The Tour de Romandie Féminin has descended into chaos before the start of the first stage, with the news that several teams have been disqualified following a row with the UCI over the governing body’s decision to introduce a new safety tracking system without consultation.
A spokesperson for Lidl-Trek has confirmed to road.cc this morning that the team will not start the Tour de Romandie, just minutes before the race’s opening time trial, between Huémoz and Villars-sur-Ollon, was due to commence.
The row appears to be over the implementation of the UCI’s new GPS rider tracking system, which is set to be trialled at the Tour de Romandie before being used at next month’s world road championships in Rwanda.
Following the teams’ disqualification, the UCI issued a statement condemning their “deplorable” refusal to “comply with the rules” and participate in the GPS safety trial.
The UCI announced last week that the trial – introduced to “strengthen the monitoring of rider safety during races”, in the wake of 18-year-old Muriel Furrer’s tragic death at last year’s world championships – would mean that one rider per team would carry the device at Romandie, the UCI Women’s WorldTour stage race being used as a test run for the world championships where everyone will carry a tracker.
However, in a letter sent to the UCI this morning, and reported by Daniel Benson, six teams have criticised the UCI’s decision to implement the trial without prior consultation, to grant itself the right to force teams to mount a device on a rider’s bike without permission, and to limit the trial to just one rider per squad.
“We made it clear that we would not select a rider ourselves, nor install, remove, or maintain the device,” the teams said in a statement.
“The UCI or its partner was free to select a rider and install the device at their own liability if they believe they are in their right to do so.”
The six teams who protested the decision were AG Insurance-Soudal, Canyon-SRAM, EF-Education-Oatly, Lidl-Trek, Picnic PostNL, and Visma-Lease a Bike, leading to the UCI threatening them with disqualification from the race.
Of those six teams, AG Insurance-Soudal will be the only team taking part in the race and today’s opening stage, a short 4km uphill time trial.
The other five squads have all been disqualified, putting the Tour de Romandie’s starting numbers below the minimum of 90 required for the race to count towards Women’s WorldTour points.
Lidl-Trek told road.cc this morning that, following this threat, the teams attempted to reach a compromise with the governing body, informing it that it could fit the devices, but that all riders should be included in the trial, to avoid one team member being placed at a “disadvantage”.
However, the Lidl-Trek spokesperson told us that the UCI then turned down this offer, throwing the race into chaos.
“Even when we said that the UCI could fit the devices, when we were threatened with DQ they declined our offer,” the spokesperson said.
In response to the furore, the UCI has issued its own lengthy statement, condemning the teams’ refusal to take part in the trial and “comply with the rules of the race”, a move the governing body described as “deplorable” and one that undermines its safety efforts. The UCI also indicated that it may consider further punishments for the five protesting teams.
“The decision of these teams to oppose the specific rules for the event is surprising, and undermines the cycling family’s efforts to ensure the safety of all riders in road cycling by developing this new technology,” the UCI said.
“As communicated in the specific rules for the event and in accordance with articles 1.3.073 and 2.12.007/3.5.3 of the UCI Regulations, teams were required to designate one rider on whose bike the GPS tracker would be fixed. Teams were given further explanations during the Sport Directors pre-event meeting.
“The UCI regrets that certain teams have objected to the test by not nominating a rider to carry the tracking device and have therewith opted to be excluded from the Tour de Romandie Féminin. In view of this situation, the UCI shall consider if other measures are warranted in accordance with the UCI Regulations.”
The statement continued: “As a reminder, this test involves one rider per team carrying a GPS tracking device, weighing 63 grams, during the three stages (15-17 August) of the Swiss UCI Women’s WorldTour stage race. The same technology will be deployed at the 2025 UCI Road World Championships in Kigali, Rwanda, where all riders will carry the device.
“The decision to implement this test of GPS safety tracking technology was made by SafeR, the structure dedicated to safety in women’s and men’s road cycling, bringing together representatives of all road cycling’s stakeholders.
“The objective of the test is to refine the UCI’s safety tracking software and establish protocols to provide real-time data to race control, medical teams and UCI Commissaires.
“This system will strengthen the monitoring of rider safety during races and enable rapid response in case of incidents. The initiative is part of the UCI’s ongoing efforts to protect rider safety, and broader implementation of this technology is envisaged for coming seasons.
“The UCI has worked with the organisers to ensure the smooth running and efficiency of the test and thanks them for their implication in ensuring rider safety. It is regrettable that the actions of some teams will impact this important international event.”
Confirming that Canyon-SRAM, EF Education-Oatly, Lidl-Trek, Picnic PostNL, and Visma-Lease a Bike are all excluded from the race, the UCI said: “It should be noted that most of these teams are part of the Velon organisation which is the owner of its own data transmission system and is working on the development of its own GPS tracking system.
“The UCI’s priority is to ensure the safety of riders. It works with the entire cycling family towards this goal, and the collaboration with most stakeholders is positive and constructive. It is deplorable to witness the refusal of certain teams to move forward together to protect the safety of riders, and the UCI condemns their non-cooperation.”
“The UCI has taken it upon itself to seek to impose on-bike tracking under the banner of ‘safety’ for the benefit of the UCI’s world championships”
However, in a joint statement, the five disqualified teams hit back at the UCI, saying they are “shocked and disappointed” by the decision – while questioning the governing body’s refusal to work with pro cycling organisation Velon and its GPS system.
“Earlier this week, all affected teams sent formal letters to the UCI expressing support for rider safety but raising serious concerns about the unilateral imposition of a GPS tracking device to just one of the riders per team,” the teams said in the statement.
Referring to Velon’s data-tracking system, first launched in 2019, the teams continued: “Despite our cooperation and the existence of a proven and collaborative safety tracking system already tested successfully in other major races (fully operational for the whole peloton and offered to the UCI), the UCI has chosen to impose this measure without clear consent, threaten disqualification, and now exclude us from the race for not selecting a rider ourselves.
“The reason why they don’t want to nominate a rider themselves is still unknown and unanswered.
“Despite multiple requests by the teams over the last two days, the UCI commissaires were unable to demonstrate on the basis of which precise UCI rule teams are obligated to discriminate one rider against other riders in terms of obligations (except for officially referring to an email of the team’s union) but have nevertheless decided to carry on and disqualify the teams with their riders.”
In the letter sent by the original six protesting teams to the governing body this morning, the squads also emphasised their support for measures designed to improve rider safety – but criticised the UCI’s decision to “impose on-bike tracking” for the benefit of its own world championships, from which it earns commercial revenue.
“The Teams are fully supportive of measures to improve the safety of riders in all races. The SafeR project seeks to achieve this through a collaborative approach supported by all stakeholders,” the letter said.
“This is proven in the successful testing of a safety tracking system across the entire peloton in both the men’s and women’s Tour de Suisse with the consent and collaboration of all stakeholders, a test the UCI was given full access to.
“Sadly, the UCI, in its capacity as regulator of professional cycling, has now taken it upon itself to seek to impose on-bike tracking under the banner of ‘safety’ for the benefit of the UCI’s World Championship, a race owned, organised and commercialised by the UCI.”
Focusing on the details of the GPS trial, the letter continued: “The right to mount a device to a bicycle of a rider of a team remains with the relevant team. This right is recognised by all stakeholders in professional cycling, in particular those race organisers who have successfully collaborated with the teams on on-bike tracking over the last decade.
“If a device needs to be mounted it should only be done with the consent and close collaboration of the teams.
“However, the UCI now seems to dispute this right and rather than seeking the permission of the teams and/or collaborating with the teams, the UCI wishes to grant itself/a third party partner the right to mount a device on a team’s bicycle without the team’s consent.”
At the sports directors meeting on Friday morning, the teams told the UCI’s imposition of tracking devices for the Tour de Romandie, “or any race for that matter”.
The teams then attempted to compromise with the UCI to reach a solution, conceding that they would not stop the governing body and its partners attacking devices to riders’ bikes.
“The staff of the Teams will not mount, remove, charge or in any way manage the devices throughout the race,” the letter said. “The staff has been instructed not to touch the devices and we assume no liability for any damage to the devices attached to the bicycles.”
However, the teams insisted that they would not consent to the GPS data captured by the devices being used by the UCI, while noting that the person who attaches the devices will be held liable for any potential injury or damage caused by it.
The protesting teams also told the UCI that they would not select an individual rider to carry the device, “as it will put that rider in a disadvantage against other riders, which is clearly discriminatory”.
Finally, the teams quoted the UCI’s letter from earlier this week, in which the governing body stated: “The broader discussion on the implementation of GPS rider safety tracking across professional cycling is a major topic and discussions involving all stakeholders will be held.”
“The UCI’s conduct clearly contradicts this statement and sentiment,” the teams pointed out.
In their joint statement, the teams concluded: “This action disregards the rights of teams and riders, applies the measure in a discriminatory manner, and contradicts the UCI’s own stated commitment to dialogue with stakeholders.
“We are always at the forefront to make cycling a safer sport, but it should be achieved through collaboration, not coercion.”
30 thoughts on “Chaos at women’s Tour de Romandie as five teams disqualified after tracking device row – as UCI condemns “deplorable undermining of safety efforts””
It does seem a bit strange
It does seem a bit strange for the the UCI to only want to put gps trackers on some riders for this race, it should be all or nothing.
I bet they don’t have enough
I bet they don’t have enough devices (or at least not enough at the race this morning) = sh1t planning. Also indicated by the lack of communication which should always be part of a planning process. Typical belligerance and ineptitude from the UCI.
Well not really if you think
Well not really if you think about it, where do you get 90+ GPS trackers from ?
And why would you buy hundreds of GPS trackers for a trial that might discover the tech needs to be reworked because it works fine for time trialling but not in packed bunches of riders.
Clearly there are competing systems on offer and the teams objecting all seem to be involved with the one that hasn’t got the nod, purely coincidence I’m sure
stonojnr wrote:
There’s surely a question to be asked as to why the fully operational and proven workable system owned by and developed with seven out of the world’s top ten teams and that was already in place didn’t get the nod. From the outside feels more like a perverse decision by the UCI aimed at reminding the team who’s boss.
We dont know the technical
We dont know the technical specs of either system, even if they were identical vendors will always add on extra costs, support contracts, licensing to use, extra charges for bespoke solutions or mods etc etc and the lifetime costs for one may simply out weigh the other.
Part of this trial was to prove the integration with the official timekeeper partner of the race, who appears to have helped develop it, the UCI may well want something that works best with their chosen key partners in the future and not be forced down a route they dont want.
Whilst undoubtedly the system the UCI picks works totally in their favour, I think we can be assured the other system will be totally stacked in the other vendors favour.
If 63 g is such a massive
If 63 g is such a massive disadvantage, have the other riders each carry six £2 coins in their jersey pockets.
But, but. . .That will cost
But, but. . .That will cost cash money!!
andystow wrote:
You shouldn’t carry any solid items in your jersey pockets unless you are happy to have them embedded in your spine in the event of a crash.
Clearly you’ve never noticed
Clearly you’ve never noticed where riders put the race radios have you.
sizbut wrote:
Actually concerns have been raised about whether race radios have led to an increase in shoulder/collarbone/spinal injuries from riders landing on them, virtually impossible to prove (not the sort of thing you can do randomised testing on) but intuitively coming down on a hard object isn’t going to do much good. If you’ve noticed where riders put race radios, the radio pocket is positioned well away from the shoulder and spine to minimize risk, they don’t keep them in their back pockets. Backladder is quite right, solid objects in the rear pockets of your jersey are a serious risk in a crash. I’ve mentioned this before here but it bears repeating, I once knew a girl who had a disc lock in her back pocket when she crashed her motorcycle and it smashed into her, resulting in the removal of her spleen.
sizbut wrote:
I have and its not something I would ride with, when I purchase a cycling top I always look for a chest pocket for my mobile phone and it works fine in that position so I don’t see why the radios can’t be carried there as well. Also the current radios seem to have a relatively sharp cornered shape, I’m sure this could be improved on.
stonojnr wrote:
How could you know it works well in bunches without having all the riders in the bunch using them?
I dont know, maybe run some
I dont know, maybe run some trials in real race situations, something like that maybe…
I think it’s all teams, but
I think it’s all teams, but only one rider per team, i.e. not all riders.
Edit: thanks for editing your post without saying you’d edited it, making my post look nonsensical.
They’re investigating this
They’re investigating this technology. It makes sense to do a small trial first, before spending another 20+ times more to buy the kit for every rider + every spare bike + spares for contingencies. A trial for a tech that various stake-holders – including the WT teams – had already agreed should be brought in in prior discussions in other forums.
We can’t be completely sure, but it sounds like Velon teams are being somewhat dickish here.
How on earth was this not all
How on earth was this not all ironed out beforehand? The UCI response reads like something they should waited 10 minutes before sending to have a calmer think instead of blasting it out.
Their frustration is no doubt
Their frustration is no doubt borne out of the teams who were objecting, creating unreasonable barriers to something that’s intended to benefit safety of their riders, and not resolving the issues in advance.
No doubt the teams thought the UCI wouldn’t DSQ them and abandon the trial, the UCIs reaction is no doubt based on that aspect more than arguing over who fits the damn things or who picks the rider.
This is childish argument.
This is childish argument. Toys out of the pram on all sides.
To suggest a 63g device will disadvantage anyone is ludicrous.
For the UCI not to have sorted this out weeks in advance is also ludicrous.
Reading between the lines it
Reading between the lines it sounds like this is Velon being annoyed the UCI did not select their tech, and getting the teams (who comprise Velon) to rebel to the /trial/ of an already agreed (in principle) safety device.
Sounds poorly handled by both sides. You can understand the frustration at the UCI too – it’s just a _trial_ of a tiny 63g device, to help race organisers implement better safety for racers. And the teams are being arses about it.
What’s the bets Velon were looking for cash from the UCI for the use of the Velon system?
Paul J wrote:
Equally, what’s the bet that there’s some form of profit or benefit to the UCI and its partners in choosing another system?
Whomever is selling the GPS
Whomever is selling the GPS tags wants to make money, and it will be the UCI paying for it.
It seems UCI already had a supplier organised, except Velon wanted to sell their own tech to UCI and Velon now has its nose out of joint on that. Velon presumably itself had contracted out the tech development. So quite possible it’s that Velon don’t want to hand-off the subcontractor to the UCI – cause they want to maintain control and/or get a cut.
UCI presumably wants to be the one in control of the technology it selects, which – given they will surely end up using it _outside_ of the WT races Velon represents (the crash that has driven this was a WC, non-WT race) – is not unreasonable either.
Paul J wrote:
Velon doesn’t represent races – it’s a venture by some of the teams. Those teams will race at both WT and non-WT races.
mdavidford wrote:
As reported, this dispute is between the UCI, as the body that makes the rules and which – after much consultation – is looking to bring in new rules to require certain tracking tech at races (above whatever level); and Velon teams.
The purpose of this GPS is to
The purpose of this GPS is to track a missing and / or crashed rider*. It aims to speed up search, rescue and evac operations, but it has nothing to do with making the pro peloton SafeR.
*This GPS controversy sounds like a good PR stunt to divert the public’s attention from the one and only question that matters – why did
it take paramedics an hour or so to reach an accidented competitor on a closed circuit? Don’t expect UCI bureaucrats to question a race and organisation they validated and approved.
If you dont know where they
If you dont know where they are, because they crashed off the road, yes it does take time to find people
MaxiMinimalist wrote:
Precisely because she didn’t have a GPS tracker which would have alerted organisers/teams/paramedics to the fact that she had crashed. Nobody saw her crash and she ended up out of sight of the road. With no trackers and no race radio nobody realised she was missing for a considerable period. It wasn’t a delay in getting paramedics to an accident victim, it was a delay in realising there had been an accident at all.
Rendel Harris wrote:
Indeed. And not just the girl at the WC. Lotto-Soudal had a rider go off one of the descents in Milan San Remo (Cippressa? I don’t remember), and go missing for a bit. His team knew they’d lost touch with him though and went back up to search for him.
Probable arguments for and
Probable arguments for and against on both sides. However, given thé UCI’s record of bizarre/stupid régulations and initiatives I suspect that they’re more at fault.
Putting a tracker on a bike,
Putting a tracker on a bike, when effectively they have them as per cycle computers – rediculous this!
leedorney wrote:
Of course, how stupid of all professional teams and cyclists and the UCI not to know this. Or perhaps how stupid of you not to know that you can’t live track a head unit unless you’re also carrying a mobile phone running the proprietary app of your computer linked to your head unit so it can broadcast your location.