• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Changes Cookson has implemented at UCI

Page 21 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
More Strides than Rides said:
Yes, there are many examples of conflicts of interest.

- his son works with the most prolific team in cycling
- his releases and updates on the independent commission show that it is not truly independent
- firing many of the old guard but failing to release Zorzoli. Then, circumventing WADA guidelines and dissolving the TUE panel, giving sole responsibility to Zorzoli

And don't forget that his very election was a break from procedure and protocol

Edit: I am forgetting details, but isn't the Kimmage lawsuit still in play? Something that it was postponed but not withdrawn by the uci? I think I am misrembering

Sitting on the team Sky board.
Declaring Froome "clean".
 
stutue said:
In theory the UCI could do more, but there is the vexed question of who pays for it.

In the meantime other decisions have to be made about other things in cycling that are not related to anti-doping but are about the smooth running of the sport of about its promotion. That is the job of the UCI.

I'm fully aware that there are some people who spend much of their waking lives on this forum banging on and on about whatever their particular obsession is, whilst not actually being a part of the sport or contributing to it or anti-doping in any way beyond lazily sliding their finger across a 3" screen, but actually...

...life goes on. :)

And why exactly are the finances of the sport so poor ?

Why have sponsors been leaving the sport ?

Why is the Cycling brand toxic to any potential new sponsors ?

...

That's Right ... Litter !!!


..

:rolleyes:
 
Feb 28, 2010
1,661
0
0
Visit site
keeponrollin said:
And why exactly are the finances of the sport so poor ?

Why have sponsors been leaving the sport ?

Why is the Cycling brand toxic to any potential new sponsors ?
...

That's Right ... Litter !!!
..
:rolleyes:

You don't have to look very hard to find complaints about races generating litter:

"A ride in the Italian countryside is invariably enjoyable but you will often spot copious amounts of waste in the grass verge. Drinks cans including many countless Esta Thé cups – official drink of the Giro – litter the roadsides. If Italian roadsides are notable for the junk the pro peloton can litter worldwide with riders dumping gel wrappers to the point where if you ride the route of a major race the day after there’s no need for GPS because you can follow the birdseed-style trail of used energy products. These zones are a good start but the cultural change has some way to go."

This is a polite example.
 
Hawkwood said:
You don't have to look very hard to find complaints about races generating litter:

"A ride in the Italian countryside is invariably enjoyable but you will often spot copious amounts of waste in the grass verge. Drinks cans including many countless Esta Thé cups – official drink of the Giro – litter the roadsides. If Italian roadsides are notable for the junk the pro peloton can litter worldwide with riders dumping gel wrappers to the point where if you ride the route of a major race the day after there’s no need for GPS because you can follow the birdseed-style trail of used energy products. These zones are a good start but the cultural change has some way to go."

This is a polite example.

I'm not saying there aren't issues outside of doping in the sport; but if you asked a group of a hundred non-cyclists what the most serious issue facing the sport was, & what the head of the UCI should be focusing on, I'm pretty sure, cameras on bikes, & litter wouldn't feature in 90% of them !

They're worth the attention of others outside of the top table, but not the head honcho !

It's like White Star line CEO announcing a taskforce to find a better orchestra for future Trans-Atlantic voyages, the week after the Titanic sank, because one of the survivors didn't like the last one :rolleyes:
 
stutue said:
In the meantime other decisions have to be made about other things in cycling that are not related to anti-doping but are about the smooth running of the sport of about its promotion. That is the job of the UCI.

No. The UCI's job actually is to create and enforce the rules of the sport.

They indirectly promote the sport with rules that are supposed to create a dramatic, but "fair" game. I don't want to argue what's fair. Obviously, they are the final arbiters of the WT schedule too. That's it.

Lately, they have tried and failed to become promoters themselves by funding World Cycling Promotions out of UCI funds. Another totally inappropriate and failed operation by the federation.
 

stutue

BANNED
Apr 22, 2014
875
0
0
Visit site
DirtyWorks said:

Errr...yes.

From the UCI website:

The UCI administers and promotes the development of the eight disciplines of cycling.

The UCI’s mission is to develop and promote cycling, in close collaboration with National Federations.
 
keeponrollin said:
Me, I'm still waiting for him to hand over control of doping to WADA; how long is it since he promised us that he'd pass doping control over to an Independent body ???

Haha. Ok, what was really clever about the way Cookson vaguely mentioned this was the "independent body" would actually be run by the UCI. So, "independent" meaning maybe a new email address @uci.ch and maybe even a voicemail number!

The only thing the UCI has to do is let WADA open cases on tests run by any anti-doping authority. That's all. Not expensive, not impossible. It would also put an end to what Jamaica's NADO was doing. They were testing in country to be certain their athletes weren't positive before they left.

That would cause a fire storm with every other IOC sport hiding their dopers. (ex. IAAF for sure) Remember the IAAF leader wailed about Armstrong's case and how USADA was overstepping their charter.
 
Feb 28, 2010
1,661
0
0
Visit site
keeponrollin said:
I'm not saying there aren't issues outside of doping in the sport; but if you asked a group of a hundred non-cyclists what the most serious issue facing the sport was, & what the head of the UCI should be focusing on, I'm pretty sure, cameras on bikes, & litter wouldn't feature in 90% of them !

They're worth the attention of others outside of the top table, but not the head honcho !

It's like White Star line CEO announcing a taskforce to find a better orchestra for future Trans-Atlantic voyages, the week after the Titanic sank, because one of the survivors didn't like the last one :rolleyes:

The bit about litter is not new it was in the October 2013 UCI bulletin on page two, headed `Sustainability', it's didn't appear to be a Cookson initiative, the idea looks to have been French. The important point for me is that in an ideal world the UCI would be able to sell cycling to sponsors as being a healthy, environmentally friendly, high visibility (as in on the TV) sport. In the real world `healthy' is kn*ckered due to the drugs and this can't be fixed easily, so you don't then want to lose the `environmentally friendly' bit as you've then only got `high visibility' left. So you don't want reporters sugesting that cycling isn't environmetally friendly, as they are already doing. If I was a cyclist hating reporter on the Daily Mail, and was sent out to do a negative story on the Tour going through the Yorkshire Dales, I'd focus on rubbish, traffic jams, and local businesses losing money. And if you asked 100 British non-cyclists what was the biggest issue facing the sport they'd say clogging the roads up.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
TailWindHome said:
Genuine question.

Has there been anything revealed about Cookson either in his career to date or personal life which suggest that he will be corrupt/ corruptible as UCI president?

Cookson was part of the UCI management committee for years.

His 10 months in the job have not shown anything other than business as usual at Aigle.
 
Hawkwood said:
The bit about litter is not new it was in the October 2013 UCI bulletin on page two, headed `Sustainability',

Wow, so they've been working on it for a whole 9 months :rolleyes:

In the real world `healthy' is kn*ckered due to the drugs and this can't be fixed easily

We can't exactly say that it can't be fixed easily, if there's never been a serious attempt to do so, now can we ? There as the opportunity in 1999, but the UCI fupped it up, & decided to let cancer boy run the sport

Implement a 50 Million euro fine, & loss of all winnings, for teams who have riders test positive, & lifetime bans for any rider, & you'll be amazed at the progress we'd make !

Sure the TdF would be dramatically slower, & we'd have to remove stages, or dramatically shorten them, but them's the breaks when you have to design a 3 week race for human beings.
 
Hawkwood said:
The bit about litter is not new it was in the October 2013 UCI bulletin on page two, headed `Sustainability', it's didn't appear to be a Cookson initiative, the idea looks to have been French.

Re-read that quote above and remember that the UCI is a Federation of National Federations. It's not democratic in the least, not transparent, and reports to no one. Some of the "business" of the federation somehow bubbles up from the national federations in many cases.

Always worth reposting this interview of Verbruggen from earlier this year: http://www.theouterline.com/changing-pro-cycling-the-perspective-of-hein-verbruggen/ THAT's what Cookson is working on.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
stutue said:
3 and a bit years.

Managed to oust McQuaid


3 years and no effect and now the great changes, clear rain capes, dont litter and camera on bikes.....a legacy that will never be beaten.


PS, McQuaid outed himself due to his incompetence, it was hardly a victory to boast of by Cookson
 
Mar 25, 2013
5,389
0
0
Visit site
Benotti69 said:
3 years and no effect and now the great changes, clear rain capes, dont litter and camera on bikes.....a legacy that will never be beaten.


PS, McQuaid outed himself due to his incompetence, it was hardly a victory to boast of by Cookson

You do know he has responsibilities for other areas outside of doping, like you know actually promoting the sport and looking for ways to make it more appealing to watching and potential future fans.

Cookson isn't flawless but he's certainly not a McQuaid and Verbruggen. People picking up on his camera on bikes as a way to hammer him is just nitpicking. Something like that can be introduced more on an immediate basis while the Independent Commission since it's inception will take up to a year. I think it's better to reserve judgement until then and see how he acts in the period afterwards on the report that is given. A bit of patience is needed. None of this was going to be sorted overnight.

Guys on here have been throwing the corruption card right from the outset irrespective of anything he did and would love a story coming out to come out to confirm it.
 
Jul 21, 2012
9,860
3
0
Visit site
ebandit said:
and for those with a short memory which would you prefer?

cookson with possibilty of change or.........................

mcquad back with no change beyond excessive commercial development

Mark L

I would much rather have McQuaid back. Cookson seems to be a british version of him which is the last thing the sport needs right now.
 
Feb 28, 2010
1,661
0
0
Visit site
keeponrollin said:
Wow, so they've been working on it for a whole 9 months :rolleyes:

Where does it say they've been working on it for 9 months? If you read the bulletin and follow the links you'll see the UCI published a recycling guide in 2006. I'm surprised the UCI hasn't got stricter with this sooner.
 
Jul 11, 2013
3,340
0
0
Visit site
From: http://skynews.skypressoffice.co.uk/newstranscripts/murnaghan-210713-interview-brian-cookson-president-british-cycling-tour-de-france

BRIAN COOKSON: Well I guess it’s inevitable to have these accusations after the revelations of the Lance Armstrong era, almost forever whoever is wearing the yellow jersey would be subject to questions and that’s right and proper but for me this is not a problem for Chris Froome and for Team Sky, this is a problem for the UCI, the International Cycling Union. We should be doing a lot more to restore credibility in the sport and as you probably know, without getting in terms of the elections, Dermot, I’m standing for the position of President of the UCI and I think one of the things that I really want to do is establish the credibility back in the sport by having an independent anti-doping agency running these things, so there are no questions of collusion and cover ups and all the other allegations that have been dogging our sport. We’ve got to restore credibility to the sport and I’m sure that we can do because it is a wonderful and beautiful sport that rewards hard work and brilliant team work like we’ve seen in the last three weeks.

Serious question: Anyone knows how far we are on the first point?

The second bolded: He's actually totally exonorating Team Sky here..
How can he know the 21/07 13 that no tests will come out positive?
Or is he just naive enough to think that no british team could involve dopers..
He clearly speaks warmly of the increasing popularity of the sport in Britain and seems to be totally confident and not taking any reservation what so ever.. Brave? all-knowingly? Stupid/naive? or just a Crookson?
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
gooner said:
You do know he has responsibilities for other areas outside of doping, like you know actually promoting the sport and looking for ways to make it more appealing to watching and potential future fans.

Cookson isn't flawless but he's certainly not a McQuaid and Verbruggen. People picking up on his camera on bikes as a way to hammer him is just nitpicking. Something like that can be introduced more on an immediate basis while the Independent Commission since it's inception will take up to a year. I think it's better to reserve judgement until then and see how he acts in the period afterwards on the report that is given. A bit of patience is needed. None of this was going to be sorted overnight.

Guys on here have been throwing the corruption card right from the outset irrespective of anything he did and would love a story coming out to come out to confirm it.

Yeah, well if you are happy Cookson moved the goalposts like an experienced politician, that is fine for you.

Cookson stated he was the guy to bring respectability back to the sport. That means clear rain capes?

Guys come on here and think that the Cooksons, Brailsfords and Vaughters are trying hard to do the right thing, but they are swimming against a tide. Bollix. They only interested in being seen to be doing the right thing.

Cookson could make any changes he wanted, he is the President. Where's the independent anti doping?

The biggest promotion of the sport would be to clean it up. Full stop. Clear rain capes, there's progress:rolleyes: and those that accept that as progress are really not seeing the wood for the trees...
 
Benotti69 said:
Yeah, well if you are happy Cookson moved the goalposts like an experienced politician, that is fine for you.

Cookson stated he was the guy to bring respectability back to the sport. That means clear rain capes?

Guys come on here and think that the Cooksons, Brailsfords and Vaughters are trying hard to do the right thing, but they are swimming against a tide. Bollix. They only interested in being seen to be doing the right thing.

Cookson could make any changes he wanted, he is the President. Where's the independent anti doping?

The biggest promotion of the sport would be to clean it up. Full stop. Clear rain capes, there's progress:rolleyes: and those that accept that as progress are really not seeing the wood for the trees...

Where's the money?

Clear rain capes, more sponsor time on TV, more revenue? Maybe, who knows. The fact is that the sport struggles to find sponsors as it is. Setting up independent doping is expensive. I've been a proponent of it for a long time, but it can't happen overnight and the UCI does have to have some involvement in the management of reporting and sanctioning.


As you note, he's the President. That means clear rain capes are as much his business as anti-doping, but one is much easier to sort out and announce than the other.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
King Boonen said:
Where's the money?

Make the teams pay for it. All the big teams do internal testing anyway

King Boonen said:
Clear rain capes, more sponsor time on TV, more revenue? Maybe, who knows. The fact is that the sport struggles to find sponsors as it is. Setting up independent doping is expensive. I've been a proponent of it for a long time, but it can't happen overnight and the UCI does have to have some involvement in the management of reporting and sanctioning.

I dont give a fig about the cost. The cost can be found if it was wanted. It is not wanted so people ***** about the cost. Want to clean up the sport, find the money make anti doping independent and properly funded and the sponsors will come flooding back as it will show other sports anti doping efforts to be pathetic...

King Boonen said:
As you note, he's the President. That means clear rain capes are as much his business as anti-doping, but one is much easier to sort out and announce than the other.

That you put clear rain capes on the same level of anti doping shows how little you understand the damage doping has done to cycling.

Cookson said independent anti doping was a priority. He said the credibilty needed to restored. Rain capes will restore credibility!
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
ebandit said:
benny I think you're wrong people wish to see 'who won' just as much ( if not more ) than 'who doped'

Mark L

I understood that teams rain capes were in team colours. That most of those capes failed led to teams purchasing/using other brand capes (black) and that caused a problem. If teams stuck to their own team capes under the rules the problem would never have arisen. That those manufacturers have not produced quality products is telling considering how much the stuff is flogged to fans. Teams constantly break the rules and cry when called on it.

I dont think clear capes will enhance the viewing if cameras are fogged by the weather and capes are clear which can 'merge' the colours of certain teams to be very similar, the blue/black team colours will be hard to be picked out.
 
Cookson is kicking the can down the road so far. First they claim they will have an independent consultant/commission to evaluate all of the nonsense.

In the meantime, does it really take an expert panel/contractor to determine the TUE system was flawed? Yet, look at Froome's case and TUE fiasco. All done by the UCI/handled by them, and completely fubar by them.

If they are serious about cleaning this up, and that means/starts with the main guy, Cookson, they need to look at all processes, with/without some contracted group, and go over all of the methods/processes involved and start to get a clear cut methodology for all things involved.

It doesn't take 9 months to figure out that the TUE issue should have never happened and re-written and processes put in place so it doesn't happen like that.

But Cookson is apparently going to just wait it out for something to magically happen that will resolve all of these issues on their own seemingly.
 

TRENDING THREADS