Disaster after disaster: From the Tour de la Provence to Etoile de Bessèges, the UCI and cycling refuse to learn their lesson

It’s only February 17th, and the UCI has already endured a series of moments they would rather forget. With the 2025 season still in its infancy, several safety disasters have put the governing body under immense scrutiny once again, raising serious questions about their ability to protect riders in professional cycling.

Let’s take a look at the current state of safety in cycling, and give an overview of the disastrous start to 2025 in terms of improving rider’s safety.

Coming into 2025, there was a renewed focus on improving rider safety, prompted by alarming incidents in previous seasons. Over the past few seasons, cycling has sadly lost riders such as Muriel Furrer and Andre Drege, and several others also in competition or during training.

The UCI introduced several new measures last summer in an attempt to improve conditions for riders, including the yellow card. However, just weeks into the new season, the effectiveness of these changes is already being called into question.

A significant part of the issue is the UCI’s continued deflection of blame onto riders. According to a report published earlier this year, the governing body and its safety partner, SafeR, claimed that rider errors accounted for 35% of race incidents.

This statistic has been widely criticised, with many arguing that it shifts focus away from the structural and organisational failures that contribute to these dangerous situations.

Despite the UCI’s promises, the opening months of the season have already been plagued by serious safety incidents. One of the most alarming occurred last week at the Étoile de Bessèges, where a car entered the racecourse midway through stage 6, causing several teams to withdraw in protest.

The reaction from the UCI has been mixed, with the governing body promising a “thorough investigation” and hinting at severe fines and increased supervision for race organisers. However, some race organisers have pushed back, arguing that teams are demanding more than is feasible. Really? Is a professional cycling team demanding no pedestrian cars on the course whilst the peloton is riding through really ‘unfeasible?’

Riders and team managers, meanwhile, have voiced their frustrations over the continued dangers they face on the road. Ralph Denk, head of Red Bull BORA, criticised race organisers for failing to consider rider safety, stating, “No rider wants to end up in a ditch with broken bones. Race organisers need to remember cycling is not a video game.”

Visma boss Richard Plugge also weighed in, warning that the sport must stop cutting corners when it comes to safety. “Safety must be without compromise,” Plugge insisted firmly.

Just yesterday, another shocking moment occurred when Pascal Ackermann crashed after hitting a pedestrian crossing in the closing metres of a sprint finish.

This latest incident has only added to the growing outrage. Former pro Johan Bruyneel delivered a scathing assessment of the UCI, stating, “The big problem lies with the UCI.” He accused the governing body of failing to hold organisers accountable, instead opting to deflect blame elsewhere.

Amidst all the controversy, the UCI has taken at least one commendable step by officially banning the use of carbon monoxide rebreathing, a controversial practice believed to offer riders a competitive edge but at significant health risks. While this move has been welcomed, it does little to address the immediate other safety concerns currently overshadowing the sport.

With the season still in its early stages, the UCI faces mounting pressure to take meaningful action before another tragedy occurs. While rider safety measures have been introduced, the series of early-season disasters has proven that the current system is not fit for purpose.

If the governing body continues to deflect responsibility and fail to hold organisers accountable, it risks further eroding trust among teams, riders, and fans alike.

Cycling is a sport built on courage, but it should not come at the cost of basic safety. It is time for change.