Another Race Radio Ban Thread
Quote
Cant belive the guy has got the nerve to say the UCI was disrespectful. The rules are NO RADIOS. They are the rules and the teams sould abide by them.
If anyone is damaging the sport its the people not playing by the rules.
Source:http://www.versus.com/blogs/the-experts-opinion/communication-breakdown-the-ucis-no-radio-rule-causes-problems-at-mallorcaYesterday marked the 1st race of the Challenge Mallorca, and for a number of riders and myself it was our first time dealing with the no race radio rule imposed by the UCI (the sport's governing body). The
A radio left in a team car for the Challenge Mallorcamajority of the riders and teams would like to keep the radios in use for the obvious and previously stated reasons, so almost every team rolled up to the start line in Palma with a radio earpiece. After several requests from the UCI to remove our radios, the team managers met with the UCI and it was decided that we would be keeping the radios for the day.
There was a catch, however. The UCI would be removing the results, points and prize money from the day and would essentially be packing up and heading back to their hotel. To leave in that fashion was very disrespectful in my opinion. The Challenge Mallorca received the needed funding for this year's event in the 11th hour, and to not support the race and its racers is not a good thing for the sport.
Cant belive the guy has got the nerve to say the UCI was disrespectful. The rules are NO RADIOS. They are the rules and the teams sould abide by them.
If anyone is damaging the sport its the people not playing by the rules.
0
Comments
-
I am in Majorca for this race and saw it all go down.
On the one hand you are correct that 'rules are rules' but the teams and riders feel strongly enough about this issue to take a stand. The UCI unilaterally have made the decision and the riders (who, let's face it are what the sport is about) don't agree. So they are making themselves heard the only way they can.
It's not a lot different to other strike actions that other unions take.0 -
It's not just about radios tho is it?
It's the riders protesting against the UCI dictating rules to them without consultation0 -
TakeTheHighRoad wrote:It's not just about radios tho is it?
It's the riders protesting against the UCI dictating rules to them without consultation
Sort of the same thing. Specifically they are protesting the UCI dictating the race radio rule without consultation. They aren't protesting the myriad of other rules that the UCI imposes with their input.0 -
Why do the riders think the sport GOVERNING BODY should consult them before determining the rules? Maybe the IRB, FIFA etc. should all consult the participants before making a decision? If the UCI have to consult pro riders then why not the humble 4th cat as we have to follow their rules as well. Come to think of it maybe the Government ought to have a referendum on every law it wants to pass?0
-
Pokerface wrote:TakeTheHighRoad wrote:It's not just about radios tho is it?
It's the riders protesting against the UCI dictating rules to them without consultation
Sort of the same thing. Specifically they are protesting the UCI dictating the race radio rule without consultation. They aren't protesting the myriad of other rules that the UCI imposes with their input.
It's not just about radios, quite from Arthur Scargill himself
http://theinnerring.blogspot.com/2011/02/protests-more-than-radios.html0 -
Sorry dumb question (and not to fan flames) but what is the point of the UCI exactly, or put another way, what is their purpose?
If it exists to enforce rules, why don't riders/cycling teams/manufacturers whoever set-up an alternative body/set of rules that they would be happier to agree with (or ignore the UCI entirely as in this case and ride outside of their rules).
What would be the implications?0 -
The UCI is the body that represents cycling in the eyes of the IOC. Any rebel organisation would be outside the IOC umbrella. Other than that you could go the same way as boxing and set up as many governing bodies as you like!0
-
Pross wrote:Why do the riders think the sport GOVERNING BODY should consult them before determining the rules? Maybe the IRB, FIFA etc. should all consult the participants before making a decision? If the UCI have to consult pro riders then why not the humble 4th cat as we have to follow their rules as well. Come to think of it maybe the Government ought to have a referendum on every law it wants to pass?
Depends if you believe in democracy or dictatorship.
Governments to a certain degree DO consult the public before passing laws. It's called 'elections'. Pass enough bad laws and you end up out of power or with revolutions.
I'm not sure if the UCI governing body is elected or how it works? But why shouldn't the riders have a say? They are the ones that keep the sport where it is and bring in all the money. Their demands are not unreasonable either.
How many times do public sector workers go on strike over an issue? All the time.
And if all 4th cats banded together over an issue and wen to the Board of British Cycling, their issue would be heard.
I see both sides of the argument, even if I think radios SHOULD be banned.0 -
I don't think radios should be banned - it's a retarded idea. They help teams function more effectively.0
-
The Mad Rapper wrote:I don't think radios should be banned - it's a retarded idea. They help teams function more effectively.
That's the point.
Cycling's a sport where well organised teams can shut down exciting racing.
It's doubley an issue if you feel racing 'tactics' is part of the remit of the rider.
Just have one way radio feed in everyone's ear. Do them in 3 languages. English, French, Spanish. Job's a goodun.0 -
Or if ts a safety issue as many riders are claiming, make the radios one way from the riders to the cars0
-
Rick Chasey wrote:That's the point.
Cycling's a sport where well organised teams can shut down exciting racing.
But it's not the point. If a team cannot communicate effectively, then surely it's incumbent upon them to raise their game and get organised to the same level as their competition, n'est pas?
Punishing the teams that can communicate well seems utterly bizarre to me. It's like Brian Holm says on Chasing Legends "Some shitty little French team that never won anything complained."0 -
The Mad Rapper wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:That's the point.
Cycling's a sport where well organised teams can shut down exciting racing.
But it's not the point. If a team cannot communicate effectively, then surely it's incumbent upon them to raise their game and get organised to the same level as their competition, n'est pas?
Punishing the teams that can communicate well seems utterly bizarre to me. It's like Brian Holm says on Chasing Legends "Some shitty little French team that never won anything complained."
It's not punishing them. I think it benefits them - if they can arrange themselves on the road like they have done for years and years, then they're getting a benefit.
Right now, any rider who has the legs can be tactically useful, regardless of mental capacity. In theory anyway. Just ask Ferarri!0 -
Pokerface wrote:Pross wrote:Why do the riders think the sport GOVERNING BODY should consult them before determining the rules? Maybe the IRB, FIFA etc. should all consult the participants before making a decision? If the UCI have to consult pro riders then why not the humble 4th cat as we have to follow their rules as well. Come to think of it maybe the Government ought to have a referendum on every law it wants to pass?
Depends if you believe in democracy or dictatorship.
Governments to a certain degree DO consult the public before passing laws. It's called 'elections'. Pass enough bad laws and you end up out of power or with revolutions.
I'm not sure if the UCI governing body is elected or how it works? But why shouldn't the riders have a say? They are the ones that keep the sport where it is and bring in all the money. Their demands are not unreasonable either.
How many times do public sector workers go on strike over an issue? All the time.
And if all 4th cats banded together over an issue and wen to the Board of British Cycling, their issue would be heard.
I see both sides of the argument, even if I think radios SHOULD be banned.
The UCI is democratic from what I recall, each member federation gets representation and the Federations hold elections. If the riders have issues they ought to pursue it through their federation rep (not sure if there is a pro tour rep on the board).0 -
I would argue that without Cycling Fan's there would be very little money in the sport.
Maybe the UCI sould consult all the cycling fan's before making this rule?
As a comparison:
The government didnt ask us if we would accept at 2.5% rise in V.A.T, they just made it so.
Besides i think the no radio rule will spice up the racing.
Not sure about the safty aspect of it because i've never been in the enviroment.
My first thought is that the "safty" argument is a smoke screen for the real reason of teams wanting to control a race.0 -
I'm hoping the UCI stick to their guns on this one - it's a spectator sport and getting rid of radios is worth a go - if it makes for worse racing or more dangerous racing then reintroduce them - my guess it will make things a little bit more unpredictable (good) and a little bit safer once riders don't have a DS talking to them in their ear (also good).
it's a hard life if you don't weaken.0 -
Why dont they do the sensible thing? Two way radios,
In channel - Every rider gets the same information about crashes/ traffic furniture/time gaps etc....
Out Channel - Emergency's only. An open channel that everyone can hear, for crashes/Injuries/mechanicals etc. That way no-one can discuss tactics, the radio is simply there for safety and to stop riders losing massive chunks of time due to punctures and things.0 -
I think the best compromise is to let them have their radios, but make all communications available to the host TV broadcaster (live), like in Formula 1.
At a guess:
90% is banal exchanges of information (eg did everyone get their lunch, roundabout coming up)
8% is the DS telling the riders tactical stuff that they already know (eg start moving to the front to lead Cav out, let's make sure Tom is near the front for Arenberg)
2% (at most) is the DS making a tactical decision (eg Andy's dropped his chain - attack)Twitter: @RichN950
