Teams walk out on McQuaid

northernneil

over Radio's

this is no longer discussion, its conflict.

http://bit.ly/euZcKJ

RichN95.

The phrase: "I have had enough of this high moral ground from you", is one that I might start using myself on here.

blazing_saddles

The UCI are a joke driven by ego, but the alternative is a bore, ( not just rrs) driven by egos.
Walking out before the subject was even aired.
Some growing up is needed on both sides of the fence.

northernneil

is this the worst run professional sport ?

Jez mon

northernneil wrote:

is this the worst run professional sport ?

FIFA's running of football leaves a lot to be desired in many peoples opinions

North American pro athletes have been known to go on strike.

iainf72

The teams suggested an independent body look into radios but the UCI won't even entertain it. Who are the ones who won't listen again Pat?

It seems Astana and Katusha remained at the meeting.

Without the pro teams, what does the UCI have? A few very minority sports that only a couple of countries actually give a toss about?

Jez mon

It has the worlds doesn't it?

dougzz

iainf72 wrote:

Without the pro teams, what does the UCI have? A few very minority sports that only a couple of countries actually give a toss about?

Isn't that really true of the governing body of any sport? What would FIFA be if the (rich) part of UEFA withdrew?

Doesn't anyone follow another sport in addition to cycling that they think is well run? I'd be surprised. Management of anything is always a hiding to nothing. You just can't please all the interested party's.

iainf72

Jez mon wrote:

It has the worlds doesn't it?

It does.

But if none of the top riders were at the worlds, would you watch it or indeed care about it?

blazing_saddles

When we are talking about "the teams", aren't we really talking about several team managers?
I know Fat Pat is a standing joke, but I'm not convinced having the sport's top end in the hands of Bruyneel, Riis and Vaughters an improvement.............

If this comes to pass and the UCI goes belly up, who looks after the less glamorous (the bulk of events) side of things?
I assume it would fall to the national feds to shore up the other calenders.

deejay

Quote
I have had enough of this High Moral Ground from you and I am refraining myself from writing exactly what I am thinking.

"Enough to inform you that when I have finished with the teams today you will have plenty to "reflect" on and communication will be the furthest thing from your mind!!” - End Quote
I love that bit "when I have Finished"

I don't agree with this thread. ? because the "mighty I am" was giving a Lecture today not a discussion and that's why they walked out. :roll:
The media and McDuff are saying they walked out because of the Radio's but I suspect it had more to do with the second sentence as he warns of a bumpy ride in the next few years.

When this World Tour (no longer a Pro Tour) gains more ground then the greedy McDuff will unvail the next part of his Strategy.
As he said "Radio's will then be the furthest thing in the mind to worry about".?
He is already chipping away with World Ranking Points in his new World Tour and gradually he intends to reduce the importance of the European Races.

I sumise this new strategy comes from getting egg on his face a couple of years ago with the stance taken by the three GT's.
As the World Tour gets bigger he intends to get the TV rights to this World Tour and then be able to squeeze the European Promoters to hand over their TV rights.
It's a very long strategy but he sees other govening bodies with that power.

He was trying for the TV rights a couple of years ago and the ASO saw that coming.

Cakegirl

Quote 'when I have finished with the teams today ..'
How dare you use such egotistical language McQuaid. It's the same as when teacher said 'the class will have to say in detention', that's exactly how puerile it sounds.
How dare you undemocratically dismiss the views of riders, personnel and directors because of your own over-inflated sense of importance..

The bloke simply does not get that his highhanded attitude is as much the problem as the actual proposition. A very flaky inconsistent stance on doping, memory loss on the Armstrong donation, and clearly no redeeming management skills either. It'd be a joke if he didn't have power.

As it is I propose the peloton accidentally rolls over the top of him at the next start he attends. Without radios, they won't be able to hear anyone telling them to stop.

CyclingBantam

Slightly off topic but when is the next realistic time he could be out of his position?

Whether you like him or not the way he handles himself and the comments he makes are not helping the sport in any way. If I spoke like he dis at work I would be considered unprofessional let alone if I was the head of the cycling governing body!

RichN95.

CyclingBantam wrote:

Slightly off topic but when is the next realistic time he could be out of his position?

I think the next election is 2013. Of course, elections aren't the only way the effect regime changes.

Personally, I don't think he's as bad as many make out. It's the worst job in cycling and Verbruggen is the one the really needs to go. I just don't see why he'd want to go to war over radios.

afx237vi

RichN95 wrote:

The phrase: "I have had enough of this high moral ground from you", is one that I might start using myself on here.

The level of discourse between the UCI and the teams shown in that article certainly resembles the bickering of an internet forum, that's for sure.

eh

Am I the only person that thinks Vaughters is coming out of this as badly as Pat, it seems like a race to the bottom at the moment.

Lets be honest the cards should be stacked in favour of the UCI, the only way I could see that change is if ASO etc came onboard with the teams

Tusher

And ASO is rumoured to be coming up for sale, so they're unlikely to rock any boats right now.

Although you never know....depends how long their memory is.

RichN95.

eh wrote:

Am I the only person that thinks Vaughters is coming out of this as badly as Pat, it seems like a race to the bottom at the moment.

No, I'd agree with you. I like Vaughters and I think he has a lot of good to contribute to the future of cycling. However, his 10 point plan was, to my mind, as flawed and self-interested as anything McQuaid has done.

RichN95.

Tusher wrote:

And ASO is rumoured to be coming up for sale, so they're unlikely to rock any boats right now.

Really? I wonder if that might interest a certain son of a media mogul with a lot of interest in cycling.

Is that a real rumour? I know that the Tour of Flanders and associated races were said to be on the market, but that's the first I've heard of ASO up for grabs.

northernneil

http://twitdoc.com/view.asp?id=7564&sid=5U4&ext=PDF&lcl=Brussel-Muscles.pdf&usr=UCI_Overlord&doc=53302177&key=key-29zr7ddhmiwbfgaocm3c

from the UCI Overlord ... funny guy to following on twitter or FB

jerry3571

I think before they get too excited about the radios they should get a hack saw on those metal bollards in the road at the Amstel Gold Race. I've created a few TT courses near where I live and the safety issues are top of the list. Bollards in the road and other safety road features would surely be declined by the CTT so why the hell they are allowed for a top notch UCI race with almost 200 riders passing through at once is perverse.
The first issues about safety is the course; if you have bollards in the road then the race is not safe. It just happens that Riis, Vaughters, Bruyneel et al were all happy to let thier riders go on this race to which I think should be sidelined. If they are serious about safety and radios then first get the courses sorted out.

-Jerry

deejay

jerry3571 wrote:

I think before they get too excited about the radios they should get a hack saw on those metal bollards in the road at the Amstel Gold Race. I've created a few TT courses near where I live and the safety issues are top of the list. Bollards in the road and other safety road features would surely be declined by the CTT so why the hell they are allowed for a top notch UCI race with almost 200 riders passing through at once is perverse.
The first issues about safety is the course; if you have bollards in the road then the race is not safe. It just happens that Riis, Vaughters, Bruyneel et al were all happy to let thier riders go on this race to which I think should be sidelined. If they are serious about safety and radios then first get the courses sorted out.

-Jerry

My mind goes back to the 2010 TDF finish in Brussels.
Such a wide straight road as can be seen in the recent finishes of Paris - Brussels

rick_chasey

Jerry - if thats' the case, then why ride on cobbles?

We know how dangerous mountain decents are - why not take those out too?

Road racing is racing on the roads, so if the roads are tricky, the riders have to man up.

I thought it was accepted by most people that there is genuine skill in being able to deal with tricky roads. Why else is positioning etc so important in classics?

If all the roads were big boulevards it'd be stuninngly dull. It's a criticism I often level at the Tour, which, because of its size, often takes the big main roads which leads to duller racing that's less challenging for riders and less selective.

Pross

RichN95 wrote:

CyclingBantam wrote:

Slightly off topic but when is the next realistic time he could be out of his position?

I think the next election is 2013. Of course, elections aren't the only way the effect regime changes.

Yes, but sending the Yanks in to invade his house might be overkill in this case and they'd only leave things in a bigger mess than they are at present (or is there a third way?)

RichN95.

Pross wrote:

Yes, but sending the Yanks in to invade his house might be overkill in this case and they'd only leave things in a bigger mess than they are at present (or is there a third way?)

There's the Provisional UCI, the paramilitary wing of Garmin-Cervelo. McQuaid needs to watch out for them.

TMR

RichN95 wrote:

There's the Provisional UCI, the paramilitary wing of Garmin-Cervelo. McQuaid needs to watch out for them.

Very good!

pedro118118

northernneil wrote:

over Radio's

this is no longer discussion, its conflict.

http://bit.ly/euZcKJ

From what I've read, the UCI isn't against radios per se, more the function that radios perform in allowing a DS to instruct/influence the riders. I understand the UCI have offered the 'olive branch' of looking at alternatives to the status quo, which would address concerns over rider safety - presumably one-way radios or a link into a 3rd party broadcast/race radio? Seems the teams are not even prepared to consider this option, which rather dilutes their claim that the primary function of the current race radio is rider safety?!

Getting pretty bored with it now, to be honest...

Tusher

Nah, the radio thing is a trojan horse.

It would be preferable if they could just draw battle lines on an empty rugby pitch early one Sunday morning, arm themselves with pink goo and plastic swords, and go at it hammer and tong until the winner emerges.

Gingerflash

"The teams suggested an independent body look into radios but the UCI won't even entertain it. Who are the ones who won't listen again Pat? "

They (by which I mean Bruyneel, Vaughters and a couple of others) seem to have misunderstood what "governing body" means.

McQuaid is absolutely right when he says they their job is to make the rules; the teams job is to provide riders and race. As he says, other governing bodies don't give in to whatever the teams want.

Vaughters has been around for about 10 minutes and seems to want to run the whole sport. That appears to be the real issue. Vaughters appears to see himself as cycling's Bernie Ecclestone and radios are just the excuse he needs to try to leave the UCI and set up his own race system.

I should say, however, that McQuaid's language is often pretty unprofessional and inflammatory, as shown in those emails. He needs to learn to calm down and to speak and write in more measured tones if he's to be taken seriously.

iainf72

Gingerflash wrote:

"

Vaughters has been around for about 10 minutes and seems to want to run the whole sport. That appears to be the real issue. Vaughters appears to see himself as cycling's Bernie Ecclestone and radios are just the excuse he needs to try to leave the UCI and set up his own race system.

Vaughters doesn't want to run the sport, but he is a representative of the riders. Their gripe is the UCI changed rules without consultation and effectively for nothing.

rick_chasey

If either side wants to achieve anything, they have to get the race orgnisers on side.

They hold all the cards.