BC and the Worlds

morstar

Can't agree with posters saying nations should have to enter women. Why? because women's cycling lacks strength in depth and isn't awash with money. Conversely, for BC to take this approach is pretty lame. Considering the budget and available talent pool, why doesn't Britain have a credible female TT'er?
It reflects badly on BC, they can't be developing talent for this event and it does show contempt for the sport. How come we can completely dominate the track at the olympics but can't field a single credible competitor in a TT which is a reasonably controllable event. We're only going to play if we can win.

ozzzyosborn206

morstar wrote:

Can't agree with posters saying nations should have to enter women. Why? because women's cycling lacks strength in depth and isn't awash with money. Conversely, for BC to take this approach is pretty lame. Considering the budget and available talent pool, why doesn't Britain have a credible female TT'er?
It reflects badly on BC, they can't be developing talent for this event and it does show contempt for the sport. How come we can completely dominate the track at the olympics but can't field a single credible competitor in a TT which is a reasonably controllable event. We're only going to play if we can win.

Because the funding provided to BC is based on Olympic success, there is a lot more gold medals to be won on the track than in womens TT, I don't agree with what they have done, I do not believe BC is so strapped for cash that they couldn't afford a flight and hotel for a woman to ride the TT. Maybe they feel none of them have shown the desire they think should be required to represent your country for the TT, lots of pro cyclists barely touch their TT bikes.

No_Ta_Doctor

Macaloon wrote:

OCDuPalais wrote:

Macaloon wrote:

I don't think a guy who has created a road team with no room for the Yates bros can be considered a success.

Thereby making every team a failure except OGE?

It sounds like they turned Sky down - not the other way around.

I have a very long charge sheet but I won't bore you with the details. I was referring to Dave's interview this year where he talked about them being 'in a better place'.

“They’re in the right team, they made the right decision,” Brailsford added. “They are getting their opportunities. Those opportunities are difficult to get in our team. If they were in our team they’d be working.”

There's something wrong with your team of lions then, Dave. The management consultants, perhaps?
http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest-news/team-sky-eyes-yates-brothers-2016-126789

Just out of interest, how would you fit the Yates bros into SKY? Which races would they get to lead? Which races would they get to go after stages? Which riders would be demoted or booted to fit them in?

Orica had space for them because they had stuff all in the way of GC riders to begin with. Sky is chock full of deluxe domestiques who want a guarantee of a couple of week long stage races as leader or a crack at the GTs.

morstar

ozzzyosborn206 wrote:

morstar wrote:

Can't agree with posters saying nations should have to enter women. Why? because women's cycling lacks strength in depth and isn't awash with money. Conversely, for BC to take this approach is pretty lame. Considering the budget and available talent pool, why doesn't Britain have a credible female TT'er?
It reflects badly on BC, they can't be developing talent for this event and it does show contempt for the sport. How come we can completely dominate the track at the olympics but can't field a single credible competitor in a TT which is a reasonably controllable event. We're only going to play if we can win.

Because the funding provided to BC is based on Olympic success, there is a lot more gold medals to be won on the track than in womens TT, I don't agree with what they have done, I do not believe BC is so strapped for cash that they couldn't afford a flight and hotel for a woman to ride the TT. Maybe they feel none of them have shown the desire they think should be required to represent your country for the TT, lots of pro cyclists barely touch their TT bikes.

Point taken about possible current contenders not demonstrating desire as a possibility but it is an Olympic event. There is no excuse for BC not having the talent pool to select from. The Tp team has a squad of riders vying for those 4 spots just to chase 1 medal. Why can't we produce a TT talent pool. If anything it's Britains strongest competitive cycling heritage. No shortage of events to get those riders into without paying rent on shiny velodromes. Probably the cheapest medal to chase.

No_Ta_Doctor

morstar wrote:

ozzzyosborn206 wrote:

morstar wrote:

Can't agree with posters saying nations should have to enter women. Why? because women's cycling lacks strength in depth and isn't awash with money. Conversely, for BC to take this approach is pretty lame. Considering the budget and available talent pool, why doesn't Britain have a credible female TT'er?
It reflects badly on BC, they can't be developing talent for this event and it does show contempt for the sport. How come we can completely dominate the track at the olympics but can't field a single credible competitor in a TT which is a reasonably controllable event. We're only going to play if we can win.

Because the funding provided to BC is based on Olympic success, there is a lot more gold medals to be won on the track than in womens TT, I don't agree with what they have done, I do not believe BC is so strapped for cash that they couldn't afford a flight and hotel for a woman to ride the TT. Maybe they feel none of them have shown the desire they think should be required to represent your country for the TT, lots of pro cyclists barely touch their TT bikes.

Point taken about possible current contenders not demonstrating desire as a possibility but it is an Olympic event. There is no excuse for BC not having the talent pool to select from. The Tp team has a squad of riders vying for those 4 spots just to chase 1 medal. Why can't we produce a TT talent pool. If anything it's Britains strongest competitive cycling heritage. No shortage of events to get those riders into without paying rent on shiny velodromes. Probably the cheapest medal to chase.

It's also an event with a fairly limited field and where Britain has plenty of expertise in the training and tech to get results. Not to mention the relative ease of conversion from e.g. pursuit. It seems daft not to make a bit of investment here, there's a huge opportunity.

Macaloon

No tA Doctor wrote:

Just out of interest, how would you fit the Yates bros into SKY? Which races would they get to lead? Which races would they get to go after stages? Which riders would be demoted or booted to fit them in?

Orica had space for them because they had stuff all in the way of GC riders to begin with. Sky is chock full of deluxe domestiques who want a guarantee of a couple of week long stage races as leader or a crack at the GTs.

When your dream team is the cycling equivalent of 8 David Battys leading out Emile Heskey, there's no space for a Le Tissier. This works well for one race a year unless your Heskey falls off, leaving you with 8 Daves. Cofidis are a more competitive team than 8 Battys.

The problem is with Dave's concept. It doesn't work in the real world of pro road cycling, failing most spectacularly in rider recruitment and motivation.

RichN95.

Macaloon wrote:

When your dream team is the cycling equivalent of 8 David Battys leading out Emile Heskey, there's no space for a Le Tissier. This works well for one race a year unless your Heskey falls off, leaving you with 8 Daves. Cofidis are a more competitive team than 8 Battys.

The problem is with Dave's concept. It doesn't work in the real world of pro road cycling, failing most spectacularly in rider recruitment and motivation.

If I may expand on your football analogy,

David Batty and Emile Heskey both won trophies, played in the Champions League and World Cup. They were unselfish team players. Ones that let the stars shine. Le Tissier could be brilliant, but he could also be a fat luxury. We won nothing and never played in the biggest tournaments. In cycling terms he won .1 ranked races with panache for a Continental team. He was Adam Blythe or Tiernan-Locke, not Froome. He was a stand out player in a crap team. A team which got relegated when he retired and recovered by developing youngsters and giving them a chance. Youngsters that left as soon as a big club showed interest. (At least Southampton got paid).

Eric Cantona once called Didier Deschamps a water carrier (maybe he actually used the word domestique). Deschamps won the World Cup, European Championship and Champions League. Cantona didn't.

You need workers in a team. You can have as many Le Tissier's as you like, but you won't win anything. Because others have Zidane, Baggio, Ronaldo or Figo.

john1967

Women cant win = women don't count or matter.
One of the the fastest riders at my club is a woman.
What does this say to my daughter,partner and all female cyclists.It says **** you.


BC if you continue down this route you will destroy female sports cycling and don't talk crap about money,a few less pinarellos would probably pay for some extra coaching.So get real or ladys cycling will become a laughing stock just like ladys football was.Believe it or not girls like playing sport too but they are rarely given the opportunity.

Please rethink your policy or don't expect my family membership again

morstar

No tA Doctor wrote:

morstar wrote:

ozzzyosborn206 wrote:

morstar wrote:

Can't agree with posters saying nations should have to enter women. Why? because women's cycling lacks strength in depth and isn't awash with money. Conversely, for BC to take this approach is pretty lame. Considering the budget and available talent pool, why doesn't Britain have a credible female TT'er?
It reflects badly on BC, they can't be developing talent for this event and it does show contempt for the sport. How come we can completely dominate the track at the olympics but can't field a single credible competitor in a TT which is a reasonably controllable event. We're only going to play if we can win.

Because the funding provided to BC is based on Olympic success, there is a lot more gold medals to be won on the track than in womens TT, I don't agree with what they have done, I do not believe BC is so strapped for cash that they couldn't afford a flight and hotel for a woman to ride the TT. Maybe they feel none of them have shown the desire they think should be required to represent your country for the TT, lots of pro cyclists barely touch their TT bikes.

Point taken about possible current contenders not demonstrating desire as a possibility but it is an Olympic event. There is no excuse for BC not having the talent pool to select from. The Tp team has a squad of riders vying for those 4 spots just to chase 1 medal. Why can't we produce a TT talent pool. If anything it's Britains strongest competitive cycling heritage. No shortage of events to get those riders into without paying rent on shiny velodromes. Probably the cheapest medal to chase.

It's also an event with a fairly limited field and where Britain has plenty of expertise in the training and tech to get results. Not to mention the relative ease of conversion from e.g. pursuit. It seems daft not to make a bit of investment here, there's a huge opportunity.

The more I think about it, the more it lends weight to the BC elite programme having a real problem with strong women. The young BC 'girls' are performing brilliantly at present and probably do what they are told largely without question. As they mature and develop more of a voice of their own, it will be interesting to see how the current crop of female talent fairs in the environment. Will there be an ever expanding list of female stars who are just 'really difficult to deal with'?

If so, questions would/should have to be asked of how the programme treats the female disciplines and contingent.

If it needs referencing, I've heard repeatedly through many mediums that NC, VP, WH, EP... are all difficult to deal with. i.e. all of the female riders who have had great success but aren't in their early twenties / late teens.

Contrast that to the men where it is only BW who gets portrayed as awkward.

Macaloon

RichN95 wrote:

If I may expand on your football analogy,

David Batty and Emile Heskey both won trophies, played in the Champions League and World Cup. They were unselfish team players. Ones that let the stars shine. Le Tissier could be brilliant, but he could also be a fat luxury. We won nothing and never played in the biggest tournaments. In cycling terms he won .1 ranked races with panache for a Continental team. He was Adam Blythe or Tiernan-Locke, not Froome. He was a stand out player in a crap team. A team which got relegated when he retired and recovered by developing youngsters and giving them a chance. Youngsters that left as soon as a big club showed interest. (At least Southampton got paid).

Eric Cantona once called Didier Deschamps a water carrier (maybe he actually used the word domestique). Deschamps won the World Cup, European Championship and Champions League. Cantona didn't.

You need workers in a team. You can have as many Le Tissier's as you like, but you won't win anything. Because others have Zidane, Baggio, Ronaldo or Figo.

Quality contribution. Ta.

I'm suggesting fewer Battys, or fewer Viera/Petits/Nieves playing à la Batty (doubt our Dave gets a game) would make for a more competitive squad across the season. Froome doesn't need 8 guys programmed to self-destruct on the edge of the box.

A Yates style rider would pose problems for other teams, give Froome more tactical options, the team a stage threat in the event of crashes, opportunities for developing/flamboyant riders, but the occasional divide by zero on the spreadsheet.

Even the 'keeper kept with panache.

RichN95.

The problem that Sky have is that they got too successful too early. So they became a team that was expected to be winning big races within two seasons. They didn't really expect that happen as well as it did.

At their outset they were set up with a few contenders (but not champions) and a lot of youth to bring through - the Ellingworth generation - Thomas, Stannard, Kennaugh, Swift (and loosely associated, Froome and Cavendish elsewhere). Those riders are now contending and winning races. Not big ones (well Froome is, Cavendish already was), but they may not have done at other teams either.
But then there is yet another generation behind them - Rowe, Puccio, Boswell, Sicknoteski, Edmondson, Henao Jr.

There's just not enough development opportunities to go around. While I think Dombrowski, if he gets fit, will be better than the Yates in the long run, Sky might be advised to let him and Boswell move on and concentrate on Brits (and Italians due to Sky Italia)

Biffcp

They should put Sir Brailsford in charge of the England kickball team, that way we wouldn't have to undergo the quadrennial excruciating embarrassment that is the World Cup, because as no-hopers they wouldn't be there. They could spend the immense finances on providing exercise facilities for children. Sorted.

mroli

@biff - I often think this about man city. With all the money that comes out of their owners and the oilfields, SURELY if they wanted the biggest club in the UK, you do it by effectively "buying" Manchester as a City. 5 a'side pitches everywhere, sponsor school facilities, everything is "sky" (lower case s) blue.

But the thing is that isn't where the money is. Ask Rapha. They have stopped making virtually all their money domestically and now make it internationally. That's where the big cash is - that's where the big football exposure is and "bang" goes sport as a mover and shaker for local, grass roots good.

I'd rather watch lower league football than premiership football (mind you as a Wolves fan, that's a good thing). I'm increasingly feeling this about pro-cycling too....

little ring needed

sjmclean wrote:

The main difference to me it seems is BC will accept they won't win something, so won't waste money or resources on it, but most other cycling nations will just blindly do it because it's what they have always done, and that's what FF wants blind acceptance of things because that's what true champion, real cycling fan pros do.

I'll take this post but could take any one of the many posts suggesting that BC have some sort of plan that only backs things when there is a chance of success.

For the newbies who have only discovered cycling in the last couple of years. maybe that lie is one you can swallow from the BC/Sky publicity machine, but for the older posters, come on, have you lost your memories ?

Let's try going back in the annals of history like all the way back to 2010. Men's road race, nobody finished and nobody was ever win with a chance. Go back to 2008 - full men's team taken, 1 finisher, well done on Russel Downing, he was getting his shot and was going to give it everything. Nobody else finished. Was this a surprise ? Weeks earlier at the 2008 Olympics - again not a single individual in the full team finished. No it was not a surprise. Was it a lottery funded holiday for the male GB team?

2009 - A full men's team. Steve Cummings 52 and Roger Hammond 92, the rest out of it. Nobody was going to say any GB man was in with a shout that year either.

This is BS from BC and it says a lot about the some of the posters that they don't recognise it as such.

Take that 2008 again and look across the fence. For the GB women - not a full team and that was after Beijing ! They had the squad, but BC just couldn't be bothered to fill it out. Nobody in the press asked and nobody was bothered. At long last a few people are starting to wake up to the fact that BC run a sexist selection campaign for the road girls. Sadly those highlighting this issue are being derailed by people heckiling from the side who seem to want to forget BC backed loser men for year after year with lottery funding with the justification that they were building up the squad.

Last year they had Katie Colclough there who rode in the winning team in the team time trial event days before. Again couldn't be bothered to pick her for the TT, a vacant berth - no GB rep ! Her team thought she was good enough to ride, no expense to get her there, She was selected for the road race, so they were not saving any lottery money. Katie complained. Katie then left the sport. I fail to understand how that is a sign of great management from Sir Dave and Sutton.

Now some idiot press person comes out, spouts BS and the people who don't know anything about the history become cheerleaders for the lie - it the best plan by Sir David - only back winners. As another poster so rightly pointed out, BC male management have a real problem trying to deal with women you know their minds. Katie and Pooley the latest to walk away from the sport, while oodles of lottery money has washed around the trackies and male road programs.

mm1

100% LRN. Nicole makes legitimate complaints, backed up with evidence, in her book and is dismissed as "difficult". Are Nicole or Pooley any more "difficult" than Wiggins? BC establishment is still a boys club, despite claiming to have "taken on board" Nicole Cooke's criticism.

salsiccia1

LRN - quality post.

eh

F**k wrote a nice response and the sodding website went wrong - sort your servers out!!!!

Anyway to not enter a woman in the TT is a very poor decision and sends out a very negative message about womens cycling under BC. Also somewhat goes against one of the selection criteria which is for the learning for potential Olympic medalists.

A positive womens story, funnily enough in a discipline that BC aren't very involved with.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/races/uci-mountain-bike-world-championships-2014/elite-women-downhill/results

jimmythecuckoo

SDB, a sexist...who knew?

Maybe Pendleton, Cooke and Pooley.


Anyway it's a stupid decision not to at least take a promising rider to blood them at world championship level for experience.

Is British Cycling losing its head up its own arse?

The governing body would do well to look a the sport in its entirety and represent its memberships views on this one.

#Letfemalesride

No_Ta_Doctor

jimmythecuckoo wrote:

SDB, a sexist...who knew?

Maybe Pendleton, Cooke and Pooley.


Anyway it's a stupid decision not to at least take a promising rider to blood them at world championship level for experience.

Is British Cycling losing its head up its own ars*?

The governing body would do well to look a the sport in its entirety and represent its memberships views on this one.

#Letfemalesride

Probably more a case of institutionalised sexism rather than any specific individuals. Though I've not read Nicole's book so I could be entirely wrong.

RichN95.

Whether BC is sexist or not I don't know. But the possibility of this scenario is an illustration as to why the idea some have that all World Tour teams should be forced to have a women's team is a terrible one.

andy_wrx

jimmythecuckoo wrote:

#Letfemalesride

Women, please.

They are not 'females', they are women.

(and they are not 'ladies' either, as that's hugely sexist and patronising)

tailwindhome

andy_wrx wrote:

jimmythecuckoo wrote:

#Letfemalesride

Women, please.

They are not 'females', they are women.

(and they are not 'ladies' either, as that's hugely sexist and patronising)

Girls?

little ring needed

RichN95 wrote:

Whether BC is sexist or not I don't know. But the possibility of this scenario is an illustration as to why the idea some have that all World Tour teams should be forced to have a women's team is a terrible one.

I would very much like you to elaborate your argument here.

On the one hand BC are sloshing around money they haven't earned, but been gifted by the public, with the only oversight being that from the bunch of numpties that make up the sporting press. As we have witnessed time and again, these are, in the main, the very opposite of investigative journalists. Cheerleaders for the gravy train is what they are all about, look at the number of cycling books these guys are churning out. So the fact that BC run a program that either via intention or by pure freak accident, is sexist in outcome, for many years, nobody has given a da*n.

At least if some private operation was forced to justify spending the bosses cash and they had to run a women's team, maybe the boss would say, well at least make sure you get these girls on TV.

I think it is a solution but I would very much like to learn the counter.

RichN95.

little ring needed wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

Whether BC is sexist or not I don't know. But the possibility of this scenario is an illustration as to why the idea some have that all World Tour teams should be forced to have a women's team is a terrible one.

I would very much like you to elaborate your argument here.

Sure.

In the past many people have argued that as a condition of a team being in the World Tour they should have to support a women's team. I have argued against this as what women's cycling needs is passionate support from committed sponsors and management, not men's teams that see them as, for want of a better word, a tax.

And if the sexism that you others say exists at BC is genuine, then that would be replicated in the women's scene for the reluctant sponsors.

You think it would force them to get it on TV, but that's not happening with Rabo/Giant/Orica etc. I think you'd just get neglect and broken promises.

morstar

The two issues are separate. The pro womens scene is subject to market forces. I happen to agree that the womens pro scene has a lot of work to do before the money will come. It may not be helped by the UCI and lots of other influences but that is a digression.

Conversely, BC, have no excuse for not supporting and fully developing the womens elite programme, their income is based on olympic medals to which the female contingent have fully contributed. The lack of a TT entrant is pretty much inexcusable.

r0bh

Many posts, but unless I've missed it no-one has actually suggested who this great TT talent that BC have snubbed is?

Great that everyone feels so strongly about women's cycling though, I'm looking forward to many pages of debate on Spoiler threads for the women's world champs races and next year's UCI World Cup races.

RichN95.

r0bh wrote:

Many posts, but unless I've missed it no-one has actually suggested who this great TT talent that BC have snubbed is?

Is that the point though? Surely if we see ourselves as a premier cycling nation we should put someone forward, even of the best riders are off doing track (PS change the track date). FFS the GB men's TT staple used to be Stuart Dangerfield.

GB cycling first noticed Chris Froome as a no-mark Kenyan with crap kit and no support. Maybe he should have stayed at home as he couldn't win.

frenchfighter

andy_wrx wrote:

jimmythecuckoo wrote:

#Letfemalesride

Women, please.

They are not 'females', they are women.

(and they are not 'ladies' either, as that's hugely sexist and patronising)

Bizzare post.

morstar

r0bh wrote:

Many posts, but unless I've missed it no-one has actually suggested who this great TT talent that BC have snubbed is?

Great that everyone feels so strongly about women's cycling though, I'm looking forward to many pages of debate on Spoiler threads for the women's world champs races and next year's UCI World Cup races.

The two issues are separate. I have consistently argued that women's pro cycling lacks strength in depth on here but still take the view that BC's position is untenable.

Britain has dominated track cycling not through a fluke of natural talent but through identifying a pool of talent and developing it to its full potential. They have failed to do that here and I can't really fathom an excuse.

It is possible to hold that view whilst having serious concerns about the credibility of the women's pro scene. But I don't want to take this off topic. It's been debated elsewhere and I've put my views forward there.

tailwindhome

Ireland aren't entering the girl's race either.
And only taking 1 of the 2 men's TT places on offer.