In advance of the hearing at the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in Lausanne scheduled for December 5, 2017 the Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI), Peter Sagan and BORA – hansgrohe have agreed to end the legal dispute and controversy about Peter Sagan’s disqualification from this year’s Tour de France.
The World Road Race champion was disqualified following a crash in the sprint at the end of the 4th stage in Vittel.
Immediately following the disqualification Sagan and his BORA – hansgrohe team had appealed the decision of the race jury with the CAS and, in order to enable the Slovakian to finish the Tour, requested a temporary suspension of the disqualification. This request was subsequently denied by CAS. However, all parties involved had the opportunity to provide evidence and call witnesses. On 5 December 2017, CAS was scheduled to hear the matter in Lausanne.
Having considered the materials submitted in the CAS proceedings, including video footage that was not available at the time when the race jury had disqualified Sagan, the parties agreed that the crash was an unfortunate and unintentional race incident and that the UCI Commissaires made their decision based on their best judgment in the circumstances. On this basis, the parties agreed not to continue with the legal proceedings and to focus on the positive steps that can be taken in the future instead.
The new president of the UCI, David Lappartient, commented on the UCI’s position as follows: “These proceedings have shown how important and arduous the work of the UCI Commissaires is. As of next season the UCI intends to engage a ‘Support Commissaire’ to assist the Commissaires Panel with special video expertise on the main events of the UCI World Tour.”
Sagan is pleased with this development: “The past is already forgotten. It’s all about improving our sport in the future. I welcome the fact that what happened to me in Vittel has showed that the UCI Commissaires’ work is a difficult one and that the UCI has recognised the need to facilitate their work in a more effective way. I am happy that my case will lead to positive developments, because it is important for our sport to make fair and comprehensible decisions, even if emotions are sometimes heated up.”