[Sylvanus Urban]

If you agree with it, could you all try to sign the petition here:

“World Cycling Organization UCI: For president Pat McQuaid to resign and cycling to be cleaned up”

http://tinyurl.com/PatMusgGoPetition

and pass on to as many people as you know – tweet, facebook, the lot! Thanks – Oh and once you’ve signed could you mention you’ve done so here to keep this post high / sticky on the board?

Topic

[Sylvanus Urban]

Sylvanus although I support

Sylvanus although I support your view that McQuaid should go I think that a more practical way to get rid of him would be to support the Kimmage Defence Fund.

Agreed – I was one of the first contributors so as you say, think that can bring a lot of pressure to bear.

Completely bemused by Gkam84’s comment about McQuaid:

I don’t think he’s doing such a bad job with it.

What about these?:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/schenk-doubts-mcquaid-has-the-credibility-to-clean-up-cycling
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-has-nothing-to-apologise-for-says-mcquaid
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/kimmage-receives-uci-subpoena
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-may-not-appeal-lance-armstrong-ban
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-claims-usada-has-no-jurisdiction-in-armstrong-case
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/mcquaid-im-not-trying-to-save-lance-armstrongs-skin
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-initiates-legal-proceedings-against-floyd-landis

What more do you want? Do we actually need to find him passing out chorionic gonadotropin to the peloton before you believe there’s a case to answer?

[Stumps]

Mallard
Mallard 😀

[captain_slog]

I thought it was a sort of
I thought it was a sort of duck.

[Stumps]

Ha, laugh i nearly wet myself
Ha, laugh i nearly wet myself =))

According to the Oxford dictionary:

Definition of dullard

noun

a slow or stupid person: he was caricatured as a dupe and a dullard

[dullard]

Apologies, stumps, didn’t
Apologies, stumps, didn’t realise it was all just a bit of a giggle. Doping, ruining riders’ careers, conspiracy, embezzlement, pah! What a larf!

[Stumps]

Dullard – we come on here for
Dullard – we come on here for the craic and to have a laugh, sometimes even at each other and to play the fantasy game.

If a topic comes up we do or dont agree with we make our feelings known.

We dont always agree on everything but this topic seems to have united a few of us in our remarks. Now there is nothing wrong with a petition its just that a few of us dont agree thats the route to go down. It may seem to you that thats a good route then thats fine but please dont try and make us out as “part of the problem” just because we dont agree with yourself.

[The Rumpo Kid]

Spot on dullard. One can only
Spot on dullard. One can only imagine what would have happened to the case against USPS if USADA had caved in to McQuaid’s bullying and handed all the evidence to the UCI.

[dullard]

dr, gkam etc – are you being
dr, gkam etc – are you being wilfully ignorant about the UCI, Verbruggen and McQuaid, money paid to them etc or you really don’t know much about it? McQuaid for one thing has been within the UCI cabal for way longer than he has been president. During both his and Verbruggen’s reign the UCI has consistently suppressed voices raising valid concerns about its being complicit in allowing doping and covering up (Kimmage, Dick Pound and Michael Ashenden spring to mind). And no, of course you don’t have any remit at all in terms of doping in cycling – you aren’t responsible if Armstrong, Millar, Contador or your own dogs doped. But your complacency about the position of the UCI is where you’re part of the problem. The UCI is critical in terms of doping because the UCI is the body that is supposed to regulate cycling and how it works, including the issue of performance-enhancing drugs, dope testing (when the UCI took over testing from the AFLD for the TdF in 2009, when Armstrong came back and miraculously finished on the podium, it resulted in not one positive test and was heralded as proof positive that the ‘war on doping’ was being won with the first race without a positive since 2005 – 2008 had seen several CERA positives) and issuing and coordinating bans. When the regulator of a sport turns a blind to eye to the taking of these drugs and, arguably, encourages it, the situation requires righting. Just turning a blind eye and saying that you think the UCI does a pretty good job is just poor.

[The Rumpo Kid]

drheaton wrote:
On the other

drheaton wrote:

On the other hand, if it turns out the UCI took bribes or covered up doping and continue to cover that up or McQuaid is in full knowledge of this then that changes things. You can’t blame them for trying to preserve a governing body which is finally making progress against doping though, but to find out the UCI were complicit would be a body blow and set the sport back years. Someone, whether that’s the current regime or the past, would need to be held accountable but I still don’t see how you can blame McQuaid for things that happened a decade before he became president.

Lance Armstrong made “donations” totalling $125,000 (that we know about) to the UCI. When Floyd Landis told the media of this, Hein Verbruggen (current Vice President) called him a “liar”. Pat McQuaid has since said that taking the money may have been a “mistake”.

Question: If the money was not a bribe, why did the UCI originally deny recieving it?

[Stumps]

Hang on a minute, why am i
Hang on a minute, why am i the one who has to take the drugs 😀

As people have already said, me included, the UCI is the same as Fifa, F1A etc etc. They stand and vote for each other and no outsider will stop that from happening.

They get to go to all the GT’s and visit beautiful places all over the globe in 5* luxury so a few thousand names on a petition isn’t going to make them become trapist monks and hand everything over.

The Kimmage case maybe the straw that breaks the camels back but until that happens or not i dont think we, as cycling fans, will have any influence over what they do.

[drheaton]

Gkam84 wrote:True. I never

Gkam84 wrote:

True. I never though of it that way. BUT, I still don’t think Pat McQuaid is at fault for everything that happens in world cycling and doping issue’s.

He is responsible for what goes on in the UCI though. I don’t think he’s doing such a bad job with it.

Agreed, it might not be down to him but he has been in charge when cycling seems to have finally turned a corner. And I ask again, who’d replace him? Everyone else in the UCI is surely just as tainted by the past? I also agree that the UCI now are doing better on doping, let’s not forget that the Spanish cycling federation let Contador off, the UCI challenged that and got him banned.

One important thing to note from the inrng analysis on the link above (in the comments I think) is that actually the national federations are responsible for the majority of drug testing not the UCI therefore if you have issues with testing, take them up with each individual federation and WADA, not the UCI.

EDIT: on the subject of Millar’s comments and the lack of an apology from the UCI I tend to agree an apology or admission that they could have done more would have helped and the UCI missed a trick failing to draw a line under the past. That’s a PR gaff though and not sufficient cause to replace McQuaid.

On the other hand, if it turns out the UCI took bribes or covered up doping and continue to cover that up or McQuaid is in full knowledge of this then that changes things. You can’t blame them for trying to preserve a governing body which is finally making progress against doping though, but to find out the UCI were complicit would be a body blow and set the sport back years. Someone, whether that’s the current regime or the past, would need to be held accountable but I still don’t see how you can blame McQuaid for things that happened a decade before he became president.

[PaulVWatts]

Sylvanus although I support
Sylvanus although I support your view that McQuaid should go I think that a more practical way to get rid of him would be to support the Kimmage Defence Fund. If McQuaid and his co-conspiritor loose their case against Kimmage then the main stream press will pick up the cause and force the big teams to view McQuaid as a liability. This may then get them finally to force the UCI to get rid of McQuaid. As other writers have said the problem with the UCI is the same as with FIFA et al, normal fans have no power.

[drheaton]

I disagree GKam, doping hurts
I disagree GKam, doping hurts the teams more than anyone else, teams struggle to get enough backing to cover costs. Some are backed by government money (Astana) or sugar daddies (BMC, Leopard), very few are self supporting. Most are backed by media companies, banks or supermarkets or energy companies. A few big doping stories scares sponsors who choose to go to ‘cleaner’ sports. Without sponsor backing the teams can’t function and its difficult to replace a top level sponsor, just look at HTC.

Some quick googling turns up a set of the UCI accounts and some analysis for 2011.

2011 UCI Financial Accounts

The UCI made 235,000 Swiss francs profit mainly thanks to great tax breaks for a being not for profit organisation. On the other hand, ASO makes an average of 30m a year profit (100 times the UCI).

What’s my point? The UCI has no financial incentive to keep the sponsors sweet because the big sponsorship money doesn’t go into their pockets, it goes to ASO. The Teams and Organisers are the ones that need to work on sponsors so they are the ones that need to push through change.

If the UCI owned the rights to the TdF, classics or Giro like FIFA own the world cup rights or champions league rights then things may be different. But they don’t. That means consumerism won’t work on the UCI because they’re not losing anything, you can’t boycott a governing body in the same way you can a chocolate bar and a petition won’t change anything because what the public thinks has no consequence as far as the UCI is concerned.

[Gkam84]

True. I never though of it
True. I never though of it that way. BUT, I still don’t think Pat McQuaid is at fault for everything that happens in world cycling and doping issue’s.

He is responsible for what goes on in the UCI though. I don’t think he’s doing such a bad job with it.

[Gkam84]

The teams and race
The teams and race organisation’s don’t really lose out either. Plus the rider can profit through the likes of book deals.

The reason no-one really loses out. MOST sponsors of teams and races are in one form or another related to cycling. Examples being bike and clothing manufacturers, component makers and cycling retailers.

If one was to drop out, lets just say because of doping, there is going to be another company willing to come in.

So for example. Team Kam (the riders being myself, drheaton, stumps and Pat McQuaid) 👿

Stumps is caught doping X( and we lose our bike sponsor (Specialized) along with SRAM for our parts. But because we are a world tour team, there are many companies offering us their products. Pinarello and Shimano come and give us new stuff.

Stumps gets a two year ban, No problem. We just bring in another rider. He goes on to write a best selling autobiography. Then returns and we go on to support him and win all the grand tours after his ban. 👿

[Author]

Replies