More Threats to Riders who Ride at Paris-Nice
Comments
-
It won't end up like boxing or darts, where you can have two world champions. There will only be one Paris-Roubaix, one Tour de France, one Giro, one Lombardy.
Why not be more relaxed about riders doing other things? It seems petty to punish riders for doing non-UCI races. Like I say, if Wiggins or Millar does a time trial in the UK, is this the same, should they be blocked? Of course not. So why bully riders who want to ride Paris-Nice? Maybe some can do Tirenno-Adriatico but many could be forced to miss out on a week's stage race, ideal preperation for the spring classics. This just reeks of Hein Verbruggen trying to control things and seems beyond reason.0 -
iainf72 wrote:Dave_1 wrote:
Hi Iain, just think part of healing the sport is to gut it of the previous regime...Bruyneel is old school no? The Basso signing shows his true attitude to clean cycling , no? No potential tour winner in their right mind will want to sign for a team lead by JB I think
Maybe, but what does that have to do with the Paris-Nice dispute?
Does Stapleton approaching Valv.Piti show his attitude towards clean cycling?
Stapleton has no history in the sport...JB's is well known...think hoping someone has learned their lessons or assuming innoncence is more reasonable than JB's baggage and brazen attitude0 -
Dave_1 wrote:Stapleton has no history in the sport...JB's is well known...think hoping someone has learned their lessons or assuming innoncence is more reasonable than JB's baggage and brazen attitude
I don't know. Focus on Bruyneel is unhealthy and is part of the reason the sport is in its current state.
Still, don't know what this has got to do with the current dispute?Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
The ASO actually own the races. The UCI are a bunch of bandwagon jumping bullies. Pricks. The UCI have interest in only power and money. Why should they have any right to dictate to the ASO who have managed perfectly well for years without them. Protecting the riders interests? What a risible, laughable statement. The UCI wouldn't care if the entire peleton was doped up th the eyes if noone found out. Have never shown any interest in stamping out doping really, despite the unexplained early deaths of cyclists which may well have been due to blood manipulation. I reckon Thay should all ride Paris Nice and then take the UCI to the Euripean Court of Human rights, and watch them Uturn quicker that a nu labour politician. Petty, vindictive, vicious children the people at the top of the UCI. If I were the ASO I would go nuclear as soon as the Olympics are over, and the last potential stick has been removed from mcQuaid and that b@stard veerbruggen. There will be plenty of time to drag them through the human rights legislation before London.Dan0
-
iainf72 wrote:Dave_1 wrote:Stapleton has no history in the sport...JB's is well known...think hoping someone has learned their lessons or assuming innoncence is more reasonable than JB's baggage and brazen attitude
I don't know. Focus on Bruyneel is unhealthy and is part of the reason the sport is in its current state.
Still, don't know what this has got to do with the current dispute?
Stapleton hasn't been a pro on an EPO fit...part of a sport with these problems...therefore, am willing to give new people the benefit...don't you think same? The old guard have shown they don't have solutions...therefore...clean them out0 -
flattythehurdler wrote:The ASO actually own the races. The UCI are a bunch of bandwagon jumping bullies. Pricks. The UCI have interest in only power and money. Why should they have any right to dictate to the ASO who have managed perfectly well for years without them.
Ummm, I think you'll find the UCI have always performed the functions in question at ASO races.Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
This is as much a question as it is an opinion... given that GB riders like Wiggins and Cavendish 2008 programme is so governed by their track/Olympic events, I had presumed that their wanting to ride the Giro (as opposed to the TdeF) was simply a matter of timing. But with RCS staying within UCI rules I now wonder if the riders saw the UCI / ASO conflict escalating and went for the Giro instead?
Also, now would also be about the time for ASO to invite Astana to the TdeF. :twisted:0 -
looks like both Wiggins and Cavendish are now officially not riding.. what a shame..
full article here
http://sport.guardian.co.uk/cycling/sto ... rss&feed=7
0 -
So, if ASO, AIGCP and the teams have reached agreement where does this leave individual riders if the UCI turn the screw?
http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/t ... ract-14781
Should Wiggins and Cavendish ride?0 -
Outside of rights and wrongs, Astana, Unibet and the Paris Nice, can anyone tell me what is at the root of the embarassing power struggle between the UCI and ASO that is likely to besmirch this sport?
Why are ASO so keen to assert their freedom to choose - even when that choice is practically meaningless?
Why are the UCI so draconian and slapdash in the way they work?
Why are both parties happy to exchange blows knowing that innocent parties are the only ones to get hurt? e.g Unibet, threats of 6 month bans etc...
Please help me understand? BTW has anyone suggested that they go to relate?0 -
jimmerslimmer wrote:Outside of rights and wrongs, Astana, Unibet and the Paris Nice, can anyone tell me what is at the root of the embarassing power struggle between the UCI and ASO that is likely to besmirch this sport?
There is a lot of history but looking at the recent past - There was a bad man called Hein Verbruggen who used to run the UCI. Under his amazing leadership the sport of cycling grew and grew. In some kind of deluded attempt to "globalise" cycling he came up with a brainwave called the UCI ProTour and the idea was the best teams in the best races. Some stuff about ethics was added in and it was all good. They came up with a natty white jersey to show who was performing best overall in a disjointed series of races.
He sold licenses which promised entry to these events etc etc....But in the background, he was trying to steal the organisers lucrative TV rights. He left office to take up a post at the IOC but left his Irish puppet boy Pat McQuaid in charge. The race organisers got a whiff of his masterplan and don't like it one bit, afterall, TV revenue is their source of income.
The organisers want out of the PT, UCI says no and so it begins. Big battle last year and now the main RCS / ASO and Unipublic races are no longer part of the calender. They form a new European calender and the organisers can invite who they like, except the Tour de France which is supposed to invite all the PT teams (says UCI) ASO don't want too, they just want to leave one team out to make it appear to the morons out in public-land that they're tough on doping.
It all boils down to the UCI trying to steal someones revenue. All the organisers would happily accept doping as long as it didn't cause embarrassment but as that can't be promised they use it as some kind of marketing tool.Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
The UCI is doing itself absolutely no favours with its threats. I see AG2R have announced their P-N line up with three foreign riders. Are these riders now going to turn round and tell their employers that they aren't racing incase they get banned? The UCI's actions wont hurt the ASO, only the riders and teams.0
-
Milram-fan wrote:The UCI is doing itself absolutely no favours with its threats. I see AG2R have announced their P-N line up with three foreign riders. Are these riders now going to turn round and tell their employers that they aren't racing incase they get banned? The UCI's actions wont hurt the ASO, only the riders and teams.
I suspect AG2R will agree to pay the riders thru any suspension and not let the lack of racing impact upon contract negotiations?___________________
Strava is not Zen.0 -
If I were the team Directeurs Sportif, I would recruit some decent-ish club riders who will never ride as pros and not mind missing a few months, pay them enough to cover their fines and then everyone is happy - ASO won't have grounds to remove their TdeF invite as the teams are entering, and the real pro riders don't get any UCI bans/sanctions.
If only they had come and asked me first...I was only joking when I said
by rights you should be bludgeoned in your bed0 -
I can't imagine ASO will be too happy with teams sending a bunch of second-stringers... although a Frenchman may actually win this year0
-
Many pros will want to ride the race as part of their build up for the spring classics. It's a big race in itself, Vaughters has said it is David Millar's aim to win it. Threatening riders is no way for the UCI to behave. You can read the email sent by Pat McQuaid to the riders here: http://assets.rug.be/img_art/site/image ... 72280A.pdf
If riders do ride Paris-Nice and it's against the UCI rules to do this, then surely McQuaid should promise to fine them, not make vague statements. Either they're breaking the rules and will get punished, or not. This way riders can make up their own minds and find solutions with their employers. The deliberate uncertainty will only make riders worry more. The UCI can't decide which rules to apply and when, it's hypocritical at best.
I also see McQuaid is dodging a meeting with the French sports minister and ex-rugby coach Bernard Laporte, setting pre-conditions to any meeting. A surefire way to continue the stand-off is to set demands before turning up.
This whole farce is like a soap opera going off the rails with ever more stupid plot twists, I'm now half-expecting a revelation that McQuaid and Prudhomme were swapped in the maternity ward by accident and that Anne Gripper's having an affair with Johan Bruyneel.0 -
ASO need brought under control...they have a monopoly and a mouthpiece of a newspaper . pat is right to threaten and prevent Paris Nice if that is what it takes Rudehomme to wake up0
-
Salsiccia wrote:If I were the team Directeurs Sportif, I would recruit some decent-ish club riders who will never ride as pros and not mind missing a few months, pay them enough to cover their fines and then everyone is happy - ASO won't have grounds to remove their TdeF invite as the teams are entering, and the real pro riders don't get any UCI bans/sanctions.
If only they had come and asked me first...
I suspect this might make for a more interesting race too!___________________
Strava is not Zen.0 -
andy_wrx wrote:Dave_1 wrote:ASO need brought under control...they have a monopoly and a mouthpiece of a newspaper . pat is right to threaten and prevent Paris Nice if that is what it takes Rudehomme to wake up
The UCI needs to be brought under control. McQaeda needs to wake up.
Those both need to wake up.
Both are responsible for the mess at the moment across cycling. The enemy of your enemy isn't always your friend.Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
The UCI needs some focus - to concentrate on administrating the sport and sort out the mess that their intransigence led them to with their 'ostrich' mentality. The UCI have no rights to race promotion, media rights and TV fees for somebody's else's race - apart from the WCs and Olympics. The UCI's credibility is down the toilet IMO and well done to ASO for finally confronting the likes of McQuaid and Verbruggens' emperors' new clothes.Make mine an Italian, with Campagnolo on the side..0
-
They both need to get a grip or risk losing T.V. coverage,why can't they just get in a boxing ring and have 12 rounds might knock some sense into them. :evil:0
-
Kléber wrote:If riders do ride Paris-Nice and it's against the UCI rules to do this, then surely McQuaid should promise to fine them, not make vague statements. Either they're breaking the rules and will get punished, or not. This way riders can make up their own minds and find solutions with their employers. The deliberate uncertainty will only make riders worry more. The UCI can't decide which rules to apply and when, it's hypocritical at best.
Discipling of riders is not carried out directly by the UCI but by the National Federations at the request of the UCI, so McQuaid cannot promise to fine them. I believe there would have to be disciplinary hearings and the relevant level of punishement assigned, up to the 6 months as outlined.
McQuaids position is probably no different to the Home Secretary advising potential offenders of the penalties involved. Its up to others to prosecute and decide on the duration of prision, within the advised tariffs.'This week I 'ave been mostly been climbing like Basso - Shirley Basso.'0 -
LangerDan wrote:Kléber wrote:If riders do ride Paris-Nice and it's against the UCI rules to do this, then surely McQuaid should promise to fine them, not make vague statements. Either they're breaking the rules and will get punished, or not. This way riders can make up their own minds and find solutions with their employers. The deliberate uncertainty will only make riders worry more. The UCI can't decide which rules to apply and when, it's hypocritical at best.
Discipling of riders is not carried out directly by the UCI but by the National Federations at the request of the UCI, so McQuaid cannot promise to fine them. I believe there would have to be disciplinary hearings and the relevant level of punishement assigned, up to the 6 months as outlined.
McQuaids position is probably no different to the Home Secretary advising potential offenders of the penalties involved. Its up to others to prosecute and decide on the duration of prision, within the advised tariffs.
Some questions:
1. Does the UCI have powers to discipline the national federations if they fail or refuse to discipline the riders?
2. Can the UCI not revoke a teams Pro Tour licence and individual rankings without the need for action by the national federations?
3. Can the UCI discipline teams, as opposed to individual riders, without the need for action by the national federations?
Help :?0 -
enjoy_the_ride wrote:1. Does the UCI have powers to discipline the national federations if they fail or refuse to discipline the riders?
2. Can the UCI not revoke a teams Pro Tour licence and individual rankings without the need for action by the national federations?
3. Can the UCI discipline teams, as opposed to individual riders, without the need for action by the national federations?
Help :?
The answers are mostly yes.
http://www.uci.ch/includes/asp/getTarge ... id=MzQ2MTM
But the structure means the national federations should obey the UCI regulations.
All the layers are difficult to follow to be honest. It's kind of like that awkward situation at the moment where it appears the French are in violation of a WADA code - There are so many parties in play that it's difficult to know where the limits lie.Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
Cheers iain. I spent far to much time last night reading your link :oops: see what you mean, not an easy read :shock:
Perhaps the French Federation is thinking of a pre-emptive strike before the UCI either a) bend their arm to discipline the riders/teams, b) get bypassed altogether by the UCI who try to discipline the riders/teams directly and/or c) get disciplined themselves for standing by the riders/teams.
http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/f ... bans-14831
Got to be a joke in there somewhere about how many lawyers does it take to run a bike race!
I bet British Cycling love the timing of all this, what with Ken wanting to bring the TdeF back to London in 2010(?) and BC’s aspirations for 2008 and 2012.0 -
iainf72 wrote:And now CAS is not competent to rule on this problem according to both the UCI and ASO.
STRIKE STRIKE STRIKE.
You really see the world as one big bucket of brown stuff to stir.It's a little like wrestling a gorilla. You don't quit when you're tired. You quit when the gorilla is tired.0 -
Timoid. wrote:
I'm not stirring, I just think it's the best way out.
I also want to watch some racing next week.Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
UCI? ASO? The Teams?
They are all as bad as each other - a bigger bunch of self serving big heads would be hard to find.
You can all go on about the rights, wrongs and collective selfish whining from the UCI and ASO but the teams are just as bad.
This should have been brought to a head by the way Unibet were treated last year (and lets not even go into the two faced behaviour over Basso) but the self serving, "me first", sanctimonious attitude won through yet again. They all deserve each other.
Luckily for us we can choose to rant or simply laugh at the absurdity of it all, we don't depend on this lot working out to make a living like the riders do.0
