The Latvian Cycling Federation protested to the UCI for not disqualifying Mathieu van der Pol for “endangering spectators” by riding on the pavement in the World Championship elite men's road race.

Van der Pol was seen bunny-hopping on and off the pavement with 58.4 km remaining in the men's race. This action is against the rules and has resulted in previous disqualifications (notably Marlen Reusser at Ghent-Wevelgem earlier this season and Luke Rowe at the 2018 Tour of Flanders).

However, the Dutch riders were not punished, and the Latvian federation sent an open letter to the UCI, questioning the consistency and equality of the application of the rules by the cycling governing body.

Latvia's Toms Skžiņš finished fourth behind Van der Pol in the road race. He passed Van der Pol in Zurich for the final spot on the podium, behind lone winner Tadej Pogachar and Ben O'Connor.

“According to the rules, any rider who jumps onto the sidewalk and endangers the public or other riders must be immediately disqualified,” an open letter from Federation President Sandis Akis stated.

“The issue is not simply that he was riding on the sidewalk, which would normally result in a fine of between 200 and 1000 Swiss francs.

“The real issue is that he endangered spectators. Van der Pol almost hit a spectator while overtaking three riders on the sidewalk.

The rules referenced by Akis state that a fine of up to 1000 Swiss francs, a 25-point UCI points deduction, and/or a yellow card are the penalties for violating UCI Cycling Rule 2.12.007: Racing Accident Rule 7.6. on Road Racing

Disqualification or demotion will be decided at the discretion of the Commissaires in “serious cases involving advantage or danger”.

The open letter was reportedly written after the race in Zurich, when Latvian representatives attempted to protest Van der Pol's actions and were told that disqualifying the Dutchman was “not in the interest of the sport.”

“After the race, representatives of the Latvian federation tried to discuss this race situation with the UCI commissaires. One of the race commissaires stated that all commissaires had looked at the situation and decided that it was not dangerous and should be penalized,” Akis continued.

“The Latvian representative argued that the rules applied to everyone, but the commissaires argued that it was not in the best interest of the sport to interpret the rules in their favor. The Latvian representative was subsequently expelled.

“It seems that some are more equal than others, especially when unpopular decisions are made.”

Akis further expressed concern about both the safety aspects of the case and the inconsistency of the ruling by the UCI and asked the governing body to take action.

“As a relatively small federation, we are deeply concerned by this decision. We urge the UCI to apply consistent rules to ensure the safety and integrity of cycling and not leave these potential incidents unaddressed because of the so-called loss of reputation.”

. As members of the cycling community, we expect the UCI to publicly explain the commissaire's decision to avoid a similar situation.” “We are very disappointed that the UCI did not pay attention to this situation, because not paying attention to this situation would have created a predisposition for greater risks to racing in the future, which no one wants."

In a statement released to Cycling News, the UCI acknowledged the open letter, but said there was no need to sanction Van der Pol for his actions. It defended the decision, saying that there was no need to do so.

“The UCI Commissaires Panel is responsible for the sporting supervision of the competition and has determined that this situation does not justify the application of a sanction under paragraph 7.6 of UCI Regulation 2.12.007,” said a UCI spokesman.

“It should be emphasized that with respect to such rules, disqualification is not a normal sanction (imposition of fines and point deductions), but applies only in cases of ”advantageous, dangerous, repeated or serious violations.”

“The situation in question was not considered such a case and the decision of the UCI Commissaire Panel was not to impose any sanction.”