Cycling UK Forum

The TV coverage also switched to static finish line cameras a few times. Transmission problems or passing protests?

Questionable sponsors? Tons of 'em! Bahrain, Emirates, Specialized, Katusha, lotteries, Total oil, Mobile phone companies...

Saw no sign of protesters at Barden Hill on stage 4. I did wonder about the 'oil spill' but that stopped the women's race not the mens. The TDY has been brilliant for the county and I just hope that it continues after the Verity scandal and the Ineos affair.

I had a great day out, 60 mile ride eastward with a tail wind over Malham Tarn to join the crowds near Embsay. Fantastic numbers of people out to watch, most riding there. Curiously I was the only one with a Carradice and flask but hey ho! Train home tired but happy.

... Questionable sponsors? ...

I'm going off the point but not all sponsors' brands are exactly international. Roompot-Charles had me wondering. I see Roompot is a holiday park company in the Netherlands.

2019 UCI World Tour Men's Teams and sponsors:
AG2R La Mondiale - French mutual insurers
Astana - Kazakh state-owned companies
Bahrain–Merida - Bahrain government and Taiwanese bike brand
Bora–Hansgrohe - German kitchen equipment and bathroom fixtures
CCC Team - Polish shoes and bags
EF Education First - language schools
Deceuninck–Quick-Step - Belgian windows and flooring
Team Dimension Data - SA IT services
Groupama–FDJ - French insurers and lottery
Team Ineos - see above
Team Jumbo–Visma - Dutch supermarket and Norwegian IT services
Team Katusha–Alpecin - Russian clothing and German shampoo
Lotto–Soudal - Belgian lottery and chemicals
Mitchelton–Scott - Australian wine and Swiss bike brand
Movistar Team - mobile phone networks (including O2)
Team Sunweb - Dutch holiday company
Trek–Segafredo - US bike brand and Italian coffee
UAE Team Emirates - UAE government and airline

I suspect the most ethical top-level sponsors today are probably EF1 but strong arguments could be made for ALM, TDD and BOH instead.

mjr wrote: ... I suspect the most ethical top-level sponsors today are probably EF1 but strong arguments could be made for ALM, TDD and BOH instead.

Is there something I missed with AG2R? I've always assumed that they were a bit like a friendly society.

thirdcrank wrote:

mjr wrote: ... I suspect the most ethical top-level sponsors today are probably EF1 but strong arguments could be made for ALM, TDD and BOH instead.

Is there something I missed with AG2R? I've always assumed that they were a bit like a friendly society.

Probably not. I think one's rating of their ethics depend on your attitude to financial services, to mutuals and to AG2R's track record in particular (including their ambition to become even bigger through mergers) and whether you regard insurance as a form of gambling or rewarding the negligent at the expense of the careful. Not my views, but one should accept they exist.

mjr wrote: ... Probably not. I think one's rating of their ethics depend on your attitude to financial services, to mutuals and to AG2R's track record in particular (including their ambition to become even bigger through mergers) and whether you regard insurance as a form of gambling or rewarding the negligent at the expense of the careful. Not my views, but one should accept they exist.

We used to have a strong mutual movement around here: AFAIK, the Halifax Building Society used to be the biggest mutual financial institution in the world - or perhaps in the West Riding, which is nearly the same . I'd agree that our own mutual movement has gone down the tubes, either by the obvious route of de-mutualising, but also by aping the antics of the PLCs, often while using their mutual status as a sort of camouflage (morals not so much different from many charities.) It's anathema IMO that a mutual should be involved in mis-selling, but plenty of it went on.

In theory, life assurance can a form of saving for old age etc. I know nothing about AG2R other than what I've read on their www. Perhaps naively, I took it that they were similar to the friendly society.

Here's an update from the fracking side of things:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... g-industry

Although I knew about Ineos, it hadn't struck me that the cyclists would be going through Yorkshire emblazoned with Ineos stickers and labels. It couldn't be much more in-your-face and insulting to the people of Yorkshire fighting Ineos' attempts to frack there. Riding roughshod is the phrase that comes to mind. I do realise that professional cyclists have to put up with a lot to get their sport funded but surely they have some boundaries? Are they completely blind and deaf to what they are promoting?

If coverage on the Harold Bird Show (AKA BBC's Look North) and the ITV equivalent is anything to go by, the Ineos controversy lost all local media interest very early on ie once they'd shown the stacks of face masks ready for distribution and nothing came from it. They've been so desperate, in their dumbed-down way, to explore every bit of controversy eg departure of Sir GV, complaints from traders affected by road closures, that I imagine they'd have milked this if much had happened, although they don't seem to undertake much real investigation.

I'm not on anything like twitter, but I get the impression that it's pretty easy to publicise protests etc., these days without depending on the mainstream media, so long as there's something to publicise. Ditto marshalling protesters. Rain is the best policeman. And I assumed that bad weather was usual for occasional picture break-up.

Bearing in mind that the race is promoted to showcase Yorkshire by the tourist board - Welcome to Yorkshire - I could imagine that anybody doing a cost/benefit analysis might have been a bit disappointed by the TV coverage in that a lot of the usual information was missing. I'm more or less familiar with every part of the route although it looks different from the air. This year, few of the places along the route were identified by the usual captions and one of the few shown was wrong: Haworth was shown as Oakworth, even though the former must be one of the most famous places in Yorkshire. Also, there were things like most of the passage through Skipton being during a commercial break.

thirdcrank wrote:
Bearing in mind that the race is promoted to showcase Yorkshire by the tourist board - Welcome to Yorkshire - I could imagine that anybody doing a cost/benefit analysis might have been a bit disappointed by the TV coverage in that a lot of the usual information was missing. I'm more or less familiar with every part of the route although it looks different from the air. This year, few of the places along the route were identified by the usual captions and one of the few shown was wrong: Haworth was shown as Oakworth, even though the former must be one of the most famous places in Yorkshire. Also, there were things like most of the passage through Skipton being during a commercial break.

Yes, I agree with that. I'm sure sometimes they have had captions showing which villages the peleton has passed. I was stood on Barden Moor with someone watching the coverage on his phone and we had a devil of a job to work out which canal/river they had just crossed! I guess the budget for the TdF is always going to be higher and ITV4 did at least cover all the race live. Last year there was a problem so they missed a stage of the womens race and I think some years they only live streamed the closing half of each day. Crowds looked pretty good given the weather and I met a lot of international visitors, especially Dutch.

horizon wrote:..
It couldn't be much more in-your-face and insulting to the people of Yorkshire fighting Ineos' attempts to frack there. Riding roughshod is the phrase that comes to mind. I do realise that professional cyclists have to put up with a lot to get their sport funded but surely they have some boundaries? Are they completely blind and deaf to what they are promoting?

Yes!
It's just a business like any other, Mr Brailsfraud fixed the new deal, apparently several other sponsors were interested, 35m is not much for the richest person in Britain, think of football sponsorship
Be glad he has not gone into politics (maybe he has, quietly)

Cycle sport is just a bu$in€$$

Last year, I dragged myself out to watch one stage at the roadside and only watched most of the last day on TV. Unless I'm dreaming, most place names were shown on screen as well as the names of landmarks, especially churches ie similar to the TdeF. This year, I recorded and watched all the men's race - recording enables skipping the ads. I'm saying that the reduction in info was in comparison with the TdeY last year.

My main point is that if you want local tradespeople on board, their own localities need the onscreen publicity if the race passes nearby. Compare Masham, where the Black Sheep Brewery was shown and publicity was given to a prime sponsored by its owner, and Skipton, which was largely passed during an ad break.

horizon wrote:Although I knew about Ineos, it hadn't struck me that the cyclists would be going through Yorkshire emblazoned with Ineos stickers and labels. It couldn't be much more in-your-face and insulting to the people of Yorkshire fighting Ineos' attempts to frack there. Riding roughshod is the phrase that comes to mind. I do realise that professional cyclists have to put up with a lot to get their sport funded but surely they have some boundaries? Are they completely blind and deaf to what they are promoting?

Were you not aware that professional cycling teams have sponsors branding all over their kit?Why would(or should) Ineos not do so for the TDY?The riders do what they are told and wear the "uniform" supplied by their employer as do many other people in many different jobs

RE protesters.
I was in Barnsley town centre for the start of stage2 and there were protesters.They were put in their place by more than one person(me included) who rightly pointed out that it's a Cycle race...Sport...not Politics and abusing the riders achieved nothing.
Idiots

100%JR wrote:RE protesters.
I was in Barnsley town centre for the start of stage2 and there were protesters.They were put in their place by more than one person(me included) who rightly pointed out that it's a Cycle race...Sport...not Politics and abusing the riders achieved nothing.
Idiots

Idiot yourself! Protesting against Ineos does not mean abusing the team's riders and politics has long interacted with cycle racing, thanks in part to a lot of government money going into racing in various ways. There are at least three top-flight men's teams sponsored by governments at the moment, as well as various cities bidding to host various races and at least one national race is called a "Presidential Tour".

On top of that, various politicians see it as a good way to promote themselves: mayors and ministers hand out prizes on the podiums, presidents rock up to bike races and ride in the lead cars, while at least one team owner has gone on to be a government minister.

So it's pretty unsurprising that people trying to get a government's attention will try to disrupt something it funds - in the past, races have been obstructed by those protesting against dockyard closures or for regions to become independent.

Political protests are part of cycle racing's tradition and all true fans should embrace it, not try to "put [them] in their place" which just shows how immature our pro racing scene still is.

100%JR wrote:.Sport...not Politics

Keep politics out of sport, as the Boers said when the anti-apartheid campaign attacked Tests against Sarf Efrika.