“Vlad Van Mechelen was blamed: he was relegated and fined,”
Zonneveld wrote in his In de Waaier Substack. “But he was not the main culprit. The main culprit is you.”
‘Prehistoric barriers’ and a dangerous racing line
Zonneveld’s criticism centred on the right-hand bend around 400 metres from the finish and a visible kink in the barriers through the Chalon-sur-Saone finale.
Riders exiting the corner from the inside were carried towards the outside of the road, while those approaching from wider positions followed the quickest line back towards the inside. Van Mechelen took that path before making contact with Gaviria.
“When you simultaneously have riders following the fastest line from the outside towards the inside, as Van Mechelen did, riders are inevitably going to be sandwiched,” Zonneveld wrote. “That is exactly what happened to Gaviria, with all the consequences that followed.”
Fernando Gaviria nurses a fractured collarbone at the 2026 Tour de France
The positioning of the barriers also narrowed and redirected the apparent route towards the finish. Zonneveld argued that a rider sprinting alongside the right-hand boarding could continue in what appeared to be a straight line and end up against the barriers on the opposite side of the road.
Stage 12 was not treated as an isolated failure. Zonneveld also criticised the decision to place the finishes of stages 7 and 11 on bends and claimed all three finales failed to meet the standards expected under UCI regulations. “The clearest sign that you do not give a shit about the riders is the way the barriers have been dumped along the final kilometres,” he wrote.
Zonneveld described the barriers as crooked, poorly installed and placed with their feet protruding into the roadway, comparing the work to that of “a bunch of cowboys who have had one drink too many”.
He contrasted that setup with safer barrier systems already available to race organisers. When Tour race director Thierry Gouvenou had previously been questioned about the failure to use them, Zonneveld said the additional transport and resulting emissions were cited as an obstacle.
That explanation drew another furious response, with Zonneveld pointing to the Tour’s publicity caravan and the promotional waste distributed along the route. “And so the Tour continues with prehistoric barriers and finishes that breach UCI regulations,” he wrote.
Zonneveld accuses ASO of failing the entire sport
The former professional also placed the safety debate against the Tour’s enormous commercial power. He estimated that ASO earns between 150 and 200 million from each edition while spending only a small proportion of that revenue on prize money, accommodation and safer finishes.
Zonneveld recalled questioning officials about dangerous road furniture and being told that removing it would cost money. According to his account, one organiser acknowledged that crashes also carried a financial cost but added: “We do not have to pay for that.”
His column became still more incendiary when he said he would not rule out organisers accepting the spectacle produced by crashes because of the attention they generate. No evidence was presented to support that allegation, which represented the most extreme point of an already ferocious attack.
Jenno Berckmoes nurses a fractured collarbone at the 2026 Tour de France
“I know you do not give a damn when riders crash,” Zonneveld wrote. “I would not even rule out the possibility that you do it deliberately, because crashes create drama and more clicks.”
His wider warning was that standards set by the Tour inevitably filter through the rest of professional cycling. Smaller races can hardly be expected to invest in safer infrastructure if the richest and most influential event in the sport continues to resist doing so.
“When you, with all your money, do not take safety seriously, it gives every other organiser permission to do the same,” he wrote. “When you, with all your power, have the UCI in your pocket so that it does not intervene, then it will not intervene at other races either.”
Zonneveld also referenced Tim Merlier’s reaction after winning stage 12. The Belgian sprinter said he would rather see his son become a footballer than follow him into cycling after experiencing a finish of that nature.
“You can continue to ignore the subject. You can continue to blame the riders. You can continue not to give a shit about them,” Zonneveld wrote. “But surely even you must understand that you are destroying the sport from which you yourselves make tens of millions?”
The column ultimately reduced a furious attack on the Tour’s finances, influence and priorities to a basic demand: a straight road, properly aligned barriers and enough care to protect the riders racing between them.