UCI won't recognise Paris-Nice

Kléber

Not to disagree with you Iain. Indeed, Stapleton should have cleared out the stables at T-Mobile, got rid of the dodgy backroom staff and suspicious riders, but he wasn't fully in charge and probably starry-eyed in front of the bigger names. Maybe signing Hincapie was a mistake but if Big George said "I want to escape Bruyneel", and is willing to embrace new ways, why not?

But I think he's only guilty of pushing the widening the gap between expectation and reality, compared to most team managers he is a saint. Hopefully he has learned some lessons and can apply them now. I'm withholding judgment until I see how the team behave this year.

DaveyL

iainf72 wrote:

Until you stand a good chance of being caught for doping, doping will continue. In the longer term what possible good can the models adopted by HR or Slipstream do?

It's nice marketing for the current climate but it's no solution.

Listen to the Vaughters interview on Competitor Radio, where he outlines his philosophy and how he thinks it's going to work, then see if you want to change your mind.

As for the constant mud-slinging in Stapleton's direction, give it a rest. You'd have us believe he's worse than guys like Saiz.

alanmcn1

I just can't follow that logic at all on Stapleton and Slipstream. The reason the French attitude has not impacted on cycling is because the Italians, Spanish, US, german attitudes swamped them. There is now a chance to reverse that trend.

This is starting to appear as a rather unobjective viewpoint?

iainf72

DaveyL wrote:

As for the constant mud-slinging in Stapleton's direction, give it a rest. You'd have us believe he's worse than guys like Saiz.

Saiz isn't treated as the saviour of cycling.

Bob is.

It's just an opinion

DaveyL

By whom?

iainf72

DaveyL wrote:

By whom?

Some people on this thread. :P

I would like the sport to clean up but I don't believe what CSC, Astana, High Road or Slipstream are doing has any value in that fight. Let's have one set of rules and testing that everyone can believe in and then we'll have sport which can be taken forward.

Richrd2205

iainf72 wrote:

DaveyL wrote:

By whom?

Some people on this thread. :P

I would like the sport to clean up but I don't believe what CSC, Astana, High Road or Slipstream are doing has any value in that fight. Let's have one set of rules and testing that everyone can believe in and then we'll have sport which can be taken forward.

I agree totally with this & have just written something similar in another thread. The downside of this issue is that it'll take leadership from someone. Anyone feel the UCI are up to the job?

My not-very-positive view of the UCI has steadily been eroded over the past few years & this latest storm in a teacup is a highlight of their apparent inability to govern anything, let alone a sport in ongoing crisis. Still less a daring, ground-breaking and challenging program taking on vested interests.

(I also started a thread on this issue at the same time as this thread last night, apologies for any confusion caused)

alanmcn1

I think as long as UCI are in charge you will never get that one set of rules. It needs a shake up, and i think ASO might deliver it. Like i said, here's hoping

iainf72

alanmcn1 wrote:

I think as long as UCI are in charge you will never get that one set of rules. It needs a shake up, and i think ASO might deliver it. Like i said, here's hoping

ASO are using the French Federation for anti-doping. And ASO's history on caring about doping shouldn't give anyone much hope.

We need a cross sport body which looks after this stuff.

deejay

Ha well here we go.

Fact, the ASO (french) have the Product. ie The Top Races including the TDF.

Fact, the ASO have sponsors Queueing at their doors

Fact, the UCI (Mc Twit) blustered about last June/July and then backed down.

Fact, Mc Twit is doing it again and who cares
He has signed a bit of paper he says ( a la Chamberlain) with several Countries Federations and he still has only a few events for his stupid Pro Tour.

Fact, There are no Pro Tour Races in between TDU and Flanders so what do's Mc Twit think these sponsors are paying the riders for. He is unbelievable.

Question :- With all these posts here about High Road etc then how is the Tour of Germany and German Fed still in league with him when he still supports the Druggies teams.

Bruyneel and the astana team will still earn loads of dosh riding in the USA and that might be, really the market Kasakstan are aiming at anyway.

vermooten

This made me laugh. It's the UCI's mission statement:

The aims of the UCI are as follows:

* regulating cycling at international level;
* promoting cycling in every country throughout the world and at all levels;
* organizing the World Championships for all disciplines;
* encouraging friendly relations between members of the cycling family; :roll:
* promoting sporting ethics and fair play;
* representing the sport of cycling and defending its interests on national and international bodies;
* collaborating with the International Olympic Committee with respect to Olmpic cycling events.

I wonder if, it is really goes ahead with ignoring Paris-Nice, that the UCI is acting against its own mission? (i.e. those bits in bold) If so will McQuaid's head explode like the many robots that exploded when Captain Kirk used logic against them? I hope so.

I agree with an earlier post, I suspect that the development of the bio passport isn't going according to plan ...

iainf72

deejay wrote:

Question :- With all these posts here about High Road etc then how is the Tour of Germany and German Fed still in league with him when he still supports the Druggies teams.

Bit slow tonight, sorry - Who is in league with who?

Richrd2205

vermooten wrote:

This made me laugh. It's the UCI's mission statement:

The aims of the UCI are as follows:

* regulating cycling at international level;
* promoting cycling in every country throughout the world and at all levels;
* organizing the World Championships for all disciplines;
* encouraging friendly relations between members of the cycling family; :roll:
* promoting sporting ethics and fair play;
* representing the sport of cycling and defending its interests on national and international bodies;
* collaborating with the International Olympic Committee with respect to Olmpic cycling events.

I wonder if, it is really goes ahead with ignoring Paris-Nice, that the UCI is acting against its own mission? (i.e. those bits in bold) If so will McQuaid's head explode like the many robots that exploded when Captain Kirk used logic against them? I hope so.

I agree with an earlier post, I suspect that the development of the bio passport isn't going according to plan ...

Oh! That's a shock!!!!
There's no mention of annoying sponsors & fans, nor of opposing any form of innovation...

"encouraging friendly relations between members of the cycling family" this one's hilarious! I've not noticed them being glowing to some branches of the cycling family at all, perhaps they mean "...relations between members of the UCI approved cycling family"
Maybe I missed any mention of them at IHPV events & ASO & UCI are friends really.

Whilst it might be about money, I suspect it's alpha male posturing, with more testosterone than intelligence. The exact same spat last year was a failure, so why would it work this time round?

iainf72

It's going to be interesting to see what the teams decide to do

micron

What has all the fuss been about with Astana? Not letting the defending TdF winner ride. This is the ultimate prize in the sport, winning the Tour. The Worlds have some cachet but the Olympics are really a bit of a joke (Bettini's gold trimmings, anyone?). At the end of the day, the riders want to be the winner of the Tour or the Giro, the winner of Paris-Roubaix. Will they (and the sponsors) trade those prestigious races for Flanders and the Worlds?

I think McQuaid is going the right way about getting the UCI discredited by WADA and having cycling thrown out of the Olympics - they have no love for each other and now he is letting things spiral totally out of his control. I'm sure WADA will be happy for the FFC to run drug testing - they have shown their commitment to anti doping for many years, unlike the UCI.

Perhaps a 'premier league' wouldn't be a bad thing - I really don't think ASO & RCS could make a worse job of running things than the UCI

Moomaloid

Can someone tell me what the problem is with Stapleton. From what i've seen he's tried to do nothing but good. So he signed George who has a question mark against him. Everything he's done is for the good of the sport no?

To individual cases of doping, dealt with, rescued the team when the sponor pulled out, cut ties with the german doctors... i may be looking through unsure hope filled rose tinted glasses, but can someone advise as to why people are attacking stapleton.

It just comes across that people are just always wanting to put these people's efforts down, and just speak of doom and gloom. I could well just have missed a load evidence against him, please let me know??

deejay

iainf72 wrote:

deejay wrote:

Question :- With all these posts here about High Road etc then how is the Tour of Germany and German Fed still in league with him when he still supports the Druggies teams.

Bit slow tonight, sorry - Who is in league with who?

Must be !
With the germans giving us the holier than thou attitude and all the other bullsh*t after German Telecom made their Fortune from East German Drugs (never failed a Test)
Now they say they are respectable and claim the High Ground by renaming the team the High Road.

Well the Tour of Germany and the Hamburg Sprint are still part of his Pro Scene and Mc Duff still supports a team of personnel who have been involved with drugs for 3/4 years.
The Astana background staff have been collected from known devious sources like Liberty Seguros etc.
Maybe the German media want more drug problems outside their country.
So now you get me to answer my own Question ! ! Doh
Good Night and I'm off to Het Volk and K-B-K tomorrow.

nwallace

The cycling model seem to be a mess.

There is a large element of Compulsion in Football and Motorsports.

If Rangers tried to break away from the SFA, they would loose any chance of getting into UEFA competition. And they need the money from that.

If McLaren got Fed up of Bernie (and a few teams did recently) they could not use the F1 Name, F1 rule book etc. They would have to devise an entirley new formula. The FIA can't stop them doing it BUT they would be unlikely to make it an FIA World Championship. The German Touring Cars tried to create their own Internatonal Touring Car championship (THe ITC) in the 90s and it failed after a couple of seasons taking the DTM with it. Thankfully the FIA have seen it fit to create and sell the rights to a World Championship in Touring Cars using the Super One rules.
But unlike F1 which is a protected name, Touring cars isn't and anyone can use the Group A, N and T homologation requirements to form a series based on road cars.
Organisers are also very limited in what they can do as in Most countries like the UK the government has nominated organisations that can sanction events. This means you have to follow the MSA rulebook for your events otherwise the RTA takes effect if it is possible for the public to gain access whether paid or not.

Where is the compulsion in Cycling?
The French don't give a toss about the rule book anyway and have THE name in international Cycling (TDF).
Winning the TDF is bigger than the Rainbow Jersey or Olympic Jersey for Road Racing in terms of recognition at least.
The ASO have the ability to sink the UCI on that Alone.

Just like as I have said before, exactly what the FFSA did to FIA Grand Turisimo and sports Car Racing with Le Mans.
Admittedly Group C had collapsed, WSC and WEC were hopeless and the FIA were stuffed.

It's all so similar a situation.

Then there is the Olympics.......
Boxing is still Amature, Pros can't enter. With 5(?) different "world" sanctioning bodies that's not a surprise.
Olympics GB can't enter a Soccer team because the FAW, FOI , FA and SFA would all have to be involved and are worried that FIFA would stop recognising them.

The UCI is the IOC registered body though since the UCI only deal with Uprights who is recognised for Hand cycles etc in the "Para"lympics? (In a world where integration is meant to be being achieved isn't it nice to see that the IOC is still in the 1800s).

If the UCI took the huff and started banning riders for taking part in non-sanctioned events (This has happened in football, An SFA registered player can't play in a SJFA match and vice versa, and there was an irish player who played in a GAA match and received a ban or Fine)
Road Riders would find themselves forced to make a choice, Be able to take part in the Olympics or take part in the TdF, VaE and GdI.

iainf72

Moomaloid wrote:

Can someone tell me what the problem is with Stapleton. From what i've seen he's tried to do nothing but good. So he signed George who has a question mark against him. Everything he's done is for the good of the sport no?

No. I don't mean to be like a stuck record (I should get a blog that I can just do linky to I guess) and I don't want to appear overly negative, however, we've all been lied to often enough and IMO, if you're talking a grandious talk, you better be walking the walk. And Bob is not.

T-Mobile 07 under Stapleton was nothing but a marketing exercise. Kept talking about a revolutionary anti-doping program which turned out to be paying the NADA for additional testing (because we all know how effective that is) and "blood volume" testing designed by the team responsible for blood transfusions for T-Mobile 06. The teams DS admits, under huge pressure, that yes, he doped on Telekom. But this wasn't up front, he didn't admit it when he was first taking over the job so either Bob was lied too or kept us in the dark. So why is Bob keeping Aldag? He knows the score, he's been around and he knows how to hide doping. Is he there to run a clean team or for a different reason? He's also employed Peiper and if you've read his book he's got an interesting attitude to doping.

T-Mobile 07 kept an interesting trio of riders in Honchar (caught talking about doping on camera), Sinkewitz and Mick Rogers (both coached by Ferrari) Now, Honchar was obviously very dodgy and wouldn't you know it he got fired - Wow guys, look our tests work! Sinkewitz rewarded the team well too - But he only used the testosterone once and he got caught, didn't he? Some might believe that, I don't.

It was also reported that there were some questions raised about Sinkewitz before his positive which were sent to Aldag. He didn't do much about them.

While all this is going on, Bob has got the cheek to go on about their new way etc.

Late 07 it emerges that possible / probably the entire T-Mobile squad from 06 used blood transfusions in the Tour. All of them, except Mick Rogers have been busted so far. Bob says he's asked Mick and he's said he didn't do anything like that. Great - That's fine...or is it? While perhaps he's saying this publically, the ever transparant Bob appears to have sidelined Mick a bit, certainly in the early part of the year and as CFA pointed out, Hincapie got all the focus at the team presentation.

And now we've got Hincapie - Well. Let's see, he seems a great fit, doesn't he? Probably had a lot to do with T-Mobile pulling their money. Everyone loves to assume Astana are still dodgy - But they're on the Damsgaard program which is by all accounts better than the ACE program. So, remind me, what's stopping George being dodgy?

Bob admits he was naive - Well, that's nice but he's in charge of 50+ people's livelivhoods in a small industry. Don't write cheques you can't cash. And the media give him such an easy time as well - That's the bit that makes me feel ill. Maybe a lot of it is to do with the past but he needed to clean out properly and do his homework. He didn't and that makes him a failure in my eyes.

Kléber

A fair points.

One test I have to the attitude of riders and teams is there openness to talk about doping. Try asking an Astana rider about blood doping, or ask Quick-Step about cortico-steroids, or many other riders on many other teams and they'll clam up up best or even walk out on the interview. Astana tried to start a human rights crusade, claiming doping controls were annoying, although the complaints only surfaced when Vino and Kash got busted. of course. Or look how other pros whinge about having to take tests, every week cyclingnews has a rider saying "it's tiring, the doping control guys wanted a sample at 11pm". They should be welcoming the controls, not bemoaning them.

Ask a High Road rider and they'll say they're working for a cleaner sport, that they realise the way to go is to be clean. A team that can support an environment where the likes of Cavendish or Wiggins are allowed to improve without doping is much better than many other teams.

This isn't to excuse Stapelton's hypocrisy and naivety along the way- Aldag has too many question marks for example - but the culture of the team has improved a lot and if there were more teams with an attitude like this, sure pro cycling would be better?

iainf72

Kléber wrote:

Or look how other pros whinge about having to take tests, every week cyclingnews has a rider saying "it's tiring, the doping control guys wanted a sample at 11pm". They should be welcoming the controls, not bemoaning them.

Mmmmm - Maybe. If you were racing and someone pitched up at 11pm wanting a blood and urine sample + all the admin, you wouldn't be too pleased.

And wasn't it reported the T-Mobile riders were a bit awkward about the test that nabbed Sinkewitz?

calvjones

I think this comes down to whether you believe Bob is maliciously hypocritical and tacitly allowing of doping, or straightforwardly/naively willing to ignore pre-07 indiscretions becuase he genuinely thinks that's the best way forward.

Never the twain shall meet.

If there was a 2 mandatory year ban for crimes against spellling this thread would never be invited to any Bees :evil:

LangerDan

calvjones wrote:

I think this comes down to whether you believe Bob is maliciously hypocritical and tacitly allowing of doping, or straightforwardly/naively willing to ignore pre-07 indiscretions becuase he genuinely thinks that's the best way forward.

Never the twain shall meet.

If there was a 2 mandatory year ban for crimes against spellling this thread would never be invited to any Bees :evil:

Goodbye, see you in 2010

iainf72

LangerDan wrote:

Goodbye, see you in 2010

He'll only be spelling for Rock Racing.

Kléber

iainf72 wrote:

Mmmmm - Maybe. If you were racing and someone pitched up at 11pm wanting a blood and urine sample + all the admin, you wouldn't be too pleased.

Maybe but I wouldn't whinge to the media about it. What are the doping control people supposed to do, book a lunchtime appointment with you weeks in advance? Besides in a job that involves 7 hours of Paris-Roubaix, alpine mountain stages and half the year living in 2* hotels, a quick piss in a pot isn't the hardest bit of the job.

Like I say, you can talk to many riders on High Road and they condemn doping and dopers openly. Compare this to many other riders and their "I just want to talk about the race", try asking Leipheimer if he feels whether dopers have robbed him of wins, or ask Bettini what three steps he'd propose to clean up the sport. Stapleton is saying to his riders that they just have to do their best and to avoid cutting corners.

iainf72

Kléber wrote:

Like I say, you can talk to many riders on High Road and they condemn doping and dopers openly. Compare this to many other riders and their "I just want to talk about the race", try asking Leipheimer if he feels whether dopers have robbed him of wins, or ask Bettini what three steps he'd propose to clean up the sport. Stapleton is saying to his riders that they just have to do their best and to avoid cutting corners.

I'm not sure about the condeming dopers openly etc - It's not really something that's in most people's natures (IMO) Imagine at work someone was constantly late, yet you and the rest of the people were always on time. I'd bet most people, if asked by management, would not offer an opinion on the guys lateness - Most would probably just not say anything.

That's not a great example but I don't think not talking about it is that odd. Just apply big picture real world to it. Would you go down the Wiggins route of being left to fry by yourself in the sun or would you just keep yer gob shut and get on with it?

DaveyL

calvjones wrote:

I think this comes down to whether you believe Bob is maliciously hypocritical and tacitly allowing of doping, or straightforwardly/naively willing to ignore pre-07 indiscretions becuase he genuinely thinks that's the best way forward.

Never the twain shall meet.

If there was a 2 mandatory year ban for crimes against spellling this thread would never be invited to any Bees :evil:

This is bang on the money and something I've wanted to articulate for a while. It's another scenario which explains away everything iain has pointed out. Stapleton could very well have come in and said "OK guys, I don't care what went on in the past - this is the way we're going to do it from now on. You either sign up to it or you're out." A load of guys (Kessler, Kloeden) decided they weren't going to sign up to it and they moved on. A lot of guys did sign up to it, but some of them though t they could carry on with the doping and get away with it, like Gonchar and Sinkewitz.

You can condemn Stapleton for this, but as said above, it boils down to whether you want to take a pragmatic, or an idealistic, approach to the future of the sport. It links in nicely to the key question of whether you are happy to forgive riders for their past sins if they choose now to turn over a new leaf.

iainf72

DaveyL wrote:

This is bang on the money and something I've wanted to articulate for a while. It's another scenario which explains away everything iain has pointed out. Stapleton could very well have come in and said "OK guys, I don't care what went on in the past - this is the way we're going to do it from now on. You either sign up to it or you're out." A load of guys (Kessler, Kloeden) decided they weren't going to sign up to it and they moved on. A lot of guys did sign up to it, but some of them though t they could carry on with the doping and get away with it, like Gonchar and Sinkewitz.

But that's sort of the point - It's all great saying that but when you have a completely half assed anti-doping approach, taking dubious riders is asking for trouble. Perhaps ACE is an impovement but has there ever been a double blind test done of their system to see if it does work?

Ultimately, most people prefer to see things their own way, not neccessarily the way they happen. Some are desperate to believe in something, so like High Horse, some like me don't believe anything and are happy with that. All I ask is to look at things critically.

It appears most people are nicer and more trusting than me.

andy_wrx

iainf72 wrote:

It's going to be interesting to see what the teams decide to do

Well if you were a team or an individual rider, would you
- side with the ASO camp and get invited to TdF, Giro, Vuelta, Roubaix, etc, etc but , if UCI is serious with its threats, get banned by UCI and not be able to ride in their (dwindling) set of races, the world champs and Olympics
- side with UCI and not be able to ride in Tdf, Giro, etc

Or somehow try to weasel an in-between option so you don't get banned by either side

I see the third option happening !

ninjaslim

Let's get this right the UCI are on the verge of opting out of being involved with the sports premier events.

I'd go for the first option on the basis that my fellow competitors do so together and agree to stick 2 fingers up at the UCI on the basis that they don't organise the premier events that my sponsors want to see us ride.

The UCI appear to be completely out on a limb saying that the ASO has a bad attitude.

As far as sanctions like olympic exclusion go I'd have to set this aside in hope that the UCI realise that they will look a bit redundant and so sort themselves out.