cavendish - question for cycling buffs
 

I caught a news clip where Mark Cavendish was caught by a journalist soon after losing out in the road race, probably not the best time to be asking questions :brickwall

The journalist asked Cavendish if riding in the Tour de France may have affected his performance. To which Cavendish replied "Do you know anything about cycling? Stop asking silly questions". And walked off.

Knowing sod all about cycling I wondered what he meant. I assume he meant that riding in the Tour destroyed you physically and mentally for some time. Or did he mean that the Tour had nothing to do with his performance?

Experts please.

David

I suspect he was trying to say that the tour had nothing to do with his performance

Stupid journo more like.

He asked the question that anybody who knew anything about pro cycling wouldn't have asked. Doing the Tour first (or other big road race) actually helps your stamina and body condition, assuming no injuries.

Journo went for a cheap shot of trying to explain the loss through a question and Cav put him in his place.

A stupid question IMHO as well. Cav's job in the plan was to survive Box Hill and be in the top 5 or 10 as the pack hits the Mall. He did his job, it was just four guys can't chase down a breakaway of 20+ riders (who are working together).

If that was during the TDF, there probably would have been 3 or 4 teams each putting in 4 or 5 riders to pull the break back.

Not very clever from cav there. He's a bit arrogant at times.

Apart from the breakaway riders and team GB, I don't know why any of the other riders bothered turning up. It was all a bit like Eurovision.

It was also pretty awful in the BBC evening round up listening to Gaby talking to Dame Kelly, Michaeal Johnson and John Mc - they obviously don't know a think about cycling, they should have stayed shut up or spoken with somebody that knew what they were talking about.

The whole thing was a great shame.

I thought it was a fair question but the wrong time to ask it :)

I had assumed, wrongly according to above, that after the Tour one's body would need a decent time to recuperate let alone unwinding the mental fatigue.

d

I think I'd have said in reply "Not much except you just lost ... badly... and I think the nation would like to know why" :lol1:

He came across as a right tit! Getting all defensive and aggressive. Fortunately someone with sense pulled him away before he made a bigger tw@t of himself.

All of the commentating seemed pretty poor. Thinking that 3rd place might have been Spain! Surely the commentators research the riders colours etc. They only seem to say things that you can see for yourself, rather than giving insight and explaining what the competitiors are trying to achieve. This seems to be common across all the sports. Said that the peloton was racing for fourth position several times. It's not the TDF, different scoring applies.

Did everyone see the studio session afterwards when Sue Barker turned up, her mike was off, then you heard a producer say "2nd place was COL, who are COL?" Classic (© 2012).

I didn't think it was a stupid question, but it was a stupid time to ask it.

Had Cav been less distraught and more Media Savvy he might have taken an opportunity to explain that he was in the form of his life, the Tour had build his strength and confidence not dented it, and sadly it wasn't to be due to factors outside teamGB's control....


But the Presenter effectively doorstepped him moments after he'd lost a dream he's spent 4 years preparing and training for and I think he was justified in throwing some venom back IMO. You can't expect people to be automatons.

In the medias eyes the medal was his and he just had to turn up and ride Wiggin's wheel to the last 100m - but sport and cycling in particular isn't like that.

Yes.

I did.


That 'voiceover' debacle went on a bit while after, too. :facepalm:

i reckon it was a cheap shot from the interviewer ,

he could have landed him one , but i guess that would have gone down even worse lol

I don't understand all these people saying the interviewer was in the wrong. He's a sports reporter reporting on the Olympic Games, which is general sport, not a cycling reporter at a dedicated cycling event. It was a valid question Joe Public might have asked given it's a week after the TdF.

There is an old saying, "there's no such thing as a stupid question, only stupid answers". That was a stupid answer and he simply came across as nothing more than a sore loser.

Yes you're right he should have landed him one, the interviewer that is. Might have knocked some sense in to him.

He's an athlete, not a PR spokesman, noone should expect him to give a perfect interview every time a reporter sticks a mic in his face.

I imagine he was fed up with all the senseless questions which so many reporters seem to ask these days.

Les

Exactly. It's akin to Kimi Raikkonen in F1 who gets criticised for the quality of some of his interviews. A top sportsman isn't necessarily a good performer in front of a camera, some like to do their talking on the track, pitch or wherever.
As for Cav I can totally understand his response given the amount of preparation that's gone into that race not to mention his disappointment at not winning a medal in the last Olympics.
At the end of the day he couldn't perform because he wasn't delivered to the mall by his team, other countries didn't play ball :razz:

Nik.

Actually he's an employee of a marketing company first and foremost, should bear in mind that the public indirectly pay his wages. In terms of his Olympic performance he should have the decency to give a public interview with a bit more class even if he finds it annoying or boring. It's not the first time he's acted like a premadona on interviews.

The day world-class professional athletes start getting sacked by their teams, or Olympic athletes deselected by theirs, for doing nothing more than being a bit short with a reported in an interview (which is what Cav did here, he didn't swear or saying anything particularly abusive, he just spoke his mind a little forthrightly), is the day I'll probably stop watching that sport.

They pay him to ride a bike not be a public relations spokesman.
To me it just shows the passion and commitment he has, the race didn't go to plan so why put on a false face, he was pissed off.

Not as if he told him to f**k off :lol1:

It was a sarcastic put down. I just think its childish and petulant.

How is that a sign of commitment?

another interview he gave at the same time


maybe he was just fed-up being interviewed twice by the BBC ??!!??

He has committed his existence on this planet to being one of the best professional sprinters of all time. He has committed himself to mile upon mile of training, committed to years of strict diets. All of this to achieve one of his main goals, to win an Olympic gold medal.
As this didn't happen he was a little pissed off hence he was short in the interview.

No it doesn't follow at all the being unhappy at losing causes on to be sarcastic with press.

:sleep:

It was a stupid question because Cavendish's condition had no bearing on the result - he got over all the climbs and it was up to his team to chase down the break-aways and engineer a bunch sprint finish, and they couldn't do it. I could understand him being frustrated by the questioning because some of these reporters are just a waste of the licence fee.

It's similar ignorance to Paul Hayward in The Telegraph who filed a blog entry on Saturday with the headline "Cavendish crumbles under expectation". He got such a slating in the comments by people who actually understand something about cycling that he went back and changed the headline a few hours later to "Cavendish suffers under expectation".

Got to admit i don't know bugger all about cycling but every race i've watched lately is won by one of the people who break off into the leader pack. Why the hell don't some of ours just go for it. :confused: