By Shane Stokes
This week’s news that Brian Cookson will ensure that the UCI looks into the matter of a long-running appeal for compensation from the widow of a pro rider who died in a race in 2005 is encouraging, even if the final outcome is not yet certain.
The Italian Alessio Galletti competed for Lampre, Saeco and Domina Vacanze during his career, and was in the colours of the Naturino Team when he collapsed during the Subida al Naranco event. He suffered a heart attack and died, leaving behind his wife Consuelo, their nine-month-old baby Marcus and their-then unborn son Manuel.
The insurance company which had backed the team refused to pay out compensation, claiming that only accidents were covered and not death from natural causes. In 2007 the Italian riders’ association wrote to the UCI appealing for its help, pointing out that the governing body had signed a convention dealing with the insurance riders should have.
The UCI answered by saying its legal department was looking into the matter. However, according to the Italian Professional Cyclists Association (ACCPI), it then ignored all further correspondence and has done precisely nothing in the six years since.
After the ACCPI issued an open letter to the new UCI president Brian Cookson, he moved swiftly.
“Many thanks for your email and the information you have provided about the sad death of Alessio Galletti in 2005 and the impact on his family,” he replied the same day that letter was publicly released. “Professional riders are central to our wonderful sport of cycling so please be assured that I do take this very seriously indeed.
“I will make sure that the UCI investigates the details and we will get back to you with a more substantive response in due course.”
The final outcome to that will become apparent over time but the fast response and tone of his answer suggest that the UCI might finally be moving to resolve the matter. If so, it will add to other encouraging signs which have been seen since Cookson took over from former president Pat McQuaid at the end of September.
Others include the news that the Briton had a team of investigators on standby outside the UCI headquarters in Aigle and, minutes after his election, directed them to enter the building and to lock down computers, documents and any other information that could be of value in the planned Independent Commission investigation.
Reports suggested that a computer belonging to McQuaid was seized, although the Irishman contradicted this.
A second sign of decisive action was the decision to end the services of the UCI’s longtime lawyer, Philippe Verbiest, who had been part of both the McQuaid and earlier Hein Verbruggen presidencies. Also shown the door was UCI director general Christophe Hubschmid, who along with Verbiest had appeared to try to ensure McQuaid’s re-election.
Thirdly, Cookson came through on a number of election promises. At the end of October he published the salary he will draw from the UCI (340,000 Swiss Francs [approximately 275,000 euro/$379,000], and 110, 000 Swiss Francs less than he said McQuaid was receiving). He also confirmed an Independent Commission would be formed in consultation with WADA, with the purpose being a full investigation of the UCI, claims of wrongdoing by it and how it tackled doping in the sport.
At the same time, he and the UCI also pledged their support for the new women’s commission, headed by UCI vice president Tracey Gaudry, which has the goal of developing that area of the sport. That goal will include one hour highlights of the women’s World Cup races, to be distributed free of charge to broadcasters.
In addition to those measures, Cookson has confirmed that the UCI is working on setting up a new and apparently completely independent anti doping commission, thus separating the roles of policeman and promoter of the sport.
This measure is one which many feel is necessary for the credibility of cycling, and should lead to greater confidence in testing results.
So far so good, then. Cookson has been in office two months and has ticked off several of his pre-election promises.
Other goals such as reforming road cycling and developing a structure that increases long-term financial stability in the sport will take more time to tackle.
However Cookson told Bloomberg this month that he was opposed to the so-called World Series Cycling project which had been proposed by some as a way of introducing that financial stability.
He said he had concerns about the effects the planned new races could have on cycling’s traditional events; under the original proposal, some key races would be shortened, while other long-standing events could be reduced in status below those which would be introduced.
“The heritage of cycling is very important,” he was quoted as saying. “You could have, say, a race from Paris to Lyon but it wouldn’t be as exciting as Paris-Roubaix.”
It remains to be seen what measures will be adopted in the medium and long term.
There was however an area that some may have been curious about; while the World Series Cycling proposal had been waved away, Cookson said that the UCI was still speaking to a number of organisations, including BSkyB.
The company said in a statement that it “maintains an open mind about whether there’s an opportunity to extend its relationship with cycling as a broadcast partner.”
It is also a long term supporter of British Cycling and is the prime backer of Team Sky, two bodies which Cookson has had an association with. He was president of British Cycling from 1997 until earlier this year, and was also previously on the board of the company which owns Team Sky.
If BSkyB does indeed assume a bigger role in the sport, that could in theory lead to questions about potential conflicts of interest.
One question that fans would have is if the involvement of BSkyB could mean that cycling would become a sport visible via that company’s satellite channels only. If so, this would potentially reduce the exposure cycling would have, and could force those who are not Sky subscribers to pay out a large sum each year to watch the sport.
This is all conjecture, of course; it remains to be seen if BSkyB does indeed get involved in a bigger way, and how that would impact on viewing habits and requirements.
It is however a reminder that Cookson’s presidency will be judged on what happens months and years down the line, not in the first few weeks.
It’s impossible to predict the outcome, even if signs are encouraging thus far. McQuaid too had promising beginning to his presidency before things started to become complicated with the UCI-ProTour spat, various doping scandals and Lance Armstrong’s red-carpet return.
Time will tell if Cookson’s honeymoon period is akin to that of a couple that grows closer and stronger over time, or if it will be the initial rosy glow of a marriage which descents into something far less enduring.
The sport deserves the former, and so here’s hoping that’s how things play out.
Shane Stokes is the editor of VeloNation.
this article originally appeared in The Roar
Changes are being rung in under the new presidency of the UCI by Brian Cookson – from confiscating computers and hard drives from MacQuaid’s people right after his victory to setting out a roadmap for the sport’s recovery – but one of the toughest challenges facing the governing body is the rehabilitation of women’s cycling.
Though it may be somewhat natural to think that any pro athlete is relatively well paid, for the women that push their pedals for cash, nothing could be further from the truth.
In fact, the vast majority of female pros have to negotiate their own contracts, seek out personal sponsorship alone, struggle with the uncertainty that their scheduled races will even be held and generally fret over paying their bills, never mind putting money into the bank.
Here’s a little fact that illustrates this point: the Giro d’Italia forks out €90,000 to the overall winner while second place takes €50,000 and third place €20,000.
The winner of the women’s Giro received – wait for it – €450.
That is not a typo. There are not two, nor even one, zero missing from that figure.
The winner of the women’s version of the Belgian Classic, Omloop Het Nieuwsblad, received just €360.
Once these winners have shared their ‘loot’ out amongst their teammates, they may have enough for a celebratory dinner – at McDonald’s.
Cookson though is making strides in the right direction, and when Brian Cookson appointed Australian Tracey Gaudry to the post of vice president, he was making a clear statement of intent.
Gaudry, who became the first ever woman to hold the post, is known as a former professional cyclist and, interestingly, is a member of the Anti-Doping Review Violation Panel to report to the Board of the Australian Sports Commission.
Gaudry has been brought in by Cookson for several reasons, the first being that he considers her to be ideally suited to carry out the duties required of the vice president of cycling’s governing body, and also to specifically tackle the problems facing women’s cycling.
Gaudry is no stranger to the challenges faced by the female peloton, one of which is the cancellation of races due to lack of financial funds.
In 1999 Gaudry won the Tour de Snowy in her first year as a pro rider, a race that was canned in 2003 due to the lack of sponsorship.
Gaudry is currently working on the setting up of a Women’s Commission that she says reflects the UCI’s new desire to diversify.
“We will have 6 or 7 members of both genders, Europeans and non-Europeans, from all disciplines, former and current athletes, National Federations, women coaches, organisers, teams and broadcasters,” she says in an interview on the UCI website.
“The Commission will be set up by the end of the year and we will present our strategy for the coming 12 months and beyond at the next Management Committee meeting in late January.
“In order to develop women’s cycling it needs, among other things, better visibility,” she continued. “But I want to specify that we will have a transversal approach: we will work with all the commissions [road, track, and so on] because the rise of women’s cycling must involve everybody. It is not something that concerns just one department.
“For the first time, there will be a woman in each commission, which is another clear sign from the UCI. We will take on board the proposals that the other commissions make to us and we will make propositions.”
The shortsightedness of the traditionally male-dominated UCI has led us to this point where there is a real and drastic need for measures such as this one.
Indeed, how and why there has never been a Women’s Commission is something that beggars belief. In a world where some 50% of the population is female you would imagine that the governing body of a sport that is suited to all would actually do something to get women on bikes, rather than neglecting them so forcefully all these years.
Speaking of male and female professional cycling, Tiffany Cromwell said to me in a recent interview that “you really can’t compare the two, they are completely different.”
Cromwell went on to state that the women accept that the two strands of cycling have differing histories, but also said that in many ways, the existence of most female pros is not that different – through their entire careers – to young, aspiring amateur men who live in team houses and in rooms above cafes at the start of their journeys.
Just about every female cyclist bar the very best riders also have to work or are studying, preparing for a later career, knowing that they will never become rich, or even well-off, from their cycling careers.
“We do it because we love it,” said Cromwell. ‘You might make a little bit of money but you’re not going to retire off of that. You don’t want to think about it. It’s how it’s always been, it’s sad but I guess we can show the beauty of the women’s side rather than comparing it to the men’s.”
And there, in a nutshell, is the answer to those who bemoan the lack of distance covered in women’s racing or the lack of brute power on display. What the women bring to the sport is different, and it is a difference that should be appreciated, not bemoaned.
Indeed, in many ways the shorter races that are a feature of the women’s side of the sport lead to far more exciting racing than many men’s events.
The sport needs to encourage women to ride, develop new races with UCI funding and outside sponsorship, and bring in television companies to help further support the enterprise.
Right now there is a female rider who may well be the greatest rider the sport has ever seen – men or women – and yet we barely see her. Mention Marianne Vos to casual followers of the sport and many will never have heard of her.
We may be getting somewhere though, thanks to Cookson, Gaudry and the spirit shown by the women riders in their pursuit of their dreams. In many ways, it is they who are the true carriers of the flame of passion and love of this great sport, simply because they do not do it for the money.
“You have to think about how lucky you are,” said Cromwell. “I am riding my bike every day, I travel the world and see beautiful places, and my passion is my job. There are not many people who can say that.”
The UCI has long been looking to Asia and to China in particular as the next frontier in cycling, offering the world governing body what it sees as the best opportunities to expand not only its brand but also its influence and to bolster its finances.
Pat McQuaid had first hand experience and knowledge of the Asian scene as race director of the Tour of Langkawi, the Tour of China, and the Tour of Philippines before he became President of the UCI in 2005. Indeed, it was this experience combined with the desire to open up the Chinese market to the UCI that saw the formation of the Tour of Beijing in 2011.
That event, the third edition of which has just finished, was hugely unpopular when first shoehorned in as the final event on the 2011 World Tour, with several teams plainly stating that they saw no point in turning up. The UCI responded with its usual finesse and threatened to strip those teams of their ProTour licenses if they failed to show in Beijing.
The teams responded in kind by demanding that the UCI postpone the implementation of the radio ban it had been ready to enforce. Both sides backed down, thus saving face, and we saw a Tour of Beijing where what crowds there were found themselves far from the action. Many of those present watching were said to have been bused in by the authorities in any case.
The inaugural Tour of Beijing was in fact a dull, staid affair that barely any real cycling fan had any interest in – much like the 2013 and 2013 editions, it could be said.
In Australia, where the cycling scene is more advanced than in Asia, there is the Tour Down Under, an event that can justify its place on the cycling calendar for several reasons, not least the competitiveness of the racing but also, critically, by the sheer volume of people that turn up to cheer the riders on.
Asia though demands a different approach. Even in the countries where the traditions of racing are quite well developed, such as Malaysia and Japan, there is nothing to match the depth of support seen at the TDU.
The kind of ‘trickle-down’ effects of top-tier multi-stage racing simply have not been shown to work in and real, tangible way here.
However, though the number of participants taking part in any sort of organized racing in Asia still remains relatively low, the number of people actually riding bikes continues to grow exponentially.
As someone who has lived in Asia now for 15 years, I continue to be amazed by the increase annually of the number of people out on the road (and in particular by the number of women). These people are riding top-end carbon fibre bikes with all the gear on – they are just not racing, with too many feeling that the leap from weekend ‘fun’ riding to competition is just too great, which, given the lack of racing culture and the lack of entry-level events here, in most cases is.
At the level just below World Tour events – such as at the 2.1 Tour of Thailand, 2.2 Tour of East Java and the Tour of the Philippines – you will find Pro-Continental and Continental teams that, though certainly competitive, do very little to inspire any real interest in racing from the locals beyond cheering them past for a few moments as the colorful peloton speeds by.
They also bring in very little economic gain to the local economies, the teams being packed with young, jobbing pro riders who have very little expendable income and whom are also unlikely to return to enjoy the local culture with a family any time soon. Not only that, some of these Asia Tour races are lacking completely in drug testing procedure. I know because I’ve raced in them and, as times, not a single rider has been tested over the entire race.
The whole approach to the Asian scene is misguided, like much of what we saw coming from the UCI under McQuaid.
So how can we combine the UCI’s desire to expand into the Asian market with the top teams’ desire to keep their riders interested in the racing, and to inspire the local riders to step into competitive racing whilst also putting something back into the local community?
I ’d suggest a series of one day ‘Asian Classics’ held over a two week period throughout the region in or around the time period that the current Tour of Beijing is held. Keep the racing exciting for the pros by having the races on courses that not only showcase the beauty of Asia – something the current events here just completely fail to do – but also choose routes that place similar demands on the participants as do Roubaix, Amstel or the Tour of Flanders.
To encourage locals to get out and participate also, an ideal format would be to have an early sportif on the Saturday, an amateur race version in the afternoon and the Pro version on the Sunday.
One event could be the Japan Cup, which has provided a very popular format of racing for several years now. Another could be in Taiwan, possibly mid-week, a third in China and another in whichever country the UCI feels would most benefit from such an event – or possibly a second in China.
This would mean a bit of traveling for the World Tour teams but would guarantee interest here in Asia and, I believe, in the rest of the cycling world too, and is surely more appealing than grimly pedaling around Beijing for a week. With one or possibly two races midweek, the whole ‘Asian Classics’ series could take place within a 2-week period, maximizing the appeal to sponsors and riders alike – and to any fans intent on seeing every race.
On top of all this, include a women’s event and make maximum benefit from the popularity of cycling amongst women in Asia, which on visual evidence alone far outrstrips Europe.
This has to be an improvement on what we have now, a race that is foisted on teams particularly that don’t want to be there and one that stands isolated from the real fans and the wider community.
Races such as the Tour of Thailand and Tour of Singkarak and others like it that make up the UCI Asia Tour should continue, but with just a little more thought the cycling community and cycling industry could be getting so much more from the Asian cycling scene – and, crucially, putting something back in.
New UCI President Brian Cookson is already making some strides with the women’s side of the sport. Let’s hope that the UCI can start to reevaluate its approach to the Asian cycling scene.
Writing about hope again? For the second time in a week? Surely not! It must be the medication…
And yet here we are, barely over two weeks into Brian Cookson’s presidency and the rumblings of change are to be heard across the land.
I know, it’s too early yet to blow the trumpets and to get out the bunting but there have been three developments this week that have reeked of common sense and the bleeding obvious – two things that had been long banned under the presidency of Pat McQuaid.
Rumour has it that both common sense and the bleeding obvious have made their return after being rescued from a remote Swiss farmhouse where they were being held against their will by several of the Irishman’s cronies.
There were found after a dawn raid to be severely undernourished and very pale, though both are recovering in a Geneva hospital.
McQuaid, when interviewed about the case, said “I know nothing”, the most sensible thing he’s said since taking over the UCI captain’s seat in 2005.
So, what’s happened in the past few days that suggests that the winds of change are blowing?
First up is the fantastic news that the women’s Tour of Britain has been granted 2.1 status by the UCI.
This raises the race alongside the Route de France and the women’s version of the Giro and it is I feel hugely important not only in that it means that the women now have one more top event to race in, but it also provides evidence that Cookson’s claim to be ready to support women’s cycling has substance to it.
The organisers of the event, SweetSpot, are obviously thrilled at the news.
The SweetSpot director Guy Elliott said: “We are absolutely delighted that the UCI have awarded us 2.1 status for this exciting new event.”
The elevation to 2.1 means that the world’s top racers will be in attendance, thus allowing the British spectators a chance to see women’s cycling at its best, which can only help to counter the argument that women’s cycling is not as watchable as the men’s.
SweetSpot also announced that the event will have full road closure, accommodation provided and – shocker – prize money. Yes, if you thought that every women’s race has prize money you were mistaken.
How bad is it? I’ve been told that the winner of the women’s version of the Giro walked away with just 450 euros earlier this year, which, after sharing among her teammates must have left her enough for a fast food banquet at best.
The second notice of change was the announcement that Cookson contacted Paul Kimmage, the former pro and journalist who took on Lance Armstrong over doping allegations, to tell him that the UCI would be ending the legal action against him taken up by McQuaid.
The former president claimed that Kimmage had defamed the UCI when he published his opinion on the way the governing body was handling the sport and wanted his pound of flesh, taking on his compatriot over what seemed like a playground grudge when cycling was reeling from the Armstrong case and had no need for more mudslinging.
Cookson has looked at the case and decided that to continue makes no sense whatsoever (probably because Kimmage was right in the first place), and has withdrawn the action.
“I had a call from him, just before he went to Beijing,” Kimmage told VeloNation.
“He told me that they were in the process of issuing a release to the extent that the they are going to drop the case against me.”
So on that score I am sure most would agree, well done Mr Cookson.
Again, it’s little more than common sense and the bleeding obvious, but after what went before we are left in a state where we lavish praise on someone behaving in a civilised and sensible manner.
Perhaps that will prove to be McQuaid’s most lasting legacy: to make otherwise basically competent bureaucrats appear to be saints.
At this rate Cookson will get a bronze statue of his image on a plinth somewhere and a standing alongside the great revolutionary leaders from the ages.
Thirdly, and this is a little more tenuous to link to Cookson’s siege of the Bastille than the first two, there is the news of the dismissal by Belkin of Luis Leon Sanchez for being named in “too many” doping affairs.
“His name crops up in too many files,” said a Belkin spokesman, which could signal the end of the Spaniard’s career.
The team settled with the rider so that it could not be taken to court over the matter, but the fact that the team said that the “confidence between the team and Sanchez has been broken” sets a much overdue precedent that could be taken up by other pro outfits.
Could this have happened under McQuaid? Doesn’t really matter if it could or not, the fact is that it never did. I suspect that Belkin whiffed the smell of change in the air also thanks to Cookson’s ascendency too, and that this played its part.
And so yes, I think these three developments signal the potential for our confidence in the governing body to come out of hibernation.
The times, they might just be a-changin’.
this article originally appeared on The Roar
this article originally appeared on The Roar
There was a moment in Sunday’s World Championships with only about a quarter of the mammoth race left to go when I caught a glimpse of Simon Clarke sitting at the back of a whittled lead pack, all alone and doing his own thing.
Whereas Clarke had nothing other to do than take care of himself, by contrast there were still some 5 Italians grouped like hungry barracuda at the front, looking twitchy and slightly nervous.
Sure, there can be advantages to being with teammates. You know the wheel in front and behind well, and that brings comfort as you hurtle through corners and downhill.
There’s always a guy there to hand over a wheel on case of an untimely flat, or to cadge some food off if you run out. And, crucially, there’s someone to take you to the line and to chase breaks down.
But then there are disadvantages also, evidence of which littered the men’s road race in Florence, leaving the best laid plans of three major teams in particular strewn across the road like so many of the riders who failed to keep the rubber side down in the wet conditions.
First there’s the pre-race pressure of having a team chock full of heavy hitters. The Italians were in that situation and also had the added stress of being in front of a home crowd. Sure, that will gee you on but the scrutiny also increases with it.
The British team were in a similar situation as were the Spanish and the largely unheralded Colombians, one of whom, Uran Uran, almost made it to the final kilometer with a chance, only to take a heavy and painful fall on a grass verge.
Then there’s the need to be able to constantly re-think tactics in-race. We saw that when Filippo Pozzato went awol inexplicably with still a long way to go, needing to be ferried back to the front by teammates, forcing all the team’s focus onto Vincenzo Nibali.
Similar with the Brits, who for some unknown reason spent all their powder in the early stages sitting at the front with Cavendish doing a massive turn, only for one rider after another to fall away into obscurity.
For them though it wasn’t so much a re-thinking as a battle of survival, and they looked very poor across the board on Sunday, prompting their coach Rod Ellingworth to question their commitment.
“Having a British jersey on their backs, they should be very disappointed,” he said later of Froome and Wiggins.
“I think it’s just not his type of weather,” said Geraint Thomas of Wiggins, a very curious thing to say of an Englishman.
Finally there is the sense of expectation that builds as the race goes on and your team is looking strong. The Italians looked for all the world like they would have the firepower to smash the race open, as they almost did a couple of times, but that can lead to over-work, over-thinking and over-confidence, as at times there are just too many possible options.
But there throughout it all was Simon Clarke, pedaling along, having to do nothing other than stay out of trouble. Another rider in the same position was Rui Costa, of whom no one spoke about until the last few kilometers.
If ever a budding racer wants to watch a display of steely composure and cycling intelligence, they need only sit down and watch a replay of the finale of this race.
A smart rider knows that to win a race you have to be prepared to lose it, and Costa demonstrated that brilliantly on Sunday. With Nibali desperately trying to chase down Joaquim Rodriguez of Spain with Alejandro Valverde on his wheel and imploring Costa to work too, the Portuguese rider simply shook his head and stayed at the back.
Rodriguez and Valverde had the numerical superiority but not the legs, and there seemed some discontent from Rodriguez at his teammate’s display, as though he expected more counter-attacks from the Movistar leader.
Nibali was the strongest rider there by a notch or two, though his chase from a fall earlier had him slightly depleted, and his nerves frayed on the final descent.
Not Costa’s though. He kept calm and pounced at the last possible moment, having sat in for so long of the race. To win, of course, you only have to go faster than everyone else for one single moment – but that moment has to be the right one.
And there it was. The first ever Portuguese winner of the World road race. A year in Rainbow for a few kilometers of tactical brilliance and a whole truck load of cool.
No teammates around, no support, nothing to do but let the others do the work.
A worthy champion of an epic race.
yep, get yer fix and the lowdown here on Lee’s Lowdown on PEZ!
we were feeling good for this one, Tjarco and I, knowing after the ITT that we had decent enough legs, but the route was not exactly one to inspire confidence – not in me anyway.
the exact same route as the TT, it was 5km down a flat road to a u-turn, then back up 5km to another. i’m no sprinter and i knew it would be very hard to get away, as we were pretty much marked men in this race. the plan was for us to do nothing til the very end, when i’d try from 4km out and then Tjarco, a good sprinter, would take over if i failed.
but, as ever, the best-made plans tend to crumble when faced with the realities of bike racing…
after 105km of the 140km race we ended up in a situation where there were 5 guys up the road, two from the OCBC team and three others. they started shelling guys at the 30km to go point and still then had just over 2 minutes lead on the peloton, which was largely still together. irritatingly, they’d actually increased it by 25 seconds over the last 10km lap.
just before the turn Tjarco said to me “ok i’m gonna do a 5km chase., this lead is too big.”
i looked at him and said “no, i’ll do it, then you win – ok?”
without waiting for an answer i headed to the front after the turn and started to ride an ITT with 50 guys on my wheel. after 5km the lead was visibly down, after 10 it was under a minute, and 5 later we had them.
then the attacks began, with Tjarco covering them, sometimes me. all during the chase for those 15km i kept thinking ‘ok after we catch them i will drop off, job done’ but i couldn’t seem to do that. the legs were hurting but i wanted to help Tjarco in any way i could. that is the great thing about riding 100% for someone else, it frees you completely.
with 4km to go Tjarco says he needs a lead out. damn. well, ok, let’s see what happens! this is it boys, do or die time!
i get on the front with about 1.5 km to go and get my head down and thrash, i’m going fast but fading slightly, when suddenly my friend Adam Taylor-Campbell of the Mavericks pops out in front of me in a bid for the line. perfect timing. i chase his wheel then thrust past him and with 300 to go, still with my nose in front, Tjarco bursts past on the left and i sit up, straining like a meercat to see whose arms go aloft at the line.
and mine go up too. i catch him on the turn and we hug and he immediately thanks me for my work – i tell him it’s a good flipping job he won! or there’d have been trouble.
and there it was. after excellent early work from Stephen Ong and a teammate I just met and whose name I cannot remember, and from Michel Velasco, despite having been injured for weeks, and from Tong Yong Kun, this was truly a team win in this usually individualistic sport.
i got 20th, the pack having been shredded, but it was the most rewarding and satisfying race of my career, after the Tour de Taiwan points classification.
and a word to the OCBC guys – not a great idea to keep attacking the bunch when you have two guys up the road – that’s a certain way to make old men very grumpy indeed…
one last word to our beleagured manager, Brandon Teo. there may be raised voices, there may be stress, but at the ends of the day, when the job is done, it all comes together! great job, Mr. B! and a huge thank you to all our sponsors, including the team sponsors Lapierre Bikes, Wishbone wheels, CCN Clothing, Monotine and Bryton, as well as my personal sponsors: Lezyne, Specialized, 720 Armour, Infinit Nutrition, Ritchey, Selle San Marco and Xtreme Endurance.
this article was written by cp and originally appeared in The Roar
The drama and tension is supposed to belong on the road, not off it. Not in stuffy offices with strip lighting and Ikea desks, the characters wearing Hush Puppies and blue suits rather than Sidis and lycra.
Yet the battle this time isn’t for a stage win or a Tour jersey, but for the soul of the sport, and if the battle ground must be a dreary municipal courtroom in Switzerland rather than the majestic hairpins of Alpe d’Huez, then so be it.
Just yesterday news came through that Swiss Cycling had withdrawn its nomination of Pat McQuaid for the UCI presidential election, coming next month, a statement that was quickly denied by McQuaid, just before he ran off, chased in black and white by a gang of Keystone Cops.
He really does seem to live in a parallel universe, Mr McQuaid, in some farcical land where facts seem not to matter.
‘Dodge and deny’ seems to be his motto. That it’s stood him in such good stead until now is quite incredible.
“The managing committee of Swiss cycling has returned to its decision of 13 May 2013 regarding the nomination of Pat McQuaid and decided to withdraw the nomination of Pat McQuaid for his re-election to the presidency of the UCI,” the statement from Swiss Cycling read.
It’s worth remembering McQuaid was already bending the rules in seeking the nomination from Swiss Cycling, after Cycling Ireland had gathered its members to vote ‘no’ to the question or whether to back him for a third term as UCI president.
McQuaid’s interpretation of the rules did not align with the majority of people who care about cycling, and when voices of unrest began to be heard (despite McQuaid having a finger in each ear and singing ‘la-la-la-la’ at the top of his voice), he then scuttled off to Malaysia to ask their cycling federation to ask for a new amendment to the UCI rule that pertained to his case.
His position is now unenviable, and it looks for all intents and purposes as though this duck has had his day. But then, this is McQuaid.
He has shown to date a disregard for the valid concerns of the cycling fan and a refusal to accept the severity and depth of the problem this sport has with banned substances, preferring instead to preen his feathers and ignore any calls for real change.
The women’s side of the sport has been grossly neglected and the growth of cycling in Asia in particular is being encouraged with disregard to proper drug testing.
But what of the alternatives? Well, we have just one. I am dismayed by this, to think that our choice is limited to just two candidates.
The other candidate is Brian Cookson, who now looks to be set to win the election by default, not something, really, to cheer about, no matter the circumstances.
Cookson has been saying encouraging things and, though it is no real comfort, cannot possibly be worse at the job than McQuaid has been.
“The important principle in any democracy is that you must respect the rules as they are, not how you’d like them to be,” said Cookson, speaking of McQuaid’s position after Swiss Cycling left him high and dry.
“My hope remains that we have a democratic process based on the rules of the race when it started rather than those made up half way through.
“For my part I remain focussed on setting out the policies and the vision that I believe is needed for the UCI and the sport of cycling to move forward.”
A vision? Move forward? I’ll believe it when I see it.
I once described Pat McQuaid’s presidency of the world cycling governing body, the UCI, as resembling a banana republic.
In retrospect, that was a bit harsh on banana republics.
Defined as ‘A small nation dependent on one crop or the influx of foreign capital’, the term doesn’t even come close to encapsulating the charade that the UCI truly is.
Whilst the UCI under the Irishman has essentially ignored and denigrated all aspects of cycling other than the cash cow with the golden udders that is the top tier of the sport – including young rider development, anti-doping and the women’s side of the sport, relying truly on ‘one crop’ – it is far worse than that staid definition of ‘banana republic’.
There’s a reason why a character with such dubious personality traits as Lance Armstrong thrived for so long under the presidencies of Hein Verbruggen (1991-2005) and then McQuaid (2005-), and it is this – his modus operandi perfectly complimented the goals of the governing body under those two gentlemen.
Verbruggen wanted a star system to propel his vision of cycling in the 90s, a desire so great that his henchmen – from coaches, doctors, journalists to riders – turned a blind eye even when young rider began dying in droves in the early 90s.
How did they die? From abusing EPO, the ‘wonder drug’ that fueled the star system and created the supermen that held the cycling world in thrall in that era.
It was, for sponsors, TV companies and the governing body alike, a match made in heaven. For anyone with a shred of a conscience however, they recognized that though the money men saw the marriage as divine, the details of the deal had been thrashed out a far darker place.
Verbruggen left in 2005 (but remains as ‘honorary president’, a misnomer if ever there was one), allowing his hand-picked successor to slip in seamlessly onto the velvet throne.
McQuaid then began a ‘business-as-usual’ reign that continues to this day, despite the trials and tribulations – and they have been massive – that his ship has been beset by.
Why, had the Titanic been even half as robust as McQuaid’s presidency it could have sailed into Antartica and split that great frozen waste in two.
An iceberg? Pffffft. No worries. Get the gin & tonics ready.
It’s like a giant Hummer with desks and rubber stamps. Bullet-proof glass, bomb-proof underside, armour plated doors, paper weights, clip-on ties and lots of Hush Puppies.
Look out: Uber-Bureaucracy is rumbling into town, and it’s gone quite insane.
How so? Well, here where’s the madness reaches new heights.
McQuaid recently suffered the ignominy of having his bid for backing for re-election as UCI President from Cycling Ireland chucked out on its shell like into a murky Dublin back alley, which sent him all a-huffin’ and a-puffin’ to Switzerland.
Once there and after a quick session of chocolate freebasing and checking out the latest trends in leather shorts, our dear Prez then managed to get the executive of Swiss Cycling to back his re-election bid.
All seemed fine. Phew! But invariably, just as when you’re smelling the flower and you realize you’re up to your knees in sheep crap, there were mumblings about the legitimacy of being backed for the presidency by any federation other than the candidate’s national body.
McQuaid bluff and blustered his way through the questions, maintaining that his bid was legitimate and that there was no legal impediment to Swiss Cycling backing him.
But then some noisy little brats from Swiss Cycling began to complain. Then a date was set for a hearing into the legitimacy of that backing, August 22nd, a hearing McQuaid cannot be certain he will win.
To add to his woes, someone else – shocker! – decided they’d throw their hat into the presidential ring – Brian Cookson.
And it seems he doesn’t have much time for Our Pat, and that he has the backing of some influential figures in the game. With most cycling fans tired of seeing the Verbruggen/McQuaid Dynasty ruling over the sport, Cookson has the hesitant support of many – hesitant because we don’t really know if Cookson will be good for the sport, but then, well, how could he be worse?
So, game over for Pat?
Not a chance. Pat came up with a brilliant plan.
To become Japan.
Not in a literal sense obviously. As an archipelago consisting of 6,852 islands, even Pat would find that transformation tricky.
No, he’s becoming Japan in that, like the sushi-loving nation, he’s spreading his tentacles far and wide to disparate nations garner support for himself in a time of dire need.
As Japan seeks support from African nations that don’t even have a coastline to help them fight anti-whaling initiatives, so McQuaid has gone to the Malaysian and Moroccan cycling federations to enlist their help in trying to overturn the ruling concerning any presidential bid requiring the backing of the candidate’s national body.
The Malaysian boys sent this letter over recently, stating the proposed change, read out to the press by UCI Director General Christophe Hubschmind (exactly – who?):
“In their letter proposing the amendment, the Malaysian Federation and ACC [Asian Cycling Confederation] state that their aim is to reinforce the independence of future UCI Presidents by ensuring they are able to carry out the role based on serving the global interests of cycling, independently from those of any single nominating National Federation.
“Under the proposal, in addition to the current rule for nominating candidates, any two National Federations would also be entitled to nominate a candidate to stand for President of the UCI.”
“The independence of future presidents…”
“…serving the global interests of cycling…”
I’d call it Machiavellian if it wasn’t so incredibly, um, un-Machiavellian.
This is altogether more SchoolYardian.
The ruling, if passed, would be backdated to support Pat’s nomination. Yup, dated at the time of passing but rolled back to allow it to be brought to bear to help McQuaid.
So, this is not about ‘future’ presidents at all – is it all about the current one.
Amazingly, I’m not the only one that has spotted the overtones of the tin-pot dictator here.
“What sort of organisation attempts to rewrite the rules once an election has actually begun?” asked Brian Cookson. “It smacks of attempted dictatorship.
“It is surely completely out of order to allow a proposal to change an electoral procedure, once that procedure is underway” continued Cookson.
“These proposals should never have been permitted onto the agenda, let alone given the validity of acceptance for the current election, especially considering that the UCI Management Committee have not even had the opportunity to discuss the matter.
“There is certainly no provision in the Constitution, as it now stands, for nomination by more than one federation.”
Why Morocco and Malaysia? Who knows? Could they have been promised something in return for this backing? Surely not – how could you think such a thing?
Or could it be that the Tour de Langkawi was very much Pat’s love child and that he’s now calling in the chips?
Again, you’re way too cynical – banish such thoughts from your dim little mind.
The twists and turns of this murky little plot couldn’t be written by even the hammiest scriptwriter.
Get your seatbelts on. We have quite a few more cliff-edge hairpins coming up.
*This article originally appeared here, on The Roar
up for today’s tongue lashing is the UCWhy. crankpunk likes a little treat before bed with his coco but unfortunately there will be none for some time – possibly months – because the UCI has taken all the biscuits! the crafty cookie-snafflers!
first of all we had the venerable prez of the body that represents (allegedly) world cycling stating the other day that the UCI hadn’t been resting on its decaying laurels and in fact it really had been busy in recent months. he then produced a backdated ‘to do’ list which quite clearly proved that fact:
1. buy marshmallows
2. clean ears
3. watch steam coming from kettle
4. become a better human being
5. f**king ignore 4.
6. fill in 7-10 later
11. do something somehow someday about that stuff, uh, dammit, and find out how to get this crap to go away
13. ! buy large broom and massive f**king carpet
so what have the UCI been up to now? well, if you remember, a few months they announced that they would setting up an ‘independent’ commission (!) to investigate their links to LA, then decide hmmm that wasn’t really such a great idea, with Pat saying this:
“I am sorry that it has to be abandoned but we could not afford the money that we wanted to spend on it.”
then he announced that ‘in June’ he would be setting up another independent commission to look at the LA ties and at the UCI’s finances. now it seems it is finally happening, next week in Russia, when the UCI and, thankfully, WADA will meet to decide who will sit on the 3-member panel. now, let me not be hasty and start doubting the integrity of a panel that is at least half-approved by the very body it is supposed to be investigating – it could be that the panel does a great and thorough job and we finally get to the bottom of this.
but then, going off past history… well, let’s just say that even if you are in possession of a full tank of high-grade oxygen, i would still advise you don’t hold that breath.
when the UCI pulled that previous panel, USADA leader Travis Tygart wearily noted that “they [the UCI] disbanded the independent commission that was set up at the very time it began to actually act independent.” we need this, so badly. and it has to be done right. it can’t be another UCI fudge-job.
Tygart summed up the feelings of many, when he spoke the other day: “We have seen nothing. It has been over seven months since our report and their declaration that they needed to take decisive action. So, of course, we are frustrated.”
they really are treating us like idiots, it is incredible. and this is just a sporting body. i mean, imagine if our government was like this? oh, wait…
now, Pat just had an opinion piece in CyclingSnooze, in which he went on about all the great work the UCI was doing, quoting from a survey conducted for the UCI by Deloitte which praised the UCI’s day-to-day relations with the cycling world, but noted himself that:
‘The executive summary makes six ‘crucial’ recommendations to enable cycling to achieve its ‘bright future’:
• We must restore the credibility of cycling and the public perception of the sport;
• A decision needs to be made quickly whether to hold an independent inquiry into the Armstrong affair and whether to offer riders an ‘amnesty’ or reduced sanctions for coming forward to that enquiry;
• The UCI needs to develop a long-term strategic plan for cycling;
• We should further strengthen the anti-doping culture that already exists in the UCI;
• We need to improve our relationship with WADA; and
• We need to restructure the pro-cycling calendar.
The report summary also makes five additional ‘high-priority’ recommendations. They are:
• To increase the independence of the Cycling Anti-Doping Foundation (CADF);
• To appoint an independent anti-doping body to sanction professional riders caught doping;
• To review the existing points system for pro-teams;
• To focus on developing women’s cycling;
• To improve our communication with professional road riders.
now, is it just me, or shouldn’t the first half of these be the UCI’s job in the first place? and, erm, shouldn’t the second half too?
so, Pat, let me get this right, the UCI is doing great! but not in fact doing any of the things that it should be doing… great work amigo, keep it up!
you know, if i had a report card like that from my job, i’d be out on my ass. seriously…
he ended his opinion piece by saying this:
‘Cycling has an extremely bright future.’
*NOTICE – i don;t know why certain words are linked, i didn’t do it but can’t stop it. that sucks, apologies.