Forum home Road cycling forum Pro race

2005 World's, the GB team, John Herety, Wegelius and Southam

AndyRubioAndyRubio Posts: 880
edited November 2009 in Pro race
This happened just before I got into cycling, I found this article aboutit but can anyone help to fill in the gaps?

There is mention of "private agendas", it seems that even though the 2 riders ignored the team's tactics, the manager got the boot. Why? Did the riders not respect him?

Andy
«1

Posts

  • Dunno about Herety tbh, if I was to make an edcuated guess it's 'cos he let them ride the way they did.

    As far as I'm aware they're still persona non grata to Sky, Team GB and Brailsford in general
  • afx237viafx237vi Posts: 12,630
    The article says he resigned, not that he got the boot. Now I know "resigned" and "sacked" are virtually synonyms in other sports, but maybe he was just p-ssed off by being ignored by his riders and really did resign.
  • That article is charmingly naive.

    Both Southam and Wegelius rode in Italy at the time and were, in time honoured World's style, bribed by the Azzura to waste themselves for their agenda on the early laps.

    To my mind, making a few grand for 5 laps work is a more beneficial use of your afternoon than busting yourself so Roger Hammond can get dropped with 2 laps to go, but the media found out and everyone went bonkers and BC had to explain why those two wouldn't be considered for selection anymore.
    "In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"

    @gietvangent
  • afx237viafx237vi Posts: 12,630
    That article is charmingly naive.

    Both Southam and Wegelius rode in Italy at the time and were, in time honoured World's style, bribed by the Azzura to waste themselves for their agenda on the early laps.

    To my mind, making a few grand for 5 laps work is a more beneficial use of your afternoon than busting yourself so Roger Hammond can get dropped with 2 laps to go, but the media found out and everyone went bonkers and BC had to explain why those two wouldn't be considered for selection anymore.

    Well to be fair, it was hardly a subtle move by Wegelius and Southam. They were riding their knackers off at the head of the chase when it made no sense for a British rider to do so. Even the densest of journalist could have seen that one, so there were obviously going to be questions asked.
  • andypandyp Posts: 8,702
    That article is charmingly naive.

    Both Southam and Wegelius rode in Italy at the time and were, in time honoured World's style, bribed by the Azzura to waste themselves for their agenda on the early laps.

    To my mind, making a few grand for 5 laps work is a more beneficial use of your afternoon than busting yourself so Roger Hammond can get dropped with 2 laps to go, but the media found out and everyone went bonkers and BC had to explain why those two wouldn't be considered for selection anymore.

    I agree. John Herety knows his way around the sport, so I wonder if he was complicit in some way with the Southam and Wegelius.

    From what I've heard one of the riders earnt the equivalent of 6 months salary for an afternoon's work. When you're earning close to the minimum wage you can understand why you'd be tempted by an incentive such as this.
  • top_bhoytop_bhoy Posts: 1,423
    andyp wrote:
    From what I've heard one of the riders earnt the equivalent of 6 months salary for an afternoon's work. When you're earning close to the minimum wage you can understand why you'd be tempted by an incentive such as this.

    I can't understand it at all. Working underhand against your teammates and organisation is reprehensible. If you disagree with the team tactics or the team agenda, don't ride and refuse future invitations to participate. These guys hadn't the balls to do this but instead they cheated. Banning them from future worlds was the least that could happen - I think they should have received a UCI wide ban for 'unsporting action'.

    An analogy is someone on minimum wage would undoubtedly be sacked and tarnished a thief if they claimed from an employer their wages but later found to be working for another company at the time of the claim. Just because these two are 'sportsmen' it doesn't make them any better.

    Judas sold Jesus for 30 pieces of silver. I trust this pair got just as much!!!
  • teagarteagar Posts: 2,100
    edited November 2009
    Top_Bhoy wrote:
    andyp wrote:
    From what I've heard one of the riders earnt the equivalent of 6 months salary for an afternoon's work. When you're earning close to the minimum wage you can understand why you'd be tempted by an incentive such as this.

    I can't understand it at all. Working underhand against your teammates and organisation is reprehensible. If you disagree with the team tactics or the team agenda, don't ride and refuse future invitations to participate. These guys hadn't the balls to do this but instead they cheated. Banning them from future worlds was the least that could happen - I think they should have received a UCI wide ban for 'unsporting action'.

    An analogy is someone on minimum wage would undoubtedly be sacked and tarnished a thief if they claimed from an employer their wages but later found to be working for another company at the time of the claim. Just because these two are 'sportsmen' it doesn't make them any better.

    Judas sold Jesus for 30 pieces of silver. I trust this pair got just as much!!!



    I suggest you go read "a dog in a hat".

    As far as cycling employment law is concerned, your are the employee of the team whose jersey you wear, not dependant on what you do on the road. If it was, the legal implicaitons would be beyond ridiculous.


    Cycling has always been this way. Always. It is part of the fun.
    Note: the above post is an opinion and not fact. It might be a lie.
  • shinyhelmutshinyhelmut Posts: 1,350
    Top_Bhoy wrote:
    I can't understand it at all. Working underhand against your teammates and organisation is reprehensible. If you disagree with the team tactics or the team agenda, don't ride and refuse future invitations to participate. These guys hadn't the balls to do this but instead they cheated. Banning them from future worlds was the least that could happen - I think they should have received a UCI wide ban for 'unsporting action'.

    This has always happened, always will. Wegelius and Southam were just not very subtle about it. They had a choice of a cash bonus for helping their trade team colleagues versus no contract in '06 if they refuse to help. I think a UCI ban would be pretty harsh, but a ban from representing the UK is probably what they would have expected. No great loss if you're born in Sweden :wink:
  • cougiecougie Posts: 22,512
    TB - this has been going on for decades in pro cycling.

    Why should the pros feel much allegiance to a twobit national team who think that they can call the shots once a year - when they've not had contact with the riders for the last 50 weeks or so ?

    (OK - Team GB is getting more organised now - but in the past - it was a right amateur organisation)

    I cant remember who we had riding for us as team leader in 2005 - but if they're not in with a chance of winning - then why waste your efforts ? This isnt radically different from the ethos of the track team - if you're not capable of a medal - you dont go.
  • KléberKléber Posts: 6,842
    edited November 2009
    There's a certain irony if the riders are not welcome at Sky.

    Dirty Italians wave cash at riders to buy them for a day but if Sky flashes its cheque book towards riders on Katusha and stirs the pot with a talented young rider halfway through a two year, well that's best-of-British fair play.
  • teagarteagar Posts: 2,100
    I'm speculating now, but at a guess I would suggest that Wegelius likely felt that Italy had supported him more when it came to cycling than the UK had.

    Furthermore, he'd probably get considerably more kudos for doing a bit of work for some Italians one time than any work in the UK, given cycling's marginal status.

    I like to think he doesn't give a sh!t where he comes from and just wants to race, and maybe make a little money on the side.

    I like that idea.
    Note: the above post is an opinion and not fact. It might be a lie.
  • Why did Herety go?
  • pat1cppat1cp Posts: 766
    The irony of it all was Asthma Jet (who was leading the Italians) realised with two laps to go that "he didn't have the legs" and Bettini, who had been working for Pettachi, was left in no mans land. Come the last lap the Italians were all over the place.

    Typical I suppose. :roll:
  • afx237viafx237vi Posts: 12,630
    teagar wrote:
    I like to think he doesn't give a sh!t where he comes from and just wants to race, and maybe make a little money on the side.

    I like that idea.

    There's nothing wrong with that, of course, but you could also argue that if that is the case, then he should just choose not to be selected for the Worlds. Some riders do give a sh-t about riding for the country and couldn't care less about making a bit of extra money.

    Whatever way you look at it, their actions were pretty selfish and disrespectful to Hammond and Herety. The ban from future selections was probably justified.
  • top_bhoytop_bhoy Posts: 1,423
    teagar wrote:
    I suggest you go read "a dog in a hat".

    As far as cycling employment law is concerned, your are the employee of the team whose jersey you wear, not dependant on what you do on the road. If it was, the legal implicaitons would be beyond ridiculous.

    Cycling has always been this way. Always. It is part of the fun.

    I don't have a copy of 'a dog in a hat'...maybe enlighten me as I don't expect to get a copy anytime soon.

    Call me old fashioned but I guess having some form of personal integrity and respect is a bit too much to expect and just because it has 'always happened', it doesn't make it OK nor acceptablel!! I could kind of understand if the 2 didn't give 100% but to actively assist the opposition - while wearing the national colours, is a step too far for me. In most other sporting events, aiding and abetting the opposition in such a manner, would be tantamount to match rigging.

    Also, whatever happened to concern about the rest of the team-mates these 2 guys cheated, is such cheating now acceptable? Whether they team had a chance or not of winning the race is irrelevant.
  • iainf72iainf72 Posts: 15,784
    Top_Bhoy wrote:
    I could kind of understand if the 2 didn't give 100% but to actively assist the opposition - while wearing the national colours, is a step too far for me. In most other sporting events, aiding and abetting the opposition in such a manner, would be tantamount to match rigging.

    It's really common in cycling at the Worlds though. Hell, people even thought Pip Gilbert helped Evans out a bit at this years worlds.

    That's why national squads are flawed as a concept. One day in a national jersey vs the rest of the year with your trade team....
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
  • eheh Posts: 4,854
    Happens at the Olympics as well, look at the result of the 2000 mens road race.

    The main problem I had with what Southam and Wegelius did was it was so damn obvious, and they should have tried to help Hammond to some degree even if it was a bit of a cover.
  • cougiecougie Posts: 22,512
    Its not cheating though is it ? I'm not aware of a rule that says who you can and who you cant ride for ?
  • Thop Boy: "Judas sold Jesus for 30 pieces of silver"

    As I recall Jesus rode a donkey, you seem to have found yourself aboard a high horse.

    As has been pointed out Gilbert rode for Evans this year. It's true that Wegelius and Southam probably had little choice but to take the money and ride but if Herety (no fool he) thought Tom's actions so unpardonable then I doubt he would have signed him for Rapha Condor. As for being banned by BC they all three took it like men, Herety resigned, Southam retired for a few years and Wegelius kept his mouth shut and kept riding.

    The most blatant 'carve up' at the world's? Maybe the time Merckx and the Italians tried to deny Maertens. National agendas? No, Campagnolo v Shimano...
  • top_bhoytop_bhoy Posts: 1,423
    edited November 2009
    cougie wrote:
    Its not cheating though is it ? I'm not aware of a rule that says who you can and who you cant ride for ?
    You don't know and I don't know the exact rules for the UCI world Championships but whatever, you can dress it up in any way you like to excuse the pair, cheating it most certainly is. It's cheating their team mates, all the support staff involved and the cycling public. It's morally and even possibly legally corrupt. Imagine a footballer who was found to deliberately score against his own team to asisst the opposition - he would quite rightly, be facing court charges for fraud, corruption and accepting bribes.

    Just because something happened in the past, it doesn't mean to say it is acceptable. Doping happened in the past also but that is no more acceptable than accepting bribes.
  • top_bhoytop_bhoy Posts: 1,423
    ynyswen24 wrote:
    Thop Boy: "Judas sold Jesus for 30 pieces of silver"

    As I recall Jesus rode a donkey, you seem to have found yourself aboard a high horse.

    As has been pointed out Gilbert rode for Evans this year. It's true that Wegelius and Southam probably had little choice but to take the money and ride but if Herety (no fool he) thought Tom's actions so unpardonable then I doubt he would have signed him for Rapha Condor. As for being banned by BC they all three took it like men, Herety resigned, Southam retired for a few years and Wegelius kept his mouth shut and kept riding.

    The most blatant 'carve up' at the world's? Maybe the time Merckx and the Italians tried to deny Maertens. National agendas? No, Campagnolo v Shimano...

    Mock however way you like, but at least I take a concious decision to choose not to support those who take bribes. High horse...probably but I find the whole episode at those Worlds corrupt and akin to doping. In cycling, corrupt practices are allowed to continue in many areas so your examples of these riders still riding holds no credibility. It proves nothing.
  • Have a word with Pat McQuaid at the UCI headquarters in Switzerland, no doubt he can provide you with a retrospective banning order on everyone involved. What happened, happened. Action was taken. Once the issues were dealt with and 'sentences' served (and indeed Wegelius and Southam will not ride for Britain again and do not seek to) then the individuals are free to take up their profession again. Such is the nature of justice, it is a sword that is dealt impartially. Then again, swords might not be much use on a horse, I suggest a Lance perhaps? Sleep tight.
  • andypandyp Posts: 8,702
    I blame Roger Hammond. If he'd ponied up the cash to pay for his team mates help then I'm sure they would have ridden for him.
  • Southam rode for GB in the Tour of Britain last year.
  • cougiecougie Posts: 22,512
    Dont forget that riders will ride for other teams pretty frequently. You're in a break in a stage race with a guy that just wants the time ? You do the work on the understanding that you get the win and he gets the maximum time gain - without the cat and mouse games of the last few miles. Is that cheating ?
  • KléberKléber Posts: 6,842
    Sometimes cash can, and will, change hands in situations like that Cougie.
  • I agree with Top Bhoy, this was the world championships, and they were representing their country. Giving a hand to a friend second to this is reasonable, but country should come first. It has been dealt with in a sensible enough and adult fashion, however.
    Dan
  • teagarteagar Posts: 2,100
    Top_Bhoy wrote:
    cougie wrote:
    Its not cheating though is it ? I'm not aware of a rule that says who you can and who you cant ride for ?
    You don't know and I don't know the exact rules for the UCI world Championships but whatever, you can dress it up in any way you like to excuse the pair, cheating it most certainly is. It's cheating their team mates, all the support staff involved and the cycling public. It's morally and even possibly legally corrupt. Imagine a footballer who was found to deliberately score against his own team to asisst the opposition - he would quite rightly, be facing court charges for fraud, corruption and accepting bribes.

    Just because something happened in the past, it doesn't mean to say it is acceptable. Doping happened in the past also but that is no more acceptable than accepting bribes.

    Where a rider decides to ride on the road and how fast, is entirely up to him. That people are cycling behind him in a slipstream isn't his problem! The "work" being done, in a legal sense, is wearing the jersey in the race. If work was defined as "pulling on the front, leading out, blah blah", then every single race would end up in a gigantic super-complex legal case, because he rode infront of him in a headwind for 20 seconds, which actually helped another team, blah blah blah..
    It's definitely not legally wrong.
    Note: the above post is an opinion and not fact. It might be a lie.
  • flattythehurdler and teagar:
    absolutely right.
  • What a lot of utter dribble some of you are saying about this :roll:

    Clearly you do not understand Pro cycling,stick to sportives/play races-let the Pros get on with the racing.

    So for years at the worlds GB does nothing,this year we see riders on the front pulling-some teams have to-looked good for GB the brits are part of the race :D

    Herety,what a loss now to GB Sky etc,nobody else is close to him yet he is now wasted away playing around in UK premiers-He should be at the head of Sky.

    Now in the next few worlds or London 2012,what if GB employ the services of a non GB sky rider to help Cav win,is that cheating-would you make Cav give back the win?
    Oh forget in the world of the cycle sportive this is not the way to play is it.
Sign In or Register to comment.