Teams & Riders Cian Uijtdebroeks - From the wetlands to the top of cycling

[Netserk]

or at least raise the salary to a value equal to the rider potential.

Cool, can they also lower the salary if the value of the rider is less than what they’re paid?

 

[Mayomaniac]

Cool, can they also lower the salary if the value of the rider is less than what they’re paid?

Lefevre has entered the chat.

 

[AmRacer]

Cool, can they also lower the salary if the value of the rider is less than what they’re paid?

I know a team which has a very expensive rider who doesn't give any value for the team.

 

[Escarabajo]

'I don't want a soap opera' - Uijtdebroeks keen to turn page after Visma-Lease A Bike move

Belgian targets Giro d'Italia in 2024 after Bora-Hansgrohe confirm release from contract

www.cyclingnews.com

This is his second series of his soap opera. Let's wait for the next one in 2024.

 

[janraaskalt]

Lefevre has entered the chat.

He rather lets them go, since lowering salary is demotivating (his words)

 

[Salvarani]

This is his second series of his soap opera. Let's wait for the next one in 2024.

Season 2 is usually where *** hits the fan for real.

 

[Miss Violet Smith]

I trust that everyone involved in this transfer is happier now than they were a week ago.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

So V|LAB and Uijtdebroeks get away from a clear breach of rules 2.15.121ff without penalty?

Just as with their frequent ignoring of their own rules for conduct on the road, non-enforcement of rules leads to poor respect for them. If they expect the current rules to hold water, apply them and be willing to explain why any unpenalised breach is considered exceptional; if they do not trust their own legislation to be fit for purpose, reform it rapidly to protect more effectively whatever the rule was intended to protect in the first place.

 

[roundabout]

So V|LAB and Uijtdebroeks get away from a clear breach of rules 2.15.121ff without penalty?

Just as with their frequent ignoring of their own rules for conduct on the road, non-enforcement of rules leads to poor respect for them. If they expect the current rules to hold water, apply them and be willing to explain why any unpenalised breach is considered exceptional; if they do not trust their own legislation to be fit for purpose, reform it rapidly to protect more effectively whatever the rule was intended to protect in the first place.

Yeah, the impression I get from the UCI press release here is that it's case closed

UCI statement concerning Cian Uijtdebroeks

www.uci.org

 

[shadowrider]

I know a team which has a very expensive rider who doesn't give any value for the team.

Not only Froome, but also Sagan since 2019. And what about Quintana, Demare, Sam Bennett (not performing since his last year with Lefevere).

 

[Colonel]

So V|LAB and Uijtdebroeks get away from a clear breach of rules 2.15.121ff without penalty?

Just as with their frequent ignoring of their own rules for conduct on the road, non-enforcement of rules leads to poor respect for them. If they expect the current rules to hold water, apply them and be willing to explain why any unpenalised breach is considered exceptional; if they do not trust their own legislation to be fit for purpose, reform it rapidly to protect more effectively whatever the rule was intended to protect in the first place.

VLAB paid a compensation at the 19th hour after trying to not do it and drag this out. Denk was prepared to go to a lengthy court saga.

 

[Colonel]

Denk approached Roglic. I thought they officially couldn’t do such a thing

It known Roglic was looking to move and unhappy, it was open market, Ineos and Trek approached him

 

[ManicJack]

It known Roglic was looking to move and unhappy, it was open market, Ineos and Trek approached him

That's funny. So it was ok for Bora to poach Roglic, who had a valid contract, but not Visma with Cian? The bias in this thread is hilarious.

 

[Colonel]

You are missing the point here. The issue isn't so much whether it works for the riders, but whether it works for the poacher team, i.e. Jumbo. In both cases, Jumbo have gained an unfair advantage over other teams because they signed a rider who wasn't legally available at the time. In both cases, the breach of contract likely doesn't even happen in the first place if Jumbo don't make a move, so it's not truly unilateral in the sense that a third party is heavily involved. In this case, this advantage has been amplified because the settlement cost them less than what other teams were trying to buy out Uijtdebroeks' contract for The fact that Bora agreed to said settlement when they didn't to said moves is moot - their hand was forced, it was either settle or face a long, energy and time-consuming legal battle. So Bora have lost out, and other interested teams have lost out too, and Jumbo are the only team gaining an advantage in a situation with a lot of players, solely because a) Jumbo are once again the only team willing to break the rules (by signing a rider who is legally still employed elsewhere) and b) breaking the rules is once again easily worth it for them.

Nothing was forced, Bora were prepared to go to court and were ready for a lengthy process.
VLAB came at the last minute before their team launch to settle this.

 

[Escarabajo]

Not only Froome, but also Sagan since 2019. And what about Quintana, Demare, Sam Bennett (not performing since his last year with Lefevere).

Quintana did not ride last year, what do you mean?? and the previous year He helped Arkea moved up to the WT category.

 

[roundabout]

That's funny. So it was ok for Bora to poach Roglic, who had a valid contract, but not Visma with Cian? The bias in this thread is hilarious.

How was Roglic poached when Jumbo accepted his request to leave and got compensation?

It is rather obvious that with Roglic all 3 parties were in agreement about the transfer, while (at least initially) it was not the case with Uijtdebroeks.

 

[Froome]

How was Roglic poached when Jumbo accepted his request to leave and got compensation?

It is rather obvious that with Roglic all 3 parties were in agreement about the transfer, while (at least initially) it was not the case with Uijtdebroeks.

With uijdtbroeks all 3 parties were in agreement. Go check Bora statement this week.

 

[ManicJack]

How was Roglic poached when Jumbo accepted his request to leave and got compensation?

It is rather obvious that with Roglic all 3 parties were in agreement about the transfer, while (at least initially) it was not the case with Uijtdebroeks.

You obviously know everything that went down behind the scenes on both fronts. Me, I'm just an ignorant cycling fan.

 

[roundabout]

With uijdtbroeks all 3 parties were in agreement. Go check Bora statement this week.

What part of the words at least initially is not clear?

 

[roundabout]

You obviously know everything that went down behind the scenes on both fronts. Me, I'm just an ignorant cycling fan.

The public communication around Roglic transfer suggests that everything happened with all parties agreeing.

It's those saying that Roglic was poached who must know something else that was not made public.

 

[ManicJack]

What part of the words at least initially is not clear?

Please tell us when and how the Roglic discussions started since you know everything.

 

[roundabout]

Please tell us when and how the Roglic discussions started since you know everything.

You're the one saying that Roglic was poached so you're the one who should tell everyone else how the poaching happened.

The 'poaching' that nobody had any issues with publicly.

 

[ManicJack]

You're the one saying that Roglic was poached so you're the one who should tell everyone else how the poaching happened.

The 'poaching' that nobody had any issues with publicly.

I have ZERO clue what went down behind the scenes and have made know such claims as others (look in the mirror) have. 🙄

 

[roundabout]

I have ZERO clue what went down behind the scenes and have made know such claims as others (look in the mirror) have. 🙄

You were claiming that Roglic was poached even though it is not supported by any public information so now you are just contradicting yourself.

 

[ManicJack]

You were claiming that Roglic was poached even though it is not supported by any public information so now you are just contradicting yourself.

I didn't claim anything. I used the word poached as a figure of speech. If English isn't your primary language, I understand the confusion.