Sean Kelly believes Pogacar would have won Paris-Roubaix without the crash: “The world champion would have dug deep and got into time trial mode”
Cycling
Sean Kelly is no stranger to the chaos and glory of the
Spring Classics. The Irish legend, now 68, won Paris-Roubaix and Milano-Sanremo
multiple times, and claimed five Tour de France stage victories alongside a
Vuelta a España title. His palmarès include nearly every major honour in the
sport, with the Tour of Flanders the only Monument that eluded him.
So when Kelly offers his insight into the current crop of
classics riders, it’s worth listening. In his recent Cycling News
column, he reflected on the dramatic 2025 edition of Paris-Roubaix and the
spring campaign more broadly. At the heart of his analysis: the ongoing duel
between Mathieu van der Poel and Tadej Pogacar, the unlucky brilliance of Mads
Pedersen, and whether Wout van Aert's peak has passed.
Much of the pre-race hype centred on the long-awaited debut
of Tadej Pogacar at Paris-Roubaix. The Slovenian had already won the Tour of
Flanders, Il Lombardia, and Liège–Bastogne–Liège, and was the first rider in
decades to take on Paris-Roubaix as the reigning Tour de France winner.
But it was reigning world champion Mathieu van der Poel who
ultimately stole the headlines again, claiming a third straight win at Roubaix.
Still, Kelly believes Pogacar may have missed a golden opportunity.
“Of course, it was always going to be hard for Pogačar to
beat Van der Poel in that one-on-one situation because he would have had to
have shaken him off before the sprint in the velodrome. Still, if Pogačar had
been there when Van der Poel had his mechanical, he would have won the race.
The world champion would have dug deep and got into time trial mode, and when
you're out front in Roubaix, even if you're dying, you can still pull something
out.”
Kelly suggests that Pogacar’s crash, the result of
misjudging a corner, cost him more than just momentum. It might have cost him
victory. But at the same time, Kelly doesn’t excuse the mistake.
“Pogačar made that big mistake that cost him the race, and
it was a big, big error, especially against a guy like Van der Poel who's so
good at bike handling that he could probably ride around a corner like that on
ice. It's just the type of racer that Pogačar is, though – he's not afraid to
try things, whether that's attacking 70km out or taking a risk on a corner.
"But
this time, he got caught out, and maybe if he'd just followed Van der Poel or
been more cautious on the cobbles, it would have been different. That's what
I'd have told him to do if I were his director, rather than taking risks in
difficult places.”
Despite the crash and a second-place finish, Pogacar’s first
attempt at the Hell of the North left a lasting impression, including on Kelly.
“I didn't think he'd be that good, and the way things were
strung out early definitely helped him, but he rode really well.”
Kelly is convinced the Slovenian will be back for more, and
that it’s only a matter of time before he claims a Roubaix cobblestone of his
own.
“The signs say that Pogačar can definitely win
Paris-Roubaix. The conditions will be important – Sunday wasn't a bad Roubaix,
there was some mud but it was quite dry in the end – so if we get dry
conditions again, Pogačar is going to win Roubaix in the next couple of years,
and I'll be very surprised if he's not back next year.”
For Kelly, Van der Poel’s greatness lies not just in his
legs, but in his instinct, timing, and bike-handling, a theme he returns to
often.
“Mathieu van der Poel showed again on Sunday that he's just
a master in so many different ways. Bike handling, cornering, giving himself
space – all these little things conserve a little bit of energy which you then
save for later in the day, and we saw how he was able to dig in and take
advantage after Pogačar's crash, which is what he needed to do to win.”
Van der Poel’s combination of physical strength and tactical
intelligence continues to make the difference. Kelly does acknowledge that Van
der Poel has benefitted from some good fortune, but he’s quick to point out
that in a race like Roubaix, "luck" is often the product of skill.
“He also keeps having good luck in these races, he doesn't
crash and he doesn't get caught behind crashes, but in Roubaix, you do make
your own luck, and it's his ability to read the race, foresee incidents and
handle his bike so well that means he avoids crashes and punctures, which is
maybe was Pogačar is lacking.”
The showdown between Pogacar and Van der Poel was the
centrepiece of the race, but Mads Pedersen looked poised to disrupt the script
before suffering an untimely puncture.
“As we maybe expected, the race came down to a Pogačar vs
Van der Poel duel, but Mads Pedersen was almost there. When he had his
puncture, it was a real disaster time for that to happen, and he's been looking
really impressive before that. Right from the first sector, he was the one who
was pushing on a lot, and I did think 'Is he going to pay for this?' but sadly
it was the puncture that took him out.”
Kelly believes Pedersen’s aggressive start hinted at a
race-winning ride, and it’s a shame the cycling world didn’t get to see how he
would have fared against the sport’s top two if fate hadn’t intervened.
“If that hadn't happened, and he'd been there with Pogačar
and Van der Poel, maybe Pedersen would have attacked and they'd look at each
other, but unfortunately we didn't get the chance to see that in real life and
how he might have performed.”
Wout van Aert’s spring has been filled with setbacks. After
crashing out of Dwars door Vlaanderen and skipping both Flanders and Roubaix
due to injury, he watched from the sidelines as his rivals claimed the
spotlight.
Kelly, however, focused more on Van Aert’s recent
performances, particularly his diminished edge in the biggest moments.
“Wout van Aert was apparently caught behind a crash, and
then he had a flat, so he got into difficult situations and had to make a lot
of efforts to get back into it. He finished strong, but he seems to lack the
real high end intensity, so when the race is really on, he's just not at the
level.”
“This can happen later in your career, where you still have
that stamina but just not the explosiveness in the key moments, so he's still
got good shape, but just not what you need to compete for the win in the Spring
Classics.”
Fin MajorCycling Journalist
Fin Major is a UK-based writer at CyclingUpToDate and has been part of the team since 2024. He is the site’s main writer for FAQs and evergreen explainers and has written around 2,000 pieces for the platform. Alongside this work, he focuses on in-depth analysis and covers the biggest races on the calendar, including the Tour de France, the Giro d’Italia, and La Vuelta a España, providing clear context around performance trends, tactics, and key storylines.
In his reporting, Fin uses reputable data sources such as ProCyclingStats for results, statistics, and historical context. He places strong emphasis on careful sourcing, editorial accuracy, and updating articles promptly when new, verified information becomes available. Outside of writing, Fin is an active cyclist, which supports his practical understanding of the sport and its demands.
claps 4visitors 4
Just in
Popular news
Latest comments
- i did not see it. was the relegation justified or an overly hard decision? and don‘t cross riders deviate from straight lines all the time? bumping into each others when they cut corners, etc … why being more strict with the rules on the finish sprint?Ketterechts08-11-2026
- seems like we are advertising the website with pointless comments…Ketterechts08-11-2026
- So?Jumpyjohn08-11-2026
- The UCI do have their favorites.
Front24208-11-2026 - On a positive note, you maybe notice turning this topic into a discussion has the benefit of eliminating certain participants who do not see how they can turn it back to their sole interest ;-)Jumpyjohn08-11-2026
- People see what they want to. I am actually the opposite of your accusation, probably more of a rebel than most of you who don’t get the big picture. The difference is, I don’t go moaning publicly about the consequences of my transgressions, I understand the need for rules and I take my OWN responsibility when deciding to ignore or break them or doing so involuntarily. I will also not hesitate to state my case or argue vehemently when relevant, sometimes it works, sometimes it makes things worse but that’s the price to pay for principles and having character.Jumpyjohn08-11-2026
- That may be but that was unknown to others and nothing says that’s the whole truth. Again, don’t try to misinterpret, it is a call and technically it is correct. Besides, even if there is a valid reason, that does not disqualify the ruling or punishment as far as the rules have been developed. I don’t think they’re as far as in football where for handball there is a distinction (in some ways and specific cases) between intentional or not. And football can be just as harsh and people live with it, eg the offside rule, also judged to within tiny fractions but often wrong or ignored. It’s the nature of every collective organisation and sometimes I wonder if our rebellion against it isn’t seated in the feelings we carry from the injustices we’ve felt personally, like being flashed driving 1km/h too fast when we are explained limits are just a security measure but we are absolutely certain not to have endangered anyone with our transgression. The problem is, nobody has better solutions and no 2 people have the same interpretation of where a limit should be.Jumpyjohn08-11-2026
- Because for you deviated implies the other rider MUST have been made to fall and fail to finish ??? I don’t know if you ride a bike but next time someone carves you up or drives dangerously close, just hold back from those feelings of changing something, reporting or filming or even complaining. Everyone will just say, hey you’re still here undamaged, doesn’t seem like anyone did anything.Jumpyjohn08-11-2026
- And we, what are we doing?Jumpyjohn08-11-2026
- And yet, it attracts people, even you. What’s more, it attracts the rival fanboys to fill cyberspace with endless pointless my hero is better than your hero blabla that’s all been heard before and only helps sell the site as an advertising platform. You know what the solution is but most can’t resist. No different than women who follow and discuss celebs through gossip magazines.Jumpyjohn08-11-2026
Loading
2 Comments