other spectators from doing things like this.
If they are putting on an event, using the country's entire landscape and people's towns, they are taking advantage and taking risks. Part of what makes it a televisable show is the enthusiasm and antics of the various townspeople. These people are behaving in a known and predictable way. So the organization is responsible for the predictable circumstances.
You say the rider who hit the sign *assumed* the person would jump out of the way at just the right incident. This random person was not an expert at estimating speed and she had her back to the cyclists. He shouldn't assume! What he *assumed* was, as we say in law, the risk.
I totally agree with you that the attacks on the woman are intended to affect other people and encourage them to be more careful... or we can't have this big crazy event.
Hunter writes:
"I'm not going to look to see if anyone is saying that that the cyclist who ran into the sign could have avoided the catastrophe. He seems a bit as if he's not paying enough attention”
He’s paying a lot of attention to his immediate neighbors and to the vagaries of the pavement in front of him. That’s where his most likely dangers lie in almost all circumstances.
"Either control the boundary between fan and competitor or expect the competitors to look out and maintain control.”
The boundaries are well delineated with barriers where the course goes through cities, but they can’t be “controlled” unless you want to deploy soldiers every few feet. And the barriers are impractical for the hundreds of miles where the course winds through the countryside.
I’m sure the unknown German lady had no intent to cause this havoc. But I’m afraid she has inadvertently provided an example to others who are always looking for such opportunities.
Lucien writes:
You may be fascinated by the loony heroism involved, but once one quits the race, one is out. Injured riders who can finish the stage preserve their options to quit the race later — after being medically evaluated — or to go again the next day, and see how things work out.
If you consider that bicycle racing is about suffering, and imagine how much each rider has to suffer just to get into the Tour, then the marginal cost of suffering through the end of the stage is cheap. If the rider makes it, they get to suffer through another 20 or so stages!
Left Bank of the Charles writes:
The cyclist's side of the story: "I saw the lady, but at the last minute she turned into the road, so there was no time to react. ... It was really unexpected."
It would seem that if the French police know the woman got on a plane, they would be able to trace her. So "untraceable" may mean that they have stopped looking.
I was biking on the Minuteman Trail in Arlington, Massachusetts one weekend in the 1990s, found they had closed a portion of the trail for a race circuit, and stopped to watch. I witnessed a crash that took out a third of the peloton. In a moment the whole right side of the peloton went down in a pile of bicycles and bodies, while the rest of the peloton moved on without them. It was quite dramatic and unexpected, but the downed cyclists looked more irritated than surprised.
Of course, he's motivated to shift the blame away from himself. He had "no time" because of the speed at which he was choosing to ride. He was counting on her to behave in a normal way. That was a choice.
Paul writes:
"I'm blogging today because I'm fascinated by the loony heroism of getting up and finishing the race with "hip and chest injuries" or a dislocated shoulder. Did somebody pop that shoulder back in for Hirshi, or did he just ride with a shoulder out of joint?"
I think the problem might be that you have no idea of what endurance athletics is, underneath the glossy TV coverage of things like the Boston Marathon or the TDF.
To participate in your local 5k race all you need is to be not particularly unhealthy and out of shape. For someone who is reasonably fit, a 5k race lasts half an hour, perhaps 35 minutes. If you are pushing hard against the limit of what you can do, you are in pain probably from about halfway through to the end. It hurts, and then you reach the finish line, and it stops hurting. 10-15 minutes of pain.
Move the focus to a marathon level effort. The period of discomfort is longer. The people who are pushing against the limit of their performance will be in pain from perhaps mile 12 thru to the end. For a fast runner, call it an hour and 15 minutes of pain. For a back of pack runner who is still pushing her limits hard, 2.5 hours of pain.
For an Ironman event, or a 31 mile or 50 mile or 100 mile ultramarathon or cycling races like the TDF, serious endurance stuff, participants talk about the “pain cave”. (this article is not too far off the mark https://www.healthline.com/health/fitness-exercise/pain-cave) We’re not talking discomfort, we’re talking pain. And we’re no longer talking about the 10 minutes of pain you’d get with running 5km, we’re talking continuing your effort despite being in pain for hours. Those athletes who want to finish learn to set the pain aside and continue anyway. They do that, not just on the day there’s a big crash and they get injured in a fall, but every single time they race hard.
Racing while in pain is not extraordinary. It’s not unusual. It’s just how it works. If you participate in races that long, competing at that level, it’s going to hurt. It’s going to hurt a lot. It’s going to hurt a lot for what to someone else probably sound like a very long time.
Is this loony heroism? If you have no understanding, probably. But if you understand what these people are doing, it’s certainly not loony, and it isn’t particularly heroic. It’s just a choice they’re making.
And I expect you’re now wondering “Why would anyone choose to do something like that?”
If you’re truly curious this might offer some insight: https://www.amazon.com/Rise-Ultra-Runners-Journey-Endurance/dp/1643131354
No, I wasn't wondering that. Not at all.
Montgomery writes:
"Upon further reflection on my original comment, I am thinking the government knows who the woman is but are protecting her from zealous fans as well as upset bettors and bookies; there is probably a lot of money bet on the race, especially in England, where they bet on anything and everything."
That sounds sensible to me.
Post a Comment