Careful with their money....

LangerDan

......or test dodgers.

No license upgrade for Rock Racing
Taking a strategic look at its goals for 2009, Rock Racing made the decision to stick with its UCI Continental Team status for next season instead of upgrading to the UCI Professional Continental level.

USA Cycling's Shawn Farrell had confirmed Rock Racing's application to continue its licensing at the same level. Then Team Owner Michael Ball explained why on Saturday.

"After completing the necessary steps, and weighing the pros and cons of acquiring a UCI Pro Continental License... Rock Racing has determined that a UCI Pro Continental status is not central to furthering our goals for racing internationally, and we are choosing to take a different approach."
"The strength of our roster and the excitement we bring to cycling events worldwide will determine our racing calendar," said Ball.



Is the fact that stepping up a grade will bring them into the mandatory element of the biological passport scheme anything to do with it?


From the UCI site:
Which riders will have a passport?
In 2008, the following riders will participate in the passport program:

• all riders registered with a UCI ProTeam,
• all riders registered with a UCI Professional Continental team which is granted a Wild Card Label,
• riders from any other team designated by the Steering Group.

blazing_saddles

I thought it a very strange decision, for a team with aspirations. Unless smeone can come up with a more plausible reason, I'd say that passports have everything to do with their failure to step up a grade.
Understandable though, given the reputation and record of their roster.
As a consequence, the rumour of a Giro invite, must be wrong.

Some US events will probably struggle to put a field together, next season:-

After Garmin-Chipotle decided to step up to the ProTour level and BMC made the move to a Professional Continental license, Rock Racing remains one of just 12 American men's UCI Continental team licenses, two fewer such teams than last year.

Kléber

I'm hearing they might be using Museeuw bikes next year. All they need is Dr Ferrari as team coach and Willy Voet as team bus driver and they're all set.

leguape

I thought they already had Paul Scott, formerly of ACE, doing their athlete passport scheme or did that never get off the roofrack? Are there obligations on roster numbers which might be a problem for them in terms of budget?

They got invited to ToB last year by asking for an invite (same as LPR) so they probably think that they can keep on using their "youth" appeal to muscle in on races that they fancy with desperate promoters.

dave_1

for a guy who talks the talk, the owner of Rock is not going up a level...it's perhaps clever marketing of the team. Maybe his brand, his finances, have been hurt bad by the slide in the US economy? You'd have expected him to be in our faces with a move up...but no. I think maybe he thinks running a team of ex-dopers who are still damn good, can win, and in an uneducated market in America, that he can get away with it but with wins...

LangerDan

leguape wrote:

I thought they already had Paul Scott, formerly of ACE, doing their athlete passport scheme or did that never get off the roofrack? Are there obligations on roster numbers which might be a problem for them in terms of budget?
.

Even if Paul Scott is on board, there is no obligation on a team to share the data with WADA or the UCI so its no incomptible with avoiding the UCI passport scheme. I don't think roster numbers or budget are a problem for Michael Ball - if he wanted to do it, it would be sorted. He's probably worked out that he wouldn't get any additional publicity or race invites if they moved up to Pro-Continental, so why bring on all the additional expense. He's the Michael O'Leary of cycling.

iainf72

Ball is magnificent.

He's done nothing and people are talking about him and his team again.

Quite enjoyed the interview with him in ProCycling (convinced Dan only interviews him to get near the Rock Racing girls though) Much better than the PR nonsense which was written for Columbia and Garmin. But that's a thread for the ProCycling forum....

leguape

LangerDan wrote:

leguape wrote:

I thought they already had Paul Scott, formerly of ACE, doing their athlete passport scheme or did that never get off the roofrack? Are there obligations on roster numbers which might be a problem for them in terms of budget?
.

Even if Paul Scott is on board, there is no obligation on a team to share the data with WADA or the UCI so its no incomptible with avoiding the UCI passport scheme. I don't think roster numbers or budget are a problem for Michael Ball - if he wanted to do it, it would be sorted. He's probably worked out that he wouldn't get any additional publicity or race invites if they moved up to Pro-Continental, so why bring on all the additional expense. He's the Michael O'Leary of cycling.

That was what I initially thought as well. Given he knows margins and aggressive business in a way that few other team owners do, or at least seem to care about, I wouldn't be surprised if he had thought that way. Look at how aggressive he's been with suppliers of bikes and kit and the way he's traded his denim business.

jimmythecuckoo

iainf72 wrote:

Ball is magnificent.

He's done nothing and people are talking about him and his team again.

Quite enjoyed the interview with him in ProCycling (convinced Dan only interviews him to get near the Rock Racing girls though) Much better than the PR nonsense which was written for Columbia and Garmin. But that's a thread for the ProCycling forum....

I didnt think much to this months magazine at all.