Forum home Road cycling forum Pro race

What happens next - UCI vs Breakaway

mr_pollmr_poll Posts: 1,547
edited August 2012 in Pro race
Lots of interesting posts and threads on LA and the USADA so not looking to replicate those. Interesting that commentators and pro’s seem to be saying that this was the past let’s look to the future. I am sort of assuming with this post that whatever evidence the USADA have will not make pretty reading for the UCI (once released or heard with other cases) – they have already shown themselves up with the handling of the jurisdiction of the USADA, but there are rumours and hearsay of doping incompetence, cover ups of failed tests, bribery and notifying certain riders of impending tests amongst other things.

However what future do you think is likely?

Nothing will change, the UCI will dig in for a bit of a ****storm and everyone will move on
A few senior heads will roll at the UCI (a bit like FIFA) and a few loopholes/rules will be tightened up and all will carry on
UCI will look so corrupt (or fight USADA and WADA so weakening themselves in world sport) that team bosses will form a breakaway such as the one that was mooted 12 months ago – covered by INRNG. Essentially attacking whilst the peloton is weak.

What happens next 31 votes

Nothing, same old
51% 16 votes
Some changes at the top but UCI remain
35% 11 votes
A breakaway league will grab it's chance
12% 4 votes

Posts

  • Monty DogMonty Dog Posts: 20,614
    I don't think you'll see a breakaway from National Bodies from the UCI for the key reason of the Olympics - the only plausible way would be for IOC to withdraw the UCI's mandate and appoint someone to set up a revised organisation at the agreement of the various national bodies. This would still take years to resolve. Regardless of UCI's best attempts to put the skids under British Cycling's Olympic ambitions, it's unlikely BC would support a breakaway if it jeapordized their ability to field a GB Team in the Olympics.
    Make mine an Italian, with Campagnolo on the side..
  • alan_aalan_a Posts: 1,419
    Who has more power within the UCI, the big trade teams (e.g. Garmin/OPQS), the big national bodies (eg British Cycling) or the big race organisers (eg ASO) ?

    I remember reading a couple of years back that if ASO wanted to break away from UCI control then I'm sure it would happen.
  • rebsrebs Posts: 891
    Petitions can be raised to the olympic committee for another organisation to be recognised. But this takes lots of support and lobbying... insane amount. A case has to be water tight to prove that the ICU is not fit for purpose.

    Oh how I do wish this would actually happen!
  • TheBigBeanTheBigBean Posts: 16,241
    No change. Football doesn't seem capable of getting rid of Fifa, so there is no way cycling can get rid of UCI.
  • Dorset_BoyDorset_Boy Posts: 5,014
    The Olympics angle must be pretty key, especially for the track cycling side of things for whom the games are the biggest event.

    If the IOC cease to recognize the UCI, then a breakaway could form - maybe ASO want to take that on as they own the major event and will therefore be the key player if a breakaway were to occur.
  • LangerDanLangerDan Posts: 6,132
    So one self-interested group loses control of the money to another self-interested group? Any rival organisation, to be a viable alternative to the UCI, needs to be representative of all levels and codes in cycling, not just a mechanism to lay its hands on more cash.

    I think fundamental reform of the UCI is the key rather than another body - cycling is in enough sh!t without adding the "Judean Peoples Front" debacle that is boxing administration, for example.
    'This week I 'ave been mostly been climbing like Basso - Shirley Basso.'
  • Monty DogMonty Dog Posts: 20,614
    In response to the earlier question, it is the National Bodies that hold sway, particularly the core European nations of Italy, France, Belgium, Holland - there are probably in excess of 200 national body representatives, the vast majority are countries that have no interest in the professional sport.
    Make mine an Italian, with Campagnolo on the side..
  • mr_pollmr_poll Posts: 1,547
    LangerDan wrote:
    So one self-interested group loses control of the money to another self-interested group? Any rival organisation, to be a viable alternative to the UCI, needs to be representative of all levels and codes in cycling, not just a mechanism to lay its hands on more cash.

    I think fundamental reform of the UCI is the key rather than another body - cycling is in enough sh!t without adding the "Judean Peoples Front" debacle that is boxing administration, for example.

    The question comes from the fact that if the UCI doesn't fundamentally reform itself - which given its response so far and the behaviour of other governing bodies like FIFA seems possible - what happens? Will teams and sponsors be happy to anchor themselves to a wounded animal or given there seems to be an appetite for a breakaway will they jump?

    I agree no one wants a boxing situation - but could a F1 situation happen, with a business holding the elite sport and all its contracts with ASO et al (sort of like Bernie Eccleston does) with a much neutered governing body like the FIA looking after the interests of the sport. I am not saying F1 is an ideal solution but divorcing the governance and the money could reap benefits.
  • ProssPross Posts: 31,652
    If any evidence comes out linking the UCI as a whole or high ranking officials within it with conspiracy to cover up doping would the IOC perhaps insist on a major shake up / removal of tainted officials in order for the sport's Olympic status to be maintained?
  • edhornbyedhornby Posts: 1,780
    edited August 2012
    I get annoyed at the grubbiness of the UCI and then I look at FIFA, the IOC and their voting bungs record, the boxing belt givers... What would be better is for a load of the key european bodies to all decide on a non-grubby replacement for McQuaid

    never forget that BC voted for McQuaid on a regular basis.... maybe we should put up Dr Hutch for president of the UCI !
    "I get paid to make other people suffer on my wheel, how good is that"
    --Jens Voight
  • Personally I cannot think of a worse model to follow than that of F1 - where both the money and power are concentrated in the hands of one oligarch and there is an almost total disconnect between what's happening at the top from what is happening at grass roots. And that's before you consider the risk of having the governing body decide to replace the Tour de France with the Tour of the Oil States (three stages to be run under floodlights, no less) because a big bung is in the offing.
    They use their cars as shopping baskets; they use their cars as overcoats.
  • rick_chaseyrick_chasey Posts: 61,036 Lives Here
    Sport governance is definitely the place to be.

    So corruptible, and ultimately, so trivial, yet flush with cash.

    Man.

    I need a job at FIFA, UCI or FIA.
  • mr_pollmr_poll Posts: 1,547
    Personally I cannot think of a worse model to follow than that of F1 - where both the money and power are concentrated in the hands of one oligarch and there is an almost total disconnect between what's happening at the top from what is happening at grass roots. And that's before you consider the risk of having the governing body decide to replace the Tour de France with the Tour of the Oil States (three stages to be run under floodlights, no less) because a big bung is in the offing.

    Like I said I am not holding up F1 as the ideal but how is your comment different to the status quo. Currently the UCI are taking the sport global and creating races such as the 2 tours in China, where there are no crowds (unless they ship school kids into the finishing line), and teams are forced to send riders to maintain their licence - whilst messing with the traditional calendar, the tour of the falling leaves no longer being the last race of the season.
  • mr_poll wrote:
    Personally I cannot think of a worse model to follow than that of F1 - where both the money and power are concentrated in the hands of one oligarch and there is an almost total disconnect between what's happening at the top from what is happening at grass roots. And that's before you consider the risk of having the governing body decide to replace the Tour de France with the Tour of the Oil States (three stages to be run under floodlights, no less) because a big bung is in the offing.

    Like I said I am not holding up F1 as the ideal but how is your comment different to the status quo. Currently the UCI are taking the sport global and creating races such as the 2 tours in China, where there are no crowds (unless they ship school kids into the finishing line), and teams are forced to send riders to maintain their licence - whilst messing with the traditional calendar, the tour of the falling leaves no longer being the last race of the season.


    One piece of good news from the UCI today: Tour of Hangzhou not going ahead this year. Sure the teams will be devastated by this.
  • Sport governance is definitely the place to be.

    So corruptible, and ultimately, so trivial, yet flush with cash.

    Man.

    I need a job at FIFA, UCI or FIA.

    Or the FEI (horses) - awash with Arab oil money and all that that entails!
  • andy_wrxandy_wrx Posts: 3,396
    There's a filthy joke there, about 'why do they call camels the ships of the desert ?'

    I daren't post the answer, sure to get banned !
    (but Google has the answer :wink: )
  • Vino'sGhostVino'sGhost Posts: 4,129
    andy_wrx wrote:
    There's a filthy joke there, about 'why do they call camels the ships of the desert ?'

    I daren't post the answer, sure to get banned !
    (but Google has the answer :wink: )
    :):lol:

    Very good

    Ave ROFL calves
Sign In or Register to comment.