• We're giving away a Cyclingnews water bottle! Find out more here!

Cookson is worse for cycling than McQuaid

Page 20 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Feb 28, 2010
1,328
0
0
No_Balls said:
I´d say Cookson is the classical burecrautical weak puppet-president. Where Phat at least gave the impression of a strong, determined, arms-waving, angry leader this farce is surrounding himself with PDF-files, twitter and political correctness.

He is a Saruman. A chief on paper but you´ll know there is a bigger baddie pulling the strings.
When did McQuaid give an `...impression of a strong, determined, arms-waving, angry leader...'? Do you mean when he was threatening law suits against anyone who claimed the UCI was corrupt?
 
Sep 29, 2012
8,087
0
0
Hawkwood said:
When did McQuaid give an `...impression of a strong, determined, arms-waving, angry leader...'? Do you mean when he was threatening law suits against anyone who claimed the UCI was corrupt?
I am not interested in and this is not to be taken as me posting anything that sounds complimentary regarding Pat McQuaid.

But one example is he pushed back hard against USADA and demanded jurisdiction.
 
Hawkwood said:
When did McQuaid give an `...impression of a strong, determined, arms-waving, angry leader...'? Do you mean when he was threatening law suits against anyone who claimed the UCI was corrupt?
McQuaid - and this is said with all the necessary caveats - always managed to act like he had the vision thing in hand, that he had an idea and he was going to make it happen, sod what anyone else said. So we got the ProTour wars, the desire to take out race radios, all the other arguments when people disagreed with him. He was as decisive as he was divisive.
 
Hawkwood said:
When did McQuaid give an `...impression of a strong, determined, arms-waving, angry leader...'? Do you mean when he was threatening law suits against anyone who claimed the UCI was corrupt?
Yes basically. Of course that (and everything else he did) would not fool the little clique in the Clinic but in the big world outside these confinements he sure did look like a general fighting the undercover doping. People couldnt believe they were in the same bed until pretty much the end.

Now you´ve got Cookson and he sure gives the impression of a cloak and dagger office-man and people looking for change has to look elsewhere. But then again he could just lean back knowing that others writing the new clean narrative for him as if nothing ever happened, so people outside the Clinic will be pleased by that.

fmk_Rol said:
McQuaid - and this is said with all the necessary caveats - always managed to act like he had the vision thing in hand, that he had an idea and he was going to make it happen, sod what anyone else said. So we got the ProTour wars, the desire to take out race radios, all the other arguments when people disagreed with him. He was as decisive as he was divisive.
This.
 
May 26, 2010
19,530
0
0
Cookson complains about Kimmage asking questions via twitter of him

“It’s easy to ask those questions in 140 characters,” he says, “but not very easy to answer them in any meaningful way.”
I would've thought the answer to that was to sit down with Kimmage for an interview!
 
Feb 10, 2010
8,095
0
0
No_Balls said:
I´d say Cookson is the classical burecrautical, weak, puppet-president.
Well, but there was more going on. It wasn't just McQuaid. It was Verbruggen, appointed for life, and McQuaid driving things forward. Any sort of real challenge coming McQuaid's way would be referred to Hein. You can't say "no" to the King.

FWIW, Verbruggen is, theoretically, retired. How 'retired' is he? I don't really know. I know that his buddy that ran the IOC isn't doing that anymore, so he can't stomp around the IOC like he owns the place like Blatter.

Cookson doesn't have friends in high places at the IOC. Cookson, theoretically, can't run to Verbruggen either. So, he can't operate like McQuaid.

IMO Cookson already looks like he'll be vaguely resembling McQuaid's reign anyway since the UCI answers to no one and likes their secrecy just fine. He is more media savvy for sure.
 
Feb 10, 2010
8,095
0
0
RownhamHill said:
It's a trivial job though to export the pdfs from the back end of an old CMS and upload them into a new one
Spoken like a project manager or above! :D

How do you know what's in the pdf? How do you structure the documents? And it just gets more difficult from there.
 
May 26, 2010
19,530
0
0
DirtyWorks said:
Well, but there was more going on. It wasn't just McQuaid. It was Verbruggen, appointed for life, and McQuaid driving things forward. Any sort of real challenge coming McQuaid's way would be referred to Hein. You can't say "no" to the King.

FWIW, Verbruggen is, theoretically, retired. How 'retired' is he? I don't really know. I know that his buddy that ran the IOC isn't doing that anymore, so he can't stomp around the IOC like he owns the place like Blatter.

Cookson doesn't have friends in high places at the IOC. Cookson, theoretically, can't run to Verbruggen either. So, he can't operate like McQuaid.

IMO Cookson already looks like he'll be vaguely resembling McQuaid's reign anyway since the UCI answers to no one and likes their secrecy just fine. He is more media savvy for sure.
I would guess this is the difference between Cookson and McQuaid and Cookson has better management abilites although not by much!
 
Jul 1, 2011
986
0
0
DirtyWorks said:
Spoken like a project manager or above! :D

How do you know what's in the pdf? How do you structure the documents? And it just gets more difficult from there.
That's the document management bit though - obviously I'm assuming that the previous CMS file manager was structured with a rational folder and file name structure meaning the web team would be able to find the document in the back-end easily enough. But yeah, that's obviously not a given. . .
 
May 26, 2010
19,530
0
0
fmk_RoI said:
I love the way some people try to complicate the easy stuff. The docs appeared on two pages of the website. Manual porting wouldn't take more than an hour of a trained monkey's time.
So why are your monkeys not working on it?
 
Feb 10, 2010
8,095
0
0
fmk_RoI said:
I love the way some people try to complicate the easy stuff. The docs appeared on two pages of the website. Manual porting wouldn't take more than an hour of a trained monkey's time.
Ahh yes, but the UCI only looks forward. ;)

It's best to close that and never visit the past again. Except, if there's a need to re-imagine it to CYA.
 
Feb 10, 2010
8,095
0
0
Apr 7, 2010
584
0
0
uci seem to have missed the deadline for submitting applications to have cycling as an event in the 2020 tokyo paralympics
 
Jul 11, 2013
2,656
0
0
thehog said:
Yeah..
UCI president interferes with team signings...

Does he want them to burn out as slaves for Froome...?
Or is he also going to interfere with how SKY manages their riders and what races they participate in..

Holy moly....!

Or just a smokescreen -appearing unbiased...
Doesn't work out very well..

Funny thing also.. The article below says that Team Sky eyes to sign Yates brothers in 2016..
 
Jul 21, 2012
6,664
0
0
Aug 13, 2009
11,354
0
0
mrhender said:
Yeah..
UCI president interferes with team signings...

Does he want them to burn out as slaves for Froome...?
Or is he also going to interfere with how SKY manages their riders and what races they participate in..

Holy moly....!

Or just a smokescreen -appearing unbiased...
Doesn't work out very well..

Funny thing also.. The article below says that Team Sky eyes to sign Yates brothers in 2016..
I am confused. I read on these boards over and over that Sky is essentially British Cycling. That they are one in the same. That their charter is to develop British riders. If that is the case isn't it obvious that the two most talented young British riders should be on the team?
 
Race Radio said:
I am confused. I read on these boards over and over that Sky is essentially British Cycling. That they are one in the same. That their charter is to develop British riders. If that is the case isn't it obvious that the two most talented young British riders should be on the team?
But should the UCI President be commenting on it?
 
Jul 21, 2012
6,664
0
0
Race Radio said:
I am confused. I read on these boards over and over that Sky is essentially British Cycling. That they are one in the same. That their charter is to develop British riders. If that is the case isn't it obvious that the two most talented young British riders should be on the team?
Cookson is no longer with british cycling.
 
Aug 13, 2009
11,354
0
0
the sceptic said:
Cookson is no longer with british cycling.
He is still on the British Olympic Association's executive committee, which is where British Cycling gets it's funding from.
 
Jun 15, 2009
7,378
0
0
Oh my... most of you blinded by hate cant even swallow it when Cookson just talks of what he would like to see. Its not that he invented a law that Sky must sign the Yates bros... Mann o Mann, was für ein Kasperl-Theater
 
Jul 11, 2013
2,656
0
0
Race Radio said:
I am confused. I read on these boards over and over that Sky is essentially British Cycling. That they are one in the same. That their charter is to develop British riders. If that is the case isn't it obvious that the two most talented young British riders should be on the team?
You read on these boards?

How does that matter?

they are a professional cycling team first and foremost imo.

The argument that young british riders should be on a british team is fallible.. You have to consider the development of the young riders before any national sentiment..

UCI has in my opinion no right to interfere here.. Does he have insider knowledge of Team sky and the two brothers to warrant such a statement...?

Even so, Cookson doing this is highly inappropriate..
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS