"If Mathieu had crashed, the charge could be attempted manslaughter": Spectator misbehaviour not properly punished according to riders' union

Spectators' behaviour in cycling is almost never a cause of concern, but there are always some isolated events of "fans" disrupting the race, and Mathieu van der Poel has been affected several times recently.

In Loenhout, shortly before the end of 2025, a spectator struck his handlebar, even if unintentionally, as later emerged. However, incidents in which objects are deliberately thrown at the Dutch rider’s head occur frequently enough to raise broader concerns. And the obvious questions arises: What can be done in such cases?

Former professional cyclists Bert and Staf Scheirlinckx have founded a riders’ union precisely to address situations like these. “We try to ensure that these kinds of incidents are followed up legally, but we cannot determine the severity of the punishment, and it is not always what we expect,” Bert Scheirlinckx told De Telegraaf.

“It is often very difficult, because the rider himself or the team is rarely in favour of giving the incident much publicity. We do initiate a procedure, because this kind of behaviour is unacceptable in cycling. However, the penalties are often light and limited, because the incident is assessed by a judge, just as it would be in ‘normal’ society.”

Banning offenders from races is also more complicated than what we might think. “For people who care deeply about cycling, incidents like the one involving Van der Poel are emotionally charged. People immediately say: that person should never be allowed to attend a race again. But if you detach that emotion, you are basically dealing with someone spitting on another person or throwing beer at them. Under Belgian jurisdiction, that is not considered a serious offence, so someone gets away with a fine.”

There are, however, exceptions, although they depend on the seriousness of the consequences. At this year’s Paris-Roubaix, for example, Van der Poel had a bidon thrown at his head. “Yes, if Mathieu had crashed there and suffered a serious injury, then he and his team would have taken that person to court and held them responsible for their actions. In that case, the victim could bring the perpetrator before a judge with ‘attempted manslaughter’ as the charge.”

“The person has been identified,” Scheirlinckx said, while noting the lack of deterrent effect. “No, we don’t know what sentence was handed down. Then you once again run into the ‘law of privacy’, which means it is not made public. That is frustrating, yes. If the punishment were made public and turned out to be severe, then everyone would think twice before doing something unacceptable.”

Some organisers, at least, recognise that the situation cannot continue as it is. “We know from Flanders Classics (organisers of the Tour of Flanders, among others) that during De Ronde they deploy more stewards at crowded points such as the Paterberg and Oude Kwaremont, to keep a preventive eye on things,” Scheirlinckx explained.

Other preventive measures such as installing cameras, however, remain problematic. “That is difficult as well, because cycling races take place on public roads and then you once again run into privacy legislation. During cyclocross that might be possible, and yes, we are in very serious talks with organisers to reduce the risk of incidents. The problem remains that due to legislation, many things we would like to do are simply not possible. That does not change the fact that we will continue to fight for the riders.”