McQuaid - facing legal action
Comments
-
@paddypower 21 Aug
We've suspended betting on the next UCI President after some decent bets on Brian Cookson. Looks like Pat McQuaid's goose is cooked!0 -
That's a shame. There could have been some tempting odds on McQuaid. (I still think he'll find a way somehow)thomasmc wrote:@paddypower 21 Aug
We've suspended betting on the next UCI President after some decent bets on Brian Cookson. Looks like Pat McQuaid's goose is cooked!Twitter: @RichN950 -
Think or hope, Rich..?0
-
Think.ThomThom wrote:Think or hope, Rich..?
Personally, I don't really think it matters who is in charge of the UCI. ASO will still have all the money and power regardless of who is President.
This man has far more power than McQuaid or Cookson will ever have, and I bet most of you have never seen his face before:
Twitter: @RichN950 -
it's not looking good for Pat at the moment and hopefully we will get some good news soon that he is gone.0
-
RichN95 wrote:
Think.ThomThom wrote:Think or hope, Rich..?
Personally, I don't really think it matters who is in charge of the UCI. ASO will still have all the money and power regardless of who is President.
This man has far more power than McQuaid or Cookson will ever have, and I bet most of you have never seen his face before:
A-ha. Also depends whether Maman has handed over all the power to him yet0 -
Even if she hasn't, he still has more power than the UCI President. And so do Yann Le Moenner and Christian Prudhomme. And a dozen other people not at ASO.Richmond Racer wrote:A-ha. Also depends whether Maman has handed over all the power to him yet
For all the kerfuffle about the election in the English speaking media, the likes of Gazzetta, Marca and Sporza don't seem to care at all (L'Equipe covers it a little). At World Tour level, the UCI are basically just a rules committee.Twitter: @RichN950 -
I don't get all the Velocast/Festina Girl hissy fits about proper democratic process thats going on at the moment
There is absolutely no chance of ANYTHING changing while PMQ/HVB are still in charge of the UCI (whether or not they are in charge). In 4 years time Brian Cookson can run a proper election with proper candidates but all that will happen if he steps aside on some pointless personal sacrifice in the name of democracy is that we ll have 4 more years of crap and another non-election after that.
The UCI is a giant mess, a single election won't suddenly change everything. There is a chance so save it here, but its not going to be a shining example of democratic people power - this is sports administration after all!!We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
- @ddraver0 -
ddraver wrote:I don't get all the Velocast/Festina Girl hissy fits about proper democratic process thats going on at the moment
There is absolutely no chance of ANYTHING changing while PMQ/HVB are still in charge of the UCI (whether or not they are in charge). In 4 years time Brian Cookson can run a proper election with proper candidates but all that will happen if he steps aside on some pointless personal sacrifice in the name of democracy is that we ll have 4 more years of crap and another non-election after that.
The UCI is a giant mess, a single election won't suddenly change everything. There is a chance so save it here, but its not going to be a shining example of democratic people power - this is sports administration after all!!
What Cookson is doing - unlike PMQ - is working within the UCI process.
You know exactly why some of the usual suspects are up to their usual nonsense. And why if instead of Cookson, it was say, Greg LeMond or more realistically (as she's actually a national fed's rep to the UCI) Tracey Gaudry, they woudnt start this waste of space business about claiming that Cookson is 'dishonourable' if he doesnt withdraw if PMQ cant stand.
Cookson=British Cycling. Need I elaborate?0 -
His pathetic and corrupt attempts to hang on to power at all costs demonstrate what an untrustworthy and nasty man he is. Surely he must recognise that his day is done and the honourable thing to do is quietly fall on his sword. Honour does not seem a word that is in his vocabulary. It seems pretty obvious why the worst excesses of the Armstrong era were allowed to continue0
-
The UCI is about rules and promoting the sport of cycling. Although in this day and age, the money involved means the word sport can be replaced with business.
Given this, it is no surprise the mess that has prevailed. Looking objectively you can argue that Armstrong brought massive coverage and money to the sport. By the time the heads in the UCI had seen what he was up to (if they ever did) then who is going to stand up and kill the goose laying the golden eggs. Taking the hard faced business view and stance will mean that a status quo will exists until outside influences effect it (see Landis and Hamilton). They very nearly got away with it too.
This is no difference from the PPI scandals. False advertising claims and other such schemes from other big businesses wanting to make more money or increase their brand standing.
Me, I want to see the UCI looking after the rider’s interests rather then the business of the sport. That requires being responsible for ensuring the riders health and well-being. What other sport allows participants to continue in agony day after day with broken bones. Even boxing has measures to ensure this does not happen. And why are coaches that promote doping and cheating allowed to continue to practice?
The UCI could also relax the silly position and weight rules and all the aero restrictions. Keep with a basic bum behind feet and hands in front of both but that is it. Humans evolve and so do their ideas so allow the ingenuity of this to prosper in cycling not be restrained.
If the UCI keeps to the business end of its remit the problems will persist I fear
0 -
this is where the goverence and money making sides of cycling, and most sports to be honest, should be splot up then it won't matter if they make money or not just that they enforce the rules0
-
They are split up - at least at the top level of men's road racing. Governance = UCI, Money making = ASO, RCS etc.sherer wrote:this is where the goverence and money making sides of cycling, and most sports to be honest, should be splot up then it won't matter if they make money or not just that they enforce the rules
The UCI's annual revenues from road racing are about 6 million euros, about 12 million from all cycling. ASO's annual revenues are around 150 million euros - largely from cycling.Twitter: @RichN950 -
the UCI sell the TV rights to the world championships and also now promote a few races, Tour of Beijing and a few others. They will also have some revenue from the pro tour. Yes a lot of the money is going to ASO but they still get some media revenue and so have a comflict of interest on the governence side0
-
ASO promote Beijing.sherer wrote:the UCI sell the TV rights to the world championships and also now promote a few races, Tour of Beijing and a few others. They will also have some revenue from the pro tour. Yes a lot of the money is going to ASO but they still get some media revenue and so have a comflict of interest on the governence side
The UCI run the Worlds and they make a little money from that - but not much - about enough to pay Froome and Gilbert for a year. They are not the money makers in the sport.
They have to make a little money from somewhere or are you one of those people who demands they do more dope testing, promote women's cycling, have a T&R commission and prop up failing races or teams but think they shouldn't earn any money. You seem to think money grows on trees. It doesn't.Twitter: @RichN950 -
RichN95 wrote:ASO promote Beijing.
The UCI run the Worlds and they make a little money from that - but not much - about enough to pay Froome and Gilbert for a year. They are not the money makers in the sport.
They have to make a little money from somewhere or are you one of those people who demands they do more dope testing, promote women's cycling, have a T&R commission and prop up failing races or teams but think they shouldn't earn any money. You seem to think money grows on trees. It doesn't.
Sorry Rich, but you're wrong. The Tour of Beijing is promoted by Global Cycling Promotions, which is wholly owned by the UCI.
http://inrng.com/2011/04/the-ucis-new-private-business/0 -
Yeah, I got that a little wrong - ASO organise it. (It gets listed in ASO's list of races on their website)andyp wrote:
Sorry Rich, but you're wrong. The Tour of Beijing is promoted by Global Cycling Promotions, which is wholly owned by the UCI.
http://inrng.com/2011/04/the-ucis-new-private-business/
It still doesn't make the UCI the sports money makers though, just the makers of a little money.Twitter: @RichN950 -
andyp wrote:RichN95 wrote:ASO promote Beijing.
The UCI run the Worlds and they make a little money from that - but not much - about enough to pay Froome and Gilbert for a year. They are not the money makers in the sport.
They have to make a little money from somewhere or are you one of those people who demands they do more dope testing, promote women's cycling, have a T&R commission and prop up failing races or teams but think they shouldn't earn any money. You seem to think money grows on trees. It doesn't.
Sorry Rich, but you're wrong. The Tour of Beijing is promoted by Global Cycling Promotions, which is wholly owned by the UCI.
http://inrng.com/2011/04/the-ucis-new-private-business/
And this follow up article is worth reading as well... http://inrng.com/2012/08/tour-of-hangzhou/0 -
In recent years we had the "Squeeze" by the UCI to control the 3 GT's and the ASO wouldn't play ball.
The ASO (& French Fed) threatened to form a different controlling body and even ran the TDF outside the UCI regulations by using the French Fed regulations.
The other GT's threatened to follow.
This was all about the UCI getting the large payments from TV companies.
The UCI formed the World Tour which is now consistently eroding the Long Established Historic European Tour and have this new tool the "Global Cycling Promotions" which as it grows will eventually get control of the ASO TV rights.
The Irish seem to be well endowed in this new "Global" venture.
Will Cookson be able to withstand this setup or will he become another "Political Pawn" to this growing Prize.Organiser, National Championship 50 mile Time Trial 19720 -
In terms of the result of Cookson vs Mcquaid are any bookies gving odds?0
-
0
-
-
Twitter: @RichN950
-
not sure the UCI will ever be able to get the rights of the ASO but with them going into cycling promotions it's the wrong direction for them to take and is a clear conflict of interest0
-
deejay wrote:The Irish seem to be well endowed in this new "Global" venture.
Besides Pat McQuaid, who else from Ireland is involved in Global Cycling Promotions?
DD.0 -
http://inrng.com/2010/09/a-family-busin ... h-mcquaid/
The problem with the UCI started when Verbruggen and McQuaid dreamed up the World Tour to try and take the TV coverage away from the race promoters like ASO. The problem was the whole venture was being bank-rolled by the likes of Thom Weisel and his Tailwind Sports cronies (who at one time looked at see if they could buy-out ASO).
Thankfully, as ASO is still a family-owned business, they weren't for selling.Make mine an Italian, with Campagnolo on the side..0 -
Just being polite but there is a whole Irish family.Dolan Driver wrote:deejay wrote:The Irish seem to be well endowed in this new "Global" venture.
Besides Pat McQuaid, who else from Ireland is involved in Global Cycling Promotions?
DD.
Find an Irish forum and tune in to find them defending Pat against all comers.
There are many that are in position to continue the regime, should he fall.
Remember to follow the money over the last 2 decades.Organiser, National Championship 50 mile Time Trial 19720
