Originally Posted by peterst6906
you're a smart guy. Go back and read some of the things written earlier in the thread. No real facts, just a heap of assumptions about who is right and wrong to sit on the management committee; and what all of the current committee members must be.
All of the rubbish and corruption that comes out of Pat and before him Hein aside, what is the right structure of the management committee and how should those members be appointed?
There is an enormous difference between what you have asserted as racial statements and the power and influence factors within the UCI.
It is too bad that you don't seem to understand the importance of the Pro Peloton, and its membership, and the power factors at the UCI. Please refer to the qualification criteria for the Olympic Road race.
Of the 144 slots available in the Men's RR, 5 are allocated to the 'UCI Africa Tour', 7 allocated to the 'UCI Asia Tour', 2 to the 'UCI Oceania Tour', 2 to the African Championship, 2 to the (non-North) American Championship, and 2 to the Asian Championship.
That means that UCI Committee Membership for Cuba and S. Korea is aligned with exactly one of the 144 slots between the two.
Who got all the slots?
Spain, Belgium, Italy, Australia, Great Britain, Germany, Netherlands, United States, and Switzerland all had 5 slots and almost one-third of the total participants. These nations all receiving those slots based upon their results in the UCI World Tour = Pro Peloton.
With respect to anything approaching racist statements, one of my examples above was Canada (1 slot of 144). Please explain how that example can be interpreted as racist. Not that there isn't racism present in Canada, of course, but your logic has baffled me.
Another example was Cuba's lack of support for their athletes to compete as professionals (and exactly 9 slots. This is a fact. Please explain how that could be interpreted as a racist comment.
You are way out of line.
If you think that anything I wrote is racist, please report it. Same for anyone else.
Otherwise, please moderate yourself.
Now, you made the assertion that all of the Central and S. American countries would be happy being represented by Cuba. Is that naive or racist?
Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, and Venezuela had more Olympic participants than Cuba while Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala and Uruguay had less.
Which of those countries do you believe felt that the Cuban member also did a good job of representing their national interests?
Here is a better question. There are countries (e.g. Great Britain and Canada) that share embassy and consular facilities around the world. How many countries in the Americas share embassy and consular facilities with Cuba?