Cookson is worse for cycling than McQuaid

[mrhender]

I have never trusted Cookson...

I still don't...

BUT.... The decision of yesterday -combined with todays cn interview -imo works in his favour...

 

[Benotti69]

I have never trusted Cookson...

I still don't...

BUT.... The decision of yesterday -combined with todays cn interview -imo works in his favour...

What would work in his favour is a change in the rules to ban DS, Doctors, coaches, from working within the sport when a team program is proven.

 

[Benotti69]

Cookson quoting Machiavelli on twitter.. great stuff

Blocking @Spitinthesoup, who is a very calm and factual tweeter does not reflect well on Cookson.

But then Cookson in a year and half has done little to bring about the real change that the sport needs.

 

[mrhender]

What would work in his favour is a change in the rules to ban DS, Doctors, coaches, from working within the sport when a team program is proven.

Is a team program proven on the basis that the licence commission made their decision?

It's not that i don't agree with your post.. I do....

I posted before the decision was made public, that I think they maybe should wait and include the Padua findings.. Furthermore I stressed that I would like to see a dissopinted cookson blaming his own rules, and a willingness to change those...

I have gotten both, so I can't be dissatisfied with this...

Cookson is not a dictator whome can do whatever he wants...
Some of his predecessors has tried that, and in the end failed..

Cookson seems to be more pragmatic, however that doesn't make you true of heart...

I think he has been a dissapointment in several areas, but I also think he might be only be a pawn in a bigger game and that his manureing space reflects this...

 

[ray j willings]

Cookson is like Obama. High hopes shoot down by a lack of balls.
Its time to legalise and get honest.

 

[wrinklyvet]

Cookson is like Obama. High hopes shoot down by a lack of balls.
Its time to legalise and get honest.

It's not right to ignore the limits of Cookson's rights to influence the decision, or the extra obligations that have been placed on Astana. Most aspects of such matters were taken out of the hands of the president for a reason.

All of us want any action taken to be legal. Why not read and think about what Cookson has said about this? All progress and change has to be achieved by proper means.

I make no comment on American politics. It's not relevant either. But I don't believe Cookson lacks balls.

 

[Benotti69]

Is a team program proven on the basis that the licence commission made their decision?

It's not that i don't agree with your post.. I do....

I posted before the decision was made public, that I think they maybe should wait and include the Padua findings.. Furthermore I stressed that I would like to see a dissopinted cookson blaming his own rules, and a willingness to change those...

I have gotten both, so I can't be dissatisfied with this...

Cookson is not a dictator whome can do whatever he wants...
Some of his predecessors has tried that, and in the end failed..

Cookson seems to be more pragmatic, however that doesn't make you true of heart...

I think he has been a dissapointment in several areas, but I also think he might be only be a pawn in a bigger game and that his manureing space reflects this...

Cookson aint stupid. He knows teams have not changed their culture.

He had a year to put in place rules to deal with this.

Popping a few riders a year does nothing to abate the doping culture.

I doubt Cookson gives a fig to do anything about doping except to punish those who are careless like Astana.

But as for wholesale changes. Nah not for Cookson, UCI, IOC, WADA or whoever. They fully accept doping is part of the culture of sport. I'd hazard a guess they exploit it.

 

[thehog]

It's not right to ignore the limits of Cookson's rights to influence the decision, or the extra obligations that have been placed on Astana. Most aspects of such matters were taken out of the hands of the president for a reason.

All of us want any action taken to be legal. Why not read and think about what Cookson has said about this? All progress and change has to be achieved by proper means.

I make no comment on American politics. It's not relevant either. But I don't believe Cookson lacks balls.

Applying the rules, errr yes. Like Froome's TUE, Kruezinger

 

[pigoonse]

Not pay the UCI fees. Not hire people the UCI favors. Not pass bribes.

It's much harder than you think!

DirtyWorks, thanks for a reply on another thread. this is where i meant to post.

i suspect many of those positives the UCI is sitting on will not be made public for the reasons you list above and if you happen to be on Cookson's buddy list. So far, i can't trust him - too many conflicts of interests coming from where he has, imo.

then again, who would be honestly good in the job? my vote would go to... cannot think who.

 

[wrinklyvet]

Applying the rules, errr yes. Like Froome's TUE, Kruezinger

Well, like it or not, Froome's TUE was within the rules as then applied. I don't complain of the changes it brought afterwards.

As for Kreuziger (as you mean to say), the UCI and the World Anti-Doping Agency appealed against the decision to the Court of Arbitration for Sport in October 2014.

Don't you want that case pursued, and if so why not?

 

[the sceptic]

Applying the rules, errr yes. Like Froome's TUE, Kruezinger

Who are we to protest if the UCI wants Dawg riding around on elephant steroids?

Nevermind that they make up the rules as they go. At least the rules were followed

 

[PeterB]

What "clean" Cookson should say tonight...

I'am very dissapointed to tell you that we have granted Astana with a WT-licence for 2015..

The thing is, that our legal team together with the Licence commission
assesed that we on the current basis would lose the case in CAS..

So what we decided is to grant the tam a licence for next year and build a case upon the Padua findings in cooperation with the italian investigators..

I can understand the dissapointment from all those apposed doping, and given the history of cycling and my very organization I would be a fool to think that anything i say is going to comfort you...

In the midst of this we have decided to change the rules for obtaining WT-licence. This step is necessary if we truly wan't to exclude the dodgy teams with dodgy riders...

We have allocated significant ressources to the Italian investiagation which we will only take part of in the sense of wiring them finances needed as well as fully opening our books to them..

Cycling is, as always in a major credibility cricis, and I will be the first to admit that we are facing an uphill-battle and that I have failed my duties on several accounts..

This, however is not do to lack of motivation, but more or lss the complexity of the issue.. As a final point I would like to apologize to all those whome feel we are not performing a proper effort.. I take full responsibilty for this and i would also stress that Astana is not one dirty apple, hence the need to change the rules for obtaining licence, both on team, and rider-level...

Reading his CN interview, I had your post in front of my eyes. Who knows, maybe you inspired him a little...

 

[thehog]

Well, like it or not, Froome's TUE was within the rules as then applied. I don't complain of the changes it brought afterwards.

What changes were those?

 

[wrinklyvet]

What changes were those?

As a result of the controversy this announcement was made:-

"Working closely with the World Anti-Doping Agency and its director-general David Howman, the UCI has been reviewing all of its anti-doping rules and procedures including those regarding therapeutic use exemptions," the UCI said in a statement on Monday.

"A completely revised set of rules is in preparation and will enter into force on January 1, 2015 in conjunction with the revised 2015 WADA code and international standards, including the international standard for therapeutic use exemptions (ISTUE).

"As an immediate measure, the UCI confirms that from now on, all TUE decisions will pass through the TUE committee."

UCI regulations already state that "the UCI shall appoint a committee of at least three physicians to consider requests for TUEs".

I expect you remember.

 

[thehog]

As a result of the controversy this announcement was made:-

"Working closely with the World Anti-Doping Agency and its director-general David Howman, the UCI has been reviewing all of its anti-doping rules and procedures including those regarding therapeutic use exemptions," the UCI said in a statement on Monday.

"A completely revised set of rules is in preparation and will enter into force on January 1, 2015 in conjunction with the revised 2015 WADA code and international standards, including the international standard for therapeutic use exemptions (ISTUE).

"As an immediate measure, the UCI confirms that from now on, all TUE decisions will pass through the TUE committee."

UCI regulations already state that "the UCI shall appoint a committee of at least three physicians to consider requests for TUEs".

I expect you remember.

link?



...

 

[wrinklyvet]

link?



...

http://www.sbs.com.au/cyclingcentral/news/54950/tue-review-by-uci-after-froome-case

 

[thehog]

http://www.sbs.com.au/cyclingcentral/news/54950/tue-review-by-uci-after-froome-case

Thanks. He also said this in September. And there was no TUE committee, sounds like he only reacts or pretends to react when there is controversy.

"We are now the leading sport in terms of anti-doping.

"I don't know of any other sport that has thrown itself open to this amount of external scrutiny."

"So we have been working very hard towards the things we set out to do. As far as the fight against doping goes, I guess the key phrase is 'eternal vigilance'."

and his manifesto:

“It is critical that the UCI embraces a more open and transparent approach in the way it conducts business. Leading by example, I will introduce a range of good governance measures, including the publishing of all my financial interests, remuneration package and any potential conflicts of interest relating to the office of President. Once we have restored trust in cycling and the UCI, it will make our other tasks of developing the sport worldwide so much easier.”

 

[wrinklyvet]

Thanks. He also said this in September. And there was no TUE committee, sounds like he only reacts or pretends to react when there is controversy.



and his manifesto:

Do you not think that it is inevitable that new problems will become obvious over a period of time and that's usually what prompts change? It's true the world over.

I don't pretend to be an expert on the UCI, any more than any other casual observer, but it has a constitution and the president is not an all-powerful dictator, even if he wants change.

Change has been happening; it cannot be denied.

Cookson has also taken some steps to separate the president from decisions that could be viewed as partisan, including doping matters.

So I don't go along with the clamour that the present situation is all Cookson's fault.

He's not the one who has been doping (the proved cases) or allegedly doping (the suspected cases) but he's the guy who has to make the public pronouncements and take the flak despite having no direct power over those issues.

I believe his good intentions and I disbelieve the conspiracy theorists. I also remind myself he has been in the job only a little more than a year, after a long period of the previous authoritarian regime. Anyone who wants to abide by the rules will always take time to change them if they need changing.

Look at what Cookson inherited and how the last guy did the job. You can't blame him for stepping carefully and ensuring that the UCI does not take rash action that would be condemned in the courts.

Perhaps you may decide he's not that bad a man and needs to be cut some slack.

 

[sniper]

Do you not think that it is inevitable that new problems will become obvious over a period of time and that's usually what prompts change? It's true the world over.

I don't pretend to be an expert on the UCI, any more than any other casual observer, but it has a constitution and the president is not an all-powerful dictator, even if he wants change.

Change has been happening; it cannot be denied.

Cookson has also taken some steps to separate the president from decisions that could be viewed as partisan, including doping matters.

So I don't go along with the clamour that the present situation is all Cookson's fault.

He's not the one who has been doping (the proved cases) or allegedly doping (the suspected cases) but he's the guy who has to make the public pronouncements and take the flak despite having no direct power over those issues.

I believe his good intentions and I disbelieve the conspiracy theorists. I also remind myself he has been in the job only a little more than a year, after a long period of the previous authoritarian regime. Anyone who wants to abide by the rules will always take time to change them if they need changing.

Look at what Cookson inherited and how the last guy did the job. You can't blame him for stepping carefully and ensuring that the UCI does not take rash action that would be condemned in the courts.

Perhaps you may decide he's not that bad a man and needs to be cut some slack.

i say we do not cut him slack and rather urge him to do as he promised on the antidoping front, not just sell hot cookies.
after festina, puerto and the usada file (amongst other doping scandals and corruption) is that too much to ask?

 

[wrinklyvet]

i say we do not cut him slack and rather urge him to do as he promised on the antidoping front, not just sell hot cookies.
after festina, puerto and the usada file (amongst other doping scandals and corruption) is that too much to ask?

See the news item on what Cookson said (CN news feed) and in particular:

"That's one of the most frustrating aspects of all this, these things take so much time, and we've seen that with Operacion Puerto in Spain. These things take a very long time to go through due process when there are elements of criminality to be taken into account. However, if we do see hard evidence that can impact on the status of a team or a rider then we will take action notwithstanding the final outcome of longstanding investigations involving the police or others. I think we can act quicker than that but we really need to see that documentation. The UCI needs to see it and refer it to the Licence Commission, and go through due process so that we don't lose a case like that on appeal to CAS."

These are the considerations that impatient people with no responsibility don't seem to accept. They should.

 

[sniper]

See the news item on what Cookson said (CN news feed) and in particular:

"That's one of the most frustrating aspects of all this, these things take so much time, and we've seen that with Operacion Puerto in Spain. These things take a very long time to go through due process when there are elements of criminality to be taken into account. However, if we do see hard evidence that can impact on the status of a team or a rider then we will take action notwithstanding the final outcome of longstanding investigations involving the police or others. I think we can act quicker than that but we really need to see that documentation. The UCI needs to see it and refer it to the Licence Commission, and go through due process so that we don't lose a case like that on appeal to CAS."

These are the considerations that impatient people with no responsibility don't seem to accept. They should.

throwing out Zorzoli would have taken how much time exactly?
handing Froome a TUE surely didn't take much time.
offering Henao a smooth escape route whilst target testing Astana. What patience are you talking about?

 

[Heckler]

Do you not think that it is inevitable that new problems will become obvious over a period of time and that's usually what prompts change? It's true the world over.

I don't pretend to be an expert on the UCI, any more than any other casual observer, but it has a constitution and the president is not an all-powerful dictator, even if he wants change.

Change has been happening; it cannot be denied.

Cookson has also taken some steps to separate the president from decisions that could be viewed as partisan, including doping matters.

So I don't go along with the clamour that the present situation is all Cookson's fault.

He's not the one who has been doping (the proved cases) or allegedly doping (the suspected cases) but he's the guy who has to make the public pronouncements and take the flak despite having no direct power over those issues.

I believe his good intentions and I disbelieve the conspiracy theorists. I also remind myself he has been in the job only a little more than a year, after a long period of the previous authoritarian regime. Anyone who wants to abide by the rules will always take time to change them if they need changing.

Look at what Cookson inherited and how the last guy did the job. You can't blame him for stepping carefully and ensuring that the UCI does not take rash action that would be condemned in the courts.

Perhaps you may decide he's not that bad a man and needs to be cut some slack.

He is the guy who is always yapping and never actually saying anything. He's the Barack of the UCI. He's talking tough knowing full well he can't back it up. And this whole thing with Astana is just the public view of an internal political battle.

But you are right about one thing, the present issues are not his fault; he's a sheep farmer running a CIRCus who was elected without even a resume. The real fault lies with you lot that piled on, chanting "we need change now" instead of looking for someone with at least smidgeon of a credential and a track record.

Who was leading the charge for new and better testing? Mcquaid.
Who is going to water down the rules and continue to use them as a political tool? Cookson.

He's a buffoon. You won't recognize the sport by the time he's done.

 

[thehog]

He's a landscape gardener.

 

[wrinklyvet]

He's a landscape gardener.

Capability Brown, the famous 18th century landscape gardener, sure moved a lot of earth about and the results can be seen to this day.

As they say of him, "Over two centuries have passed since his death, but such are the enduring qualities of his work that over 150 of the 260 or so landscapes with which he is associated remain worth seeing today.

So that's a promising thought of yours. Everyone may all be surprised one day by the Cookson legacy.

 

[Granville57]

He's the Barack of the UCI.

Then I look forward to him raiding Ferrari's compound.

Capability Brown, the famous 18th century landscape gardener, sure moved a lot of earth about and the results can be seen to this day.

Touché.