rembradt wrote:Fine leader for the team. I don't buy it.!! Cav was largely a follower NOT a leader; he led over the last 200 metres on the Stages in the Tour that did not demand the gut wrenching stuff in the Alps etc, and in the time trials he was ordinary; clever marketing certainly got him some good public reaction.
How many of the great British public know anything about Le Maillot Vert...few I am certain. I think the reference to him as a great cyclist is a vast exaggeration. His win in the road Race Worlds was entirely down to the team and he had the good grace to acknowledge it.
Please dont let your judgement be clouded by the SPOTY nonsense. As for the paean of praise for Lance Armstrong... he is rightly regarded as a crummy cheat in many quarters, if not on this Forum.
But all team leaders are 'largely followers'.
Of course he's a fine leader of the team. They have him in the team to win stages and the green jersey. (I appreciate you understand what a team leader is in terms of a cycling team, yes?)
He never said that his win at the RRWC was 'entirely due to the team', he said that their help was invaluable and vital to his victory. Essentially, you don't win the RRWC without a great team, but a team doesn't win the RRWC without a great rider.
I didn't praise Lance Armstrong, you might what to re-read that. I just said that his wins were largely due to having a team of potential GC men setting a killer pace on every mountain in order to neutralise the field. In terms of achievements, and not worrying about how it was done, you would be full of praise of Lance. But could he have done anywhere near as much without Heras, Popo, Levi, Hincapie, Chechu, etc? That's without mentioning Bruyneel and Ferrari.
As for SPOTY being down to campaigns, etc, I fully agree. It doesn't change the fact that Cavendish deserves to win. Had Mo won, I would have said the same about him too. Both would have been deserving winners, probably along with the golfers too.