On cyclingnews.com, an article stated that UCI is making helmets mandatory. So this makes me wonder, do the aero TT helmets that offer no protection, fall under that umbrella, or will the helmet companies be forced to make ANSI approved aero helmets, and we will be able to ride what the pros wear?
Triathlon Forum
Login required to started new threads
Login required to post replies
Re: UCI mandatory helmet rule [SByers]
[ In reply to ]
Is that for all races everywhere and is that for sure r soemthing they are just thinking about
thanks
can you post a link to the article?
thanks
can you post a link to the article?
Re: UCI mandatory helmet rule [taku]
[ In reply to ]
http://www.cyclingnews.com/...2003/apr03/apr05news First Edition News for April 5, 2003
Edited by Jeff Jones & Chris Henry UCI: Helmets mandatory
The UCI has indicated that for the first time, helmet use will be compulsory in all professional events. The UCI has always advised helmet use, but previous attempts at mandatory use were met with stiff resistance from the peloton. However, following the death of Andrei Kivilev, and in light of the advances in helmet weight and comfort, the decision to require riders to wear helmets has finally come to fruition.
The UCI signaled its support of the resolution adopted by the Management Committee of the Professional Cyclists' Association (CPA) to urge mandatory helmet use. Tour de France director Jean-Marie Leblanc had also called for a new ruling on helmets following Kivilev's fatal crash on the roads of Paris-Nice.
The new rule is expected to be put in place in the near future, likely before the start of the Giro d'Italia on May 10. "The statutory aspects of this initiative (financial penalties, loss of UCI points or other sanctions) are currently being studied by the relevant departments," the UCI said in a written statement.
Edited by Jeff Jones & Chris Henry UCI: Helmets mandatory
The UCI has indicated that for the first time, helmet use will be compulsory in all professional events. The UCI has always advised helmet use, but previous attempts at mandatory use were met with stiff resistance from the peloton. However, following the death of Andrei Kivilev, and in light of the advances in helmet weight and comfort, the decision to require riders to wear helmets has finally come to fruition.
The UCI signaled its support of the resolution adopted by the Management Committee of the Professional Cyclists' Association (CPA) to urge mandatory helmet use. Tour de France director Jean-Marie Leblanc had also called for a new ruling on helmets following Kivilev's fatal crash on the roads of Paris-Nice.
The new rule is expected to be put in place in the near future, likely before the start of the Giro d'Italia on May 10. "The statutory aspects of this initiative (financial penalties, loss of UCI points or other sanctions) are currently being studied by the relevant departments," the UCI said in a written statement.
Re: UCI mandatory helmet rule [SByers]
[ In reply to ]
This rule is just for show; it really won't affect anything. If they were serious about the rule, they'd truly make it mandatory--you'd be DQed for not wearing one if they were serious. Riders already wear them almost all the time. Just a few hot or hilly races where they don't wear one. Big deal, so they lose a couple UCI points or pay a couple bucks. UCI points means almost nothing to anyone but the top few on the UCI standings.
My guess is you'll still see the riders not wearing them in certain races... just like they do now.
I agree with your view on the subject. I would only think they were serious if there were DQ's being issued for lack of compliance.
What would the helmet standards be? For one example, the NHL had a mandate for all players who turned pro after 31 Dec 1979 to wear a helmet. Many of the older guys did not wear them (as they were excused), and many who were due to come into the league had looked forward to not having to wear them. So what happened? A bunch of guys coming into the league at that time who really did not want to wear them wore what amounted to a street hockey helmet. That old Jofa thing was almost worse than no helmet at all. Finally, the NHL came to their senses nearly twenty years later and had standards for the helmets, rendering the plastic ice cream cartons illegal for all except the oldest players.
I could see the UCI calling the leather hairnets (or Briko's spandex hairnet) and the ice cream carton plastic TT helmets as helmets. I could also see some sort of grandfather clause allowing older pros to ride without them, as well.
What would the helmet standards be? For one example, the NHL had a mandate for all players who turned pro after 31 Dec 1979 to wear a helmet. Many of the older guys did not wear them (as they were excused), and many who were due to come into the league had looked forward to not having to wear them. So what happened? A bunch of guys coming into the league at that time who really did not want to wear them wore what amounted to a street hockey helmet. That old Jofa thing was almost worse than no helmet at all. Finally, the NHL came to their senses nearly twenty years later and had standards for the helmets, rendering the plastic ice cream cartons illegal for all except the oldest players.
I could see the UCI calling the leather hairnets (or Briko's spandex hairnet) and the ice cream carton plastic TT helmets as helmets. I could also see some sort of grandfather clause allowing older pros to ride without them, as well.