If anyone is surprised by this they havent been paying attention for the past 20 yearsSERIOUSLY UCI???
Even as a LTS fan, what a fking joke. You've made teams doing horribly stupid things for months now for this??
I know there has been a a lot of teams lobbying for this for a while but I also thought UCI always said no.
Just to be clear, the article just says UCI is thinking about having 20 WT teams, not that it has been confirmed.
There may be a few posters like LS, Netserk and Bavarianrider who agree with that but I don't think there will be unanimous excitement about those proposals.I was just thinking last night we need 20 teams, minimum, maybe 25, with 10 riders per race.
Shorter time trials as well(maybe scrap them entirely), with short, action packed stages for the casual viewers like T20 cricket but with cycling, and better communication devices too certainly.
It sounded more like you thought that crashes had gotten worse which I really don't think is the case.This is a forum I really don't need some significant statistical evidence to state something. I really don't have the feeling 2 teams more or less does anything to safety no.
You do realize Israel is deadlast and not Lotto right? If you honestly think this is to save Lotto, the only team that probably somewhat survives being PCT, you're just straight up dumb. It's not Lotto that's threatening the UCI with legal action.So, what happens when in the next cycle we have 21 teams battling for the top 20 & Lotto are 21st, do we just keep increasing the number of WT teams to save Lotto?
every team and sponsor in DANGER of being relegated could threatening UCI with legal action. too much at stake. sponsor and riders could leave if the team is relegated, jobs are in danger. do you think Israel alone is ready to go with legal action? open the focus.You do realize Israel is deadlast and not Lotto right? If you honestly think this is to save Lotto, the only team that probably somewhat survives being PCT, you're just straight up dumb. It's not Lotto that's threatening the UCI with legal action.
That’s interesting—I didn’t think of that perspective.Cycling has always struggled to secure long term funding for WT teams with many teams coming and going over the journey. Now that we have 20 teams who have the money to invest in the WT it seems crazy for the UCI to say we don't need your money and possibly lose investment in the sport.
Well, at the same time, you've got to look at the enormous parallel shrinking away of investment in the ProTeam level. It has been something of a PremierLeagueification of the sport, there's now more investment in the top level, but it's then concentrated all of the talent into a small number of teams and reduced the ProTeams to largely being irrelevant break fodder with only one or two teams as exceptions, whereas if you look at the late 2000s/early 2010s you can see a large number of very competitive ProConti teams who were contributing favourites to every Classic (this is the one area they do compete similarly here, with Mathieu van der Poel) and almost every major stage race, with the likes of Voeckler, Scarponi, Garzelli, Marcato, Mosquera, Sastre, di Luca, Petacchi, Visconti, Hoogerland, Pozzovivo, Leukemans, Carrara, de Waele, Tondó, Hushovd, Haussler, Moncoutié, Taaramäe, Keukeleire, Evans, Hincapie, Ballan, Kristoff and Rujano all riding at that level in a short period of time.That’s interesting—I didn’t think of that perspective.
Either that or somebody fed them the story to try to pressure it, a bit like when someone at AquaBlue prematurely leaked merger information and caused said move to fall apart.
So Cyclingnews just made something up. Nothing new.
I really like this relegation battle. Its adds some much needed spice for lots of races. Now, we can argue it could have been done a lot different, but its super interesting to follow and has been for a while now. I like it.As UCI says game is still on:
Matthews 2nd and Cortina 5th in Québec tonight. Big points for BEX and Movistar.
No Lotto or Israel in the top 20.
It should happen every year! Or atleast every second year. Then it wouldn’t be such a disaster to be relegated as you quite quickly could bounce back. Now with a 3 year perspective I think that looks more overwhelming for teams and sponsors getting relegated.I really like this relegation battle. Its adds some much needed spice for lots of races. Now, we can argue it could have been done a lot different, but its super interesting to follow and has been for a while now. I like it.