
Article By:
CyclingNews
2026-05-03 09:12:47
'If the organisers want to make Pogačar win, that’s their choice' – Motorbikes under fire again at Tour de Romandie as Paret-Peintre and Rodríguez complain for different reasons
Summary By: eMotoX
The conduct of race motorbikes at the Tour de Romandie has come under renewed scrutiny following complaints from two riders on stage four. Valentin Paret-Peintre criticised the proximity of the television motos to the peloton, suggesting that their positioning may have unfairly benefited Tadej Pogačar during the decisive moments of the race. Paret-Peintre, who had been part of a long breakaway caught on the final climb, implied that the race organisers might be favouring Pogačar, a claim met with a terse refusal to comment from the event’s management.
Meanwhile, Ineos Grenadiers’ Carlos Rodríguez suffered a high-speed crash on the descent to the finish, which he attributed to a motorbike braking abruptly on the racing line. Although Rodríguez was able to continue after the fall, he lost valuable time and slipped out of the top ten overall. His complaint highlights ongoing concerns about the safety and conduct of race convoy vehicles, especially in critical and fast sections of the course where rider concentration and space are paramount.
The issues raised by Paret-Peintre and Rodríguez underscore a persistent tension in professional cycling regarding the role and behaviour of motorbikes during races. Television motos, essential for live coverage, can inadvertently influence race dynamics by creating aerodynamic advantages or causing dangerous situations. Despite repeated rider grievances, race organisers have shown little willingness to address these concerns publicly, maintaining a stance of non-intervention.
These incidents at the Tour de Romandie may prompt renewed calls within the cycling community for clearer regulations and stricter enforcement concerning motorbike conduct. Ensuring rider safety and fairness remains a delicate balance, but the recent complaints suggest that current practices may require reassessment to prevent further controversy and accidents in future events.
