Vaughters 10 point plan

eiger30

Anyone read the Vaughters piece on BBC web-site.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_s ... 429572.stm

Think he is a bit optimistic about how popular cycling could be, but he has some good points for improving the interaction of the tv viewer.

Not sure I like the 10/15 year licences, sounds a bit like a closed club, but I can see the point of 5 year deals as this is far more attractive to potential sponsors.

blazing_saddles

I'd give him about 5 out of ten, if you know what I mean.

frenchfighter

3 maybe four out of ten

morstar

I think he's off the mark with a number of these ideas but the important point is that he wants to prompt discussion. The sport could do better but he is effectively saying that key stakeholders have little input in the sports direction.

He's categorically right that this is unacceptable.

B3rnieMac

equipment innovation? we already have enough arguments about doping without a tonne of " rider X would never have won if he didnt have that special fairing/ helmet/ handlebars etc"

wasp707

Not sure we need more Team Time Trials. Also, in a one day race thge first to cross the finish line tends to be the winner. Fairly easy to understand the format there.

Sounds like a bitter man who wants more high profile rades in the US. You can't forget the current races we have in Europe because they have history.

afx237vi

1. More races of the highest level outside of Europe.

Not going to complain about more races outside Europe, you can't manufacture "highest level" races anywhere. Calling it a "World Tour" race does not make it highest level as far as most fans are concerned.

2. Consistent, understandable formats for cycling fans.

Don't know what this means.

3. Long-term guaranteed entry to the Tour de France for professional teams.

A closed shop. Great if you're in it, but how are pro continental teams supposed to attract sponsors if they have no chance of ever moving up in the ranks?

4. More focus on prevention of doping, in the first place, as opposed to catching cheats.

Fair enough.

5. More team-time trials more often.

This is an odd one. Why?

6. Technical innovation, such as cameras on bikes, inside cars, helmets, inside team buses to make the "craziness and danger of the peloton more real to the viewer".

This I agree with, especially cameras on bikes. Maybe decide on one type of lightweight camera and tell the teams that one rider from each team has to have a camera on their bike. Cycling is stuck in the dark ages when it comes to broadcasting.

7. Equipment innovation to see if the the smartest team wins sometimes, rather than the strongest.

WTF?

8. Open radios to the public and listen to your favourite team and what they are doing.

There's no reason why teams can't do this already. Stick a live audio feed on your team website.

9. GPS tracking of individual riders to make races fun to watch.

Gimmick. Wow - a dot moving across a screen, how exciting!

10. Have an understandable and consistent way of determining the best rider in the world and the best team in the world. That might mean riders have to ride Paris-Roubaix, and if they do not finish they would be docked points.

I dunno about anybody else, but I don't really care who is number 1 in the world. I think this is the main difference between cycling and stuff like tennis or golf. In cycling, each race is individual - it stands on it's own, and the difference between Paris-Roubaix and the Tour de France is so great, trying to compare the two is pointless. Making Basso or Schleck race Paris-Roubaix only for them to either finish 25 minutes down or climb off at the first feed zone... why? How does that make Paris-Roubaix a better race?

Tom BB

I agree with almost everything that you write there afx.......howver on point 9, the use of GPS-dont you think that in some races it would really help to understand the whole picture of the race-when the bunch spilts, it is often very difficult to know exactly who is where on the road-GPS could help in this scenario.

Tom Butcher

I'd give him 1 out of 10 - I wouldn't mind more cameras for the TV coverage. The rest of it I'd be against or not bothered either way. Don't even agree on more focus on preventing doping instead of catching cheats - as well as catching cheats maybe - not instead of.

Why can't he be honest - this is all about radios in the peloton and more power for the teams - this kind of rubbish is exactly why they shouldn't have more power.

afx237vi

Tom BB wrote:

I agree with almost everything that you write there afx.......howver on point 9, the use of GPS-dont you think that in some races it would really help to understand the whole picture of the race-when the bunch spilts, it is often very difficult to know exactly who is where on the road-GPS could help in this scenario.

Maybe, but I think TV coverage already handles this fairly well. When a bunch splits, there's a camera with the front and if a favourite drops behind, there's a camera on him too. Sometimes there's frantic action with riders all over the place, but when that happens I'm usually glued to the TV and not likely to load up my browser so I can follow one specific rider via GPS.

I'm not saying there shouldn't be GPS, just that it hardly seems like a pressing issue for the sport.

mroli

I think GPS would be great - and a good aid for commentators as well as watchers. I lose count of the number of times a commentator goes "and there is a *team* rider, it looks like X, but it could be Y".

Not blaming the commentators - I'm amazed how good some of them are - but a GPS would help them massively surely? If it could be accurate/detailed.

EKIMIKE

A very self serving list there from JV:

Team Time Trials are Garmin's favourite.

Long term guaranteed entry to TdF , suits him and his buddies who get into that one. This is possibly the worst suggestion on the list IMO.

GPS tracking..... Garmin GPS units.....? I wonder who suggested that one to Vaughters?

But as said above, at least it might get some discussion started which is what's needed. Just don't follow the models of other sports, who whilst making alot of money, are flawed on a competition basis. I'm thinking the TdF entry thing sound very similar to the UEFA Champions League in football where they essentially use a seeding system to boost the chances of all the big boys getting at least to the group stages. It's second rate, predictable competition which is generally quite boring.

andrewjoseph

Team time trials mean a big hit of sponsors logo's undiluted by other teams when on screen. 5 minutes with a screen full of only: garmin, trek, sky, etc.
riding in perfect harmony.

This is somewhat spoiled when the team end up in a ditch or the front rider takes down the whole team.

GPS use has been used for a little while now. Several teams used it during TdF last year. I followed Cav for a while (I think, it was a blob on the screen that was way behind the peleton and doing 70km+) only to find that he had swapped bikes and I was following the team car.

RichN95.

Here, by contrast, is Rich's ten point plan.



1. Centralise ownership of cycling. Bring all of the major races under one umbrella (Cycling World Tour - CWT), owned by a single company, in which the current race owners, ASO, RCS, IMG, UCI etc hold shares. IMG can do the marketing and selling. (Much easier said than done, this one).

2. Improve TV coverage. Have an in house production company responsible for filming all CWT races. Make it innovative and most of all embrace the 'red button'. Hire Sky as consultants. Let the viewer have a choice of which camera he wants to follow. Have tactics guides for newcomers. Have a choice of audio, which leads me to....

3. Keep race radios, but let us hear them.

4. Sell races to TV as packages and do what F1 does, ensure that every part of the package is broadcast. So if you buy the Tour de France package, you also have to broadcast Paris-Nice and GP Plouay too.

5. Sell directly to the consumer. Create a subscription channel on the internet. Viewers can buy individual races or packages or a season ticket. It won't be HD, but have added content, such as all the team radio feeds, but particularly footage from old races - make the back catalogue work for you.

6. Make a bigger deal of the World Rankings - but focus on the team standings, rather than the individual ones. For the individual standings, have three separate ones - GC standings, classic standings and stage standings. Have prize money for it.

7. Abolish ProTeam licences. Instead have a wider top level licence so that current ProTour teams and ProConti with wildcard teams are all equal. However, the top 14 or 15 teams in the end of season standings get automatic invitations to all races. This will allow for more wildcard selections, but no more than 50-66% of wildcards should be given to local teams.

8. Allow for an increase the number of races on the CWT calender, but don't oblige the top 14 or 15 teams to accept all invitations (they can opt out of a certain number - and be expected to). However, give relatively more ranking points to newer races to help them establish themselves.

9. Have the 'owners' of cycling get involved in helping teams find sponsors - a sort of 'dating service' if you will.

10. Outsource all doping to an independent agency (eg WADA), which will allow all doping cases for the top teams to be heard by a central UCI court, not the national federations. Punish teams, as well as riders, for positives.

dbb

this all reminds me of cricket in the seventies.
established and controlled by the old guard - resitant to change. the whole attitude was "but we've always done it this why and there is no need to change

then came world series cricket. look at the sport of cricket today.
very healthy,
being played by many more nations,
we have one day and twenty/20
many new innovations
great tv coverage and great use of technology to make viewing intersting (and even exciting?)

cricket is in a good condition as a result of the revolution.

LangerDan

Heres my 1-point plan

1) JV, iIf you want to make a shed load of cash from sport (which, TBH is what this all boils down to), then you should have been better at golf, or tennis or soccer or whole long list of other sports as a young lad.

cogidubnus

As avid F1 fan, I can see where he is coming from with a few of the ideas.

GPS: Would allow us to see exactly who is in each group. How many times do you hear David Harman and Sean Kelly saying "have you seen x in this group.." Would make it easier for them and us.

On bike camera's: yes I know it would add to weight and the teams/riders wouldn't be keen but would really add something for the viewer.

Radio: Listening to team radio in F1 really adds something to the coverage. Its usually done on a 30s delay or so, but gives you an idea of the tactics etc etc. If we are keeping radio's in cycling lets listen to selected ones during the coverage

As for the TTT the only reason I can think of is thus. Rather that supporting just individual riders, I guess JV wants us to follow a particular team like you would in other team sports. So by having alot more TTT you get to see "your" team work and race together in an obvious sense.

RichN95.

Cogidubnus wrote:

As for the TTT the only reason I can think of is thus. Rather that supporting just individual riders, I guess JV wants us to follow a particular team like you would in other team sports. So by having alot more TTT you get to see "your" team work and race together in an obvious sense.

Substitute 'us' with 'the sponsors' and you'll get where he's coming from. TTTs are popular with sponsors. Ofcourse Garmin are good them, which is also where he's coming from.

cogidubnus

RichN95 wrote:

Cogidubnus wrote:

As for the TTT the only reason I can think of is thus. Rather that supporting just individual riders, I guess JV wants us to follow a particular team like you would in other team sports. So by having alot more TTT you get to see "your" team work and race together in an obvious sense.

Substitute 'us' with 'the sponsors' and you'll get where he's coming from. TTTs are popular with sponsors. Ofcourse Garmin are good them, which is also where he's coming from.

This is very true. But if you take someone who isnt really interested in cycling it can be difficult to work out the team dynamic and how they all work for each other. Whereas stick in a TTT in the race and its obvious to anyone which teams are performing. But you are right that he is thinking about it from a commercial perspective

mattsy666

The TTT works fine within the context of a GT but not much else ... It skews the result of what is an individual sport far too much to be used anywhere else ...

Except ... How about a mini 'team' race ... TTT, a mountain stage where the times are taken for the first 5 team finishers over the line and then a 'sprint' stage where time bonuses are given to the first finisher on each team, to then be deducted from teams overall time ... And make those bonuses count ... So even a team 5 mins down on the overall still has a chance ... That way if they don't have a sprinter then they have to form a breakaway ... Probably end up more of a classic style stage than a sprinters one but the sprinters still get their chance if their team can control it ...

Tbh i've never undrsntood why no-one seems to care about the team competition in stage races ... When they can be bothered and there is less than a minute in it the racing is facinating and takes well beyond the 'oh right, he was first, i'll switch off now' ...

Please note ... I'd also make snooker players play a pool tournament to liven that up too ... So that's how much i care for tradition etc ...

Tusher

3. Long-term guaranteed entry to the Tour de France for professional teams.

No, no and thrice no. As wiser posters been said before, what incentive would there be for a sponsor to become involved with a junior team with the goal of going to the Tour a few years hence. And what about the mega-teams? A Sky or a Def Leppard Team, say? And remember Footon-Servetto last year? A team who were at the Tour on the basis of previous glory, but were actually second rate by the time 2010 came around. Skil-Shimano would have been a better choice.

5. More team-time trials more often.

Yes please- I love 'em. The creation of a day race solely composed of TTTs could become another classic. Well, in decades and decades it could. In fact, the sponsors would love it, because the winner would be the Team, not one single rider.

May I again push the Outer Hebrides? I suggest this annual race take place from Castlebay on Barra to Stornoway on Lewis, 112 miles.

The techie suggestions would all be superb.

One Man And His Bike

1. More races of the highest level outside of Europe.

Fine in theory, in actuality this may cause conflicts with point 10, but I'm all for more races or options on what I can view or the type of races I can watch.

2. Consistent, understandable formats for cycling fans.

Not precisely sure where this one is pointing, if he means stage races or points jerseys or mid race sprints and such?

3. Long-term guaranteed entry to the Tour de France for professional teams.

This one is going to be a slippy or dodgy area, long enough to make it interesting say 5 years, sure, sounds good. Longer than that though and you are shutting the door on new teams and fresh injections of money and it becomes stale? Do we really want that whole Ferrari and Williams domination saga that destroyed F1 for decades, or at least made it near enough a foregone conclusion when no one else could compete?

4. More focus on prevention of doping, in the first place, as opposed to catching cheats.

Anything that stops doping or seriously reduces it in the sports world gets my vote.

5. More team-time trials more often.

I'm for this, though I know it's going to be 50/50 for/against. Team Time Trials I feel add an extra dimension to the sport, it is a team sport so why not have team specific events?

6. Technical innovation, such as cameras on bikes, inside cars, helmets, inside team buses to make the "craziness and danger of the peloton more real to the viewer".

All for this, every race becoming "Chasing Legends", what isn't to like?

7. Equipment innovation to see if the the smartest team wins sometimes, rather than the strongest.

Not sure what he means here either, though could be another slippy slope? Smaller teams pushed out by bigger teams with bigger budgets such as F1?

8. Open radios to the public and listen to your favourite team and what they are doing.

I'm against radio in cycling if the DS's are allowed real time comms with the riders, rider to rider in team comms could be interesting?

9. GPS tracking of individual riders to make races fun to watch.

More info is great to aid commentary and commentators, so long as they keep it simple and don't go mental with it. Also it has to be tied in with no DS to Team radio comms or else the DS's may as well be sat in a big leather chair at home playing a computer game as they can see who is chinstrapped in other teams and can order attacks based from the information they have at hand?

10. Have an understandable and consistent way of determining the best rider in the world and the best team in the world. That might mean riders have to ride Paris-Roubaix, and if they do not finish they would be docked points.

People who know enough about the sport to be entertained by it can work out in a second this is pretty retarded as the sport is many facetted, and as such while the general concensus is an all-rounder can be claimed to be the best, there are too many speciality events or aspects and riders who are good at them or target those events for it to be a winner takes all system.

We have the jersey system to show this, while it might be good to have a generic system over all the events to do so would mess with the heritage of events and displease a lot of fans if they say for example; forced the Giro to adopt a Yellow jersey instead of the Pink one etc.

I believe the UCI needs to start taking onboard the criticism it is facing at the moment and start heading advice from people who they should listen too or else the potential for a split is ever growing and it's already being discussed in the latest round of debate and fires are being lit to break away and form something new already. The longer they leave the situation the more momentum it will gather.

eh

1 is fine in theory but as F1 is finding out, not so great in practise Do I want to see for example the Dauphine replaced with some rubbish race around a parking lot just because it is in a developing country for cycling, errr, no.

More Time trials, jesus the most boring form a of cycling ever, they are even boring to race as a rider, no thanks.

Radios should either be banned (NB: MotoGP doesn't have radios) or only one way from DS to rider and on an open channel.

Just to p*ss JV off they should do GPS but with the newely built European version

greasedscotsman

Tusher wrote:

The creation of a day race solely composed of TTTs could become another classic. Well, in decades and decades it could. In fact, the sponsors would love it, because the winner would be the Team, not one single rider.

It's already been tried. The Eindhoven Team Time Trial ran as part of the UCI Protour from 2005 to 2007. Think it's fair to say it's not run anymore because nobody was interested.

I pretty much agree with what AFX posted on the previous page. Cycling isn't F1 or tennis and trying to copy ideas from those sports isn't really a good idea.

RichN95.

greasedscotsman wrote:

Cycling isn't F1 or tennis and trying to copy ideas from those sports isn't really a good idea.

While the actual events are clearly very different, cycling could learn a hell of a lot from them and other sports on how to market, sell and broadcast events. And also how the governing body should be largely divorced from the money men.

FJS

dbb wrote:

this all reminds me of cricket in the seventies.
established and controlled by the old guard - resitant to change. the whole attitude was "but we've always done it this why and there is no need to change.

That was true for cycling until the 90s - since then Hein Verbruggen and co have pushed through scores of 'modernising' world tours pro tours world cups points systems etc.

Not saying change isn't good, but some of Vaughters' suggestions, and additional ones suggested here seem very Verbruggenesque. And we do know what that obsession with becoming a global sport, 'on a par with F1', etc. did with ethics and transparency. Cycling is perfectly healthy in terms of popularity in countries that care for it, already rivalling F1 etc.

pedro118118

This all boils down to money.
JV's list is a pick'n'mix of no brainers and self-help.
I used to love football, but since the formation of the Premiership (and all the money that has come with it), I have long since fallen out of love with the game...

LangerDan

The problem with enhancing the coverage is that cycling is a fundamentally different spectator model to almost any other of the sports (soccer, F1, tennis) that might be used as an example of what could be. For those, you have the lowest cost for watching on TV, followed by an enhanced TV package ("red button", HD, 3D) then moving to paying to attend the event, which will have its own scale of charges. Unless the fundamental structure of cycling changes, you'll have a situation where you'll pay to stay at home and watch it on TV, but can attend the event itself and watch if for free. Will there be enough people who will pay the commercial cost of an enhanced TV package to make a viable proposition - I'm not sure there will.


BTW, before folks get worked up about the benefits of rider cams, they might do well to remember the response of one of the British riders who came to Ireland to rider the Rás in the 1990's - when asked what he thought of the Irish scenery, his response was "It just looks like a cyclists arse to me".

donrhummy

LOVE these suggestions:

4. More focus on prevention of doping, in the first place, as opposed to catching cheats.


6. Technical innovation, such as cameras on bikes, inside cars, helmets, inside team buses to make the "craziness and danger of the peloton more real to the viewer".


8. Open radios to the public and listen to your favourite team and what they are doing.

9. GPS tracking of individual riders to make races fun to watch.

rick_chasey

I have ZERO interest in equipment innovation in my pro-racing.

By all means let it happen, but not at the cost of the one, ultimate true facet in cycling, that, more or less, the equipment of a pro doesn't make a notable difference on performance.

I appreciate the 'innovation' keeps the sponsors happy, and ultimately, that's what keeps the cash rolling into the sport, but it'd ruin it if it did affect the racing in a real sense.

edhornby

can only agree with Rick Chasey on this one - the fact that pro and consumer bikes aren't a world apart and that fact that the richest teams with the access to wind tunnels and the best gear don't monopolise the podiums is a good thing, it sets us apart from F1

oh god, I agree with LA 'it's not about the bike'