SB Nation - Login for mobile commenting

Podium Cafe

Sporza: "Naughty Belgians Will be Penalized!"

Groenendaal_medium

[Now with video!]

Honestly, what better hook to a story could there possibly be? Actually, despite my distaste for posting links, this one is too good to miss. Not because of the naughty Belgian angle (does Albertina have the fainting couch?), but because of the awesome backstory and what it says about national team racing in Cyclocross.

The main story is that Belgian national team riders had better ride for the Belgian national team (and not a trade teammate), or else they will be sent to their room, or have their beer taken away, or something. The backstory is that Richard Groenendaal, pictured above in the lead, was a stud crosser back in the turn of the millenium, and still rides professionally for AA Drinks. As a Dutchman, he naturally found himself in Rabobank colors at the peak of his powers, a period where he won four World Cup titles, eight Dutch championships, and yes, one World Championship. That was in 2000, when Groenendaal was riding for the Netherlands, while his 23-year-old Rabobank teammate Sven Nys was riding for his home nation of Belgium. Nys was then coming into his own, having just won his first World Cup and shown promise of the greatness to come. Nys was a loyal Rabobank soldier, two years into a ten-year association, so when he saw his Rabobank teammate Groenendaal jump on the first lap of the elite UCI World Championships race in Sint-Michielsgestel, it was up to either him or Belgian rival Mario De Clerq to chase.

What happened? You probably know, but click through anyway!

Star-divide

Well, De Clerq chased, but Nys -- the only guy strong enough to reel in Groenendaal -- did not. According to this site, Nys and Groenendaal, who had been dueling teammates all year, had been called to meet with Rabo manager Jan Raas to discuss the worlds, and had agreed that they would not chase each other down. There was no agreement as to who would win; just a truce against the worst-case scenario where they dueled each other to a standstill and let De Clerq or another non-Rabo rider steal the title. Groenendaal seized the moment, first by playing head-games with Nys and arranging to be given the number 13, Nys's lucky dossard. The young Nys flinched when Groenendaal attacked, and then told De Clerq he was following orders not to chase. Groenendaal won, Belgians brooded, and national team naughtiness fell out of favor.

Nobody came out ahead, except maybe Rabobank, who assured themselves of a rainbow jersey to parade around. Groenendaal sounds more upset now about the fact that his victory isn't appreciated than the reasons behind why maybe it shouldn't be. Not sure what Nys thinks about it, but his worlds karma is nothing to brag about. De Clerq won a second title in 2002; not sure that counts as justice or not, but he came out OK.

National team shenanigans are as old as national teams. This can come as a shock to Americans, who until recently enjoyed a high level of citizenship homogeneity in our big sports. To this day football is almost entirely American. Only hockey wasn't, and Canadians weren't so different as to turn off fans. [And this may explain why soccer and cycling have struggled to gain acceptance, thanks to their unfamiliar lack of American stars.] So when we formed national teams, there might be infighting, but you could be sure nobody was going to secretly work for Mexico or England or whomever.

One last question: why is Belgium issuing this warning? The big stars are pretty evenly distributed across trade teams, so while each of the top four of Nys, Pauwels, Albert and Stybar can count on seeing some trade teammates around early on, none of those teammates are likely to have much of an impact on the race. And if they do, well, how will it hurt a national team? Klaas Vantornout helping Pauwels means two Belgians working together. Not sure where the shenanigan potential lies.

dit is een drama.

Photo by Michael Steel, Getty. Pictured in front is Groenendaal in 2008, when he helped Lars Boom -- a trade and national teammate -- to victory.

0 recs  |  31 comments

Comments

Not sure where the shenanigan potential lies.

Pauwels in front, solo. Albert, Nys, Peeters and… Stybar in a group, 15s behind. Do they work together to get him back?
Shenanigans ensue.

Also, those world champs resulted in much Belgian cryface.

See, if that was the situation, I'd be hugely disappointed if Albert, Nys, Peeters & Stybs *didn't* chase down Pauwels

and THEN expect, I dunno, Peeters to block Stybs, and they all go completely insane on the final lap, trying to destroy each other!

At least, that’s how I

hope
it’ll go down!

I know, I know nationhood, team playing etc – but don’t the Big Belgians already know they are the best of the best, if Stybs is following this season’s form?

yeah

I guess… Is Styby the best sprinter? If that’s the case, then it really is trouble. But it’s on the coach to say who goes up the trail first.

He's quick, yes

And up to the coach, I think that’s sort of the point. In the past we often just picked the 7 strongest Belgians, they’d all end up racing against each other, the coach had fuck all to say about it and in the end a foreigner won.

Do we know who the coach has picked?

I just can’t see them all banding together, given that Styby is in a weird place. OK, if Stybs had just won the World Cup

(Unless the reason Sven wasn’t chasing on Sunday was some kind of deal where Pauwels gets the World Cup if Nys gets the Champs?? It certainly beats an x-box!)

Yes we know

And I’ve told you this already ;)
Nys, Albert, Pauwels, KVT, Meeusen, Aernouts, Peeters

No SVT, no DVT

Oh sorry, I meant which of those has been picked by the coach as the guy to win, who the others shouldn't chase
Nys, Albert and K-Pow probably

the other four are humble servants

Awww look at little Nys! So babyface!
Ha! I can imagine that every Belgian will be too busy trying to beat every other Belgian to think about helping trade team-mates!

(I can’t quite work out who this is aimed at, now Styby is on OPQS….)

It's a standard procedure. They give this warning every year.
I have that race on video

Nys looking thoroughly miserable coming in for 3rd, DeClerq crying on the podium, Groenendaal looking totally pleased in front of the home crowd. It’s awesome.

Groenendaal doesn't ride professionally anymore
Yep

Rode for AA Drink for 2 years from end of Feb 2007 to last race Oostmalle 22 Feb 2009. Last world championship race Hoogerheide 2009 (38th). Now general manager of AA Drink – Leontien.nl.

ah

Not clear from wiki page. Thanks.

Sure?

Because Groenendaal is also the DS of the Rabo Giant Off Road team

I thought
Right!

I’m not quite sure since when. He may have returned to Rabo when AA men’s team officially merged with Leontien.nl.

http://rabosport.nl/wielrennen/offroadteam/ploegleiders

Sometimes naughty people wants to be punished

Just saying.

sounds like a confession to me
Ehrmm...

Yeah. Well, You know. How’s the weather in California?

Slightly on-topic...

that which confuses this American the most about European sports is the lack of long-term contracts. One year contracts are the norm in cycling. Two years is relatively uncommon (‘cept neos). Three years is all but unheard of, and when Jelle Vanendert signed a four year deal with Lotto-Belisol (fun fact: if you type ’Vandendert’ into google, it’ll auto-complete with “Dennis Vanendert,” but not Jelle) it was unheard of (at least to my admittedly recentist knowledge).

The transience of the teams no doubt plays a big part in it – no major sports team in North America is going to just up and cease to exist, at least not without several years of serious financial trouble. But if someone signs for so few years in a North American sport, it’s because they actually want to test the waters again relatively soon, are old, or are seen as too risky or unproductive to sign for that long. If cycling worked anything like American sports, Philippe Gilbert would have signed with BMC for ten years, not three (right?).

It’s interesting to think about this (the situation described in the article) happening. It probably also seems foreign (no pun intended) to Americans who grew up hearing “USA! USA!” chants at sporting events. Since I know very little about cyclocross (shoot me), I can only liken it to road, and with all the pseudo-national road teams these days (seriously, who’s left at the top level that’s not pseudo-national? BMC maybe?) it makes me that something like this might well happen with the odd rider here and there who don’t fit with the team’s pseudo-nationality. Jens Mouris (random such example, infer nothing from me picking him in particular) spends his entire season riding with and for Aussies, probably making some great friends, so come worlds time he rides for Dutchmen he might barely know? This is without even throwing cash into the equation. I could definitely see this happen.

I wouldn't say one year contracts are the norm...Time to bust some conventional wisdom

I’d say 2 year is the norm…Yeah, when your getting an extension a one year might be the norm but signing a contract with a new team, two year deals are definitely not uncommon.
Robert Gesink, Bauke Mollema, Andrey Amador, Valverde, Blel Kadri, Van Summeren, Rui Costa, Stybar, Chris Froome, Tony Martin, Geraint Thomas, Van Garderen, Lars Boom, Van Avermaet, Hushovd, Andrey Zeits, Peter Sagan and Gilbert all got either 3 year contracts or extensions signed this past year or for this coming year (all through the end of 2014). These are just from a 5 minute search and just World Tour teams.
Guys that extended for 2 years or got new 2 year deals would fill up a huge page

Now with your Jens Mouris analogy, that stuff has happened (a lot) before in the Worlds RR in the past…the best recent example was Charly Wegelius and Tom Southam at the ‘05 Worlds for the UK…Roger Hammond was the protected rider but instead they rode for the Italians. They were both essentially blacklisted from the UK worlds team for life for this and Wegelius has to repay British Cycling for ay expenses related to the race.
Now that is road, where team work is more obvious but in ’cross it is different. Guys on the same team don’t race ‘with’ each other a lot and use team tactics so even when worlds come around, the only reason they would be motivated to help said teammate is for monetary purposes (perhaps friendship but maybe not) and to get a nice bonus check. Going back to the road metaphor, there is a lot of national pride when it comes to this race so guys on the same trade team won’t necessarily work together. On ’cross, 3 countries have won the last 14 Worlds with 10 of those being Belgians…so because of the greater odds of hitting the podium for Belgium, Netherlands, etc. their nationalistic tendencies can take a back seat

I guess it prbably could seem unusual because the USA doesn't seem to prioritise the World Champs as much as most countries

and in cycling, they aren’t a big cycling nation – so there wouldn’t be a question of riders not wanting to ride for Farrar at CPN Worlds, because he’s the obvious choice, and the rest know he’s better than them on that kind of course – but it’s different for the bigger cycling nations.

Re 4 or 5 year contracts – I can see good reasons why it can be good for a rider not to have them. If eg a team locks a 23 y/o rider same terms & conditions for 4 years, it’s risky on both sides – what if the rider develops and starts winning big time, but is stuck on a beginner’s wage? We already see riders like Cav feeling like they have been dealt a bad hand. Or if, like the Cervélo riders, or riders involved in the Leopard-Shack merger, who sign a 2-year contract for one team, and something happens to the team structure, they may be stuck for a year, but they know they can get out.

(A genuine Q about USA sports – I see things every now and again about basketball or american football players being traded to other teams against their will – is that something that actually happens? Does it work that although they are on long contracts, that doesn’t guarantee they will be kept by the team? How does that work if the player has family etc, given the huge size of the USA, so they’d probably have to relocate?)

a rider also may not want to sign for a long term

because he can’t be certain that the teammates he needs to help him meet his goals will be sticking around. Having the right support is crucial.

While true, that's a bit of a catch-22

There aren’t long-term contracts…because support riders don’t get long-term contracts?

Point by point reply

“they aren’t a big cycling nation”

I guess if your definition of “big” extends only to France, Spain, Italy, Belgium, and the Netherlands. Because after them, I’m not sure who’s bigger. GB or Oz? Tied, if anything. Unless we’re throwing track into the mix, then yes, GB is bigger.

“what if the rider develops and starts winning big time, but is stuck on a beginner’s wage?”

This happens constantly in American sports. I could fill the page with examples. It’s why teams in relatively small markets like St. Louis and Milwaukee have little recourse when their star players become eligible for free agency and seek bigger money in larger markets like Los Angeles and….Detroit (okay, that’s not such a fitting example :p ).

“I see things every now and again about basketball or american football players being traded to other teams against their will – is that something that actually happens?”

Oh yes, frequently. Baseball has a “ten and five” rule – any player that’s been playing in the Major Leagues for at least ten years, and at least five years with the same team, can veto any trade involving him. But otherwise, unless a “no trade clause” is written into the player’s contract, they can be sent packing anytime (well…not *any*time, but there’s minutiae that goes beyond the scope of the question).

“Does it work that although they are on long contracts, that doesn’t guarantee they will be kept by the team?”

Essentially. The two teams swap contracts, and sometimes money will be involved as well. If the players involved in the trade have drastically different salaries, the team receiving the less expensive player will sometimes continue to pay part of the salary of the more expensive player. This happens when a player signs a costly contract and does not live up to expectations. The team who signed him will simply want to get rid of him, but they’d never find another team to take him on at the price for which he signed. So, they’re stuck continuing to pay the bulk of his salary if they want to be rid of him. This happens a lot more often than you may think.

“How does that work if the player has family etc, given the huge size of the USA, so they’d probably have to relocate?”

It sucks for them. Truly does. You might find this article interesting: Baseball trades a hardship on players. It discusses a player named Russell Branyan, who though (or because) he’s fairly talented (very good home run hitter), has changed teams with dizzying frequency throughout his career.

Sorry that was 110% off-topic, but I feel it was informative :)

You can't give a guy a contract for 4 years if your sponsors have only signed for 2 years
Well.....

Milram gave Roger Kluge and I think at least one other rider 2-year deals in the 2009-2010 offseason. Turned out they were only good for one year!

I thought this was going to be all about Niels Albert. Oh well.

You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Podium Cafe to post a comment.