Cookson is worse for cycling than McQuaid

Page 67 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Re:

RownhamHill said:
What I found interesting was the comment that Cookson made that seemed to suggest they wanted the detail kept private so that other riders wouldn't be able to use the details to cheat themselves with a ready made excuse. Which seems to suggest that whatever explanation Kreuiziger gave was both plausible enough to win a court case, but also possibly unverifiable either way - could be he came up with the perfect excuse!
Or maybe Oleg was ready to blow the whole sport apart and Cookson doesn't want that as he will miss out on his knighthood!

As if Kreuziger's people were not going to tell everyone else how he got off, no secrets in cycling, ask Floyd.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Re: Re:

mrhender said:
Benotti69 said:
it stinks. end of. experts are now not expert enough according to Cookson! Yeah sure. Blood passport is not for anti doping, it is a tool to use to prevent so called alien performances and the repeats of Riis, Indurain, Armstrong, etc (to control riders or teams) where UCI can monitor their doping, but it is flawed and UCI has no backbone to fight the likes of Tinkov. So ABP has failed. Next?

Cookson had a great PR campaign but he is just a brown bag man like all those in sporting federations.
But even if Cookson (or any UCI president for that matter) had the backbone it would require him being able to make everyone involved following his lead....

How does one make that possible?

How does one accomplish mutual agreement between short-sighted stakeholders that is only for the benefit of future stakeholders.......?

When there is only one "here and now"....?
I dont think it is fixable by one person. But he made all them promises.........
 
May 19, 2010
1,899
0
0
If there is a mutal agreement to not disclose information about the case it means Kreuziger got something too. Why else would he venture into such an agreement if there wasn't something there for him? Tinkov would have loved to drag UCI to court to get some money out of them. Most likely WADA/UCI thought there were chances he might win the case at CAS, but they weren't certain, Neither was Kreuziger. So in exchange for dropping the case Krueziger agrees to let it be, no suing for damages and no revealing of details.

Most likely it was the hypothyroidism. A hypothyroidism diagnosis might give you a get out of jail card for an otherwise abnormal bio passport profile.
 
Apr 3, 2011
2,301
0
0
Re:

mrhender said:
I wouldn't like to be in Cookson's shoes...

He is balancing between protecting the sport and cleaning it up....
like there is a difference, in the long run... but from the interview it looks like he's fully caught up in the turmoil of The Great Calendar War and "reform". Everybody fighting each other, ASO pushing to kill Giro and Vuelta by shortening them - as Vuelta organizers! What a nice example of a hostile takeover to bust your competition.

And poor guy gets so caught in his own fabulations (Kreuzi's case) that he inevitably comes with the "last hope" argument: "I want to protect the sport". Which btw. should be followed by a head chopping: well, maybe in a short run you think you protect, but in the long run you're killing the sport and you know it (it may go beyond ridiculous already this Tour - and there's a permanent risk of some crazy lab going too sensitive, Conti's steak style, and you can have Big4 busted on the spot).
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
good post doperhopper.

@mrhender, thanks for the summaries/link. but like doperhopper i too think you're giving him too much credit, where none is due.

maybe kreuziger's team threatened to blow a whistle on sky or zorzoli, leaving cookson/uci no choice.
cookson is so caught up in multiple conflicts of interest, he can't police this sport, period.
much worse than Pat in that regard.
 
Cookson was compromised on so many fronts the second he put his hat in the ring. He was the wrong challenger, but unfortunately the only challenger, because the UCI rules restricted entry to exclude anyone who might have the profile of being not caught up in the past of the sport.

Cookson had a long track record at BC of looking the other way whenever any hot issue came along. Only in the 48 months before his presidency bid he was the senior cycling board member of the sky team, as sir David put the papers before him to hire a bunch of doping facilitators, including the guy who turned doping at Rabbo into a production line operation. Sir Bradley, the Dawg, G doing a big G and US Postal II is born. The guy is not quick witted.

Then - hold your hands up if you think buying votes at a presidential election is just the preserve of Fifa. I don't think Cookson did that, but I think one or two "supporters" around him may well have done so and compromised the election. Afterwards, what does Cookson do as people want to call in those favours. These guys knew their man - the spine of a jellyfish - he was never going to stand up and say "you know what folks - I was unfairly elected - we need another election and I need to exclude myself from it."

All this "preserving the sport" cr*p is exactly what Hein and Pat came out with for years to excuse their lack of desire to take actions to get out of the sport, those who ruin it. I see Cookson is talking about running for a second term. No Brian, just change the rules and allow some decent competition so that someone with a spine can enter the race.
 
Jul 11, 2013
3,340
0
0
Re: Re:

doperhopper said:
mrhender said:
I wouldn't like to be in Cookson's shoes...

He is balancing between protecting the sport and cleaning it up....
like there is a difference, in the long run... but from the interview it looks like he's fully caught up in the turmoil of The Great Calendar War and "reform". Everybody fighting each other, ASO pushing to kill Giro and Vuelta by shortening them - as Vuelta organizers! What a nice example of a hostile takeover to bust your competition.

And poor guy gets so caught in his own fabulations (Kreuzi's case) that he inevitably comes with the "last hope" argument: "I want to protect the sport". Which btw. should be followed by a head chopping: well, maybe in a short run you think you protect, but in the long run you're killing the sport and you know it (it may go beyond ridiculous already this Tour - and there's a permanent risk of some crazy lab going too sensitive, Conti's steak style, and you can have Big4 busted on the spot).
I can see that single sentence is not agreeable...
But maybe quoting the rest of the post it came from would offer a bit more clarity as to my position:

So is being well-intended leaning more to the one side then the other?

And if so, it must surely be on a case by case analysis in combination with your overall objective as UCI president which is what?

To deliver change for the better?'

I mean, Cookson may be able to cause havoc, but history has shown us that scandals are no pillar for REAL change...

No man alone can change the culture of cycling... Not even the president of UCI..

So maybe a well-intended president is taking some risks to get things in motion for positive improvement, but is faced with more resistance then a salmon swimming upstream in northen america?

Maybe the Astana/APB-Kreuziger -and reform collaps is a symbol of the salmon being a quarter way upstream now,
-and must re-evaluate his approach..

So what does he do now?

Turn back and survive (personally)... But offer no change to the culture of cycling?

Or continue on an (ofiicially) powerful mandate that in reality contains a lot less pedigree?

I take it he does not see the meaning in swimming up-stream if no-one is following..

Thus he is the Salmon caught in the middle...
A few minutes later I went on to say this

But even if Cookson (or any UCI president for that matter) had the backbone it would require him being able to make everyone involved following his lead....

How does one make that possible?

How does one accomplish mutual agreement between short-sighted stakeholders that is only for the benefit of future stakeholders.......?

When there is only one "here and now"....?
So basically my point could be summarized to this:

1) Being well-intended is not clearly definable...
2) Cleaning the sport up does not come from one man or his actions alone...

He can inspire by fear, but what is that worth when everyone knows the testers are way far behind and that there are several other interests with some degree of "power" over same testing regimes and "politics".. The UCI president may be able to produce a positive (as per Hein) but he is not able to prevent dopers from doping unless they agree among themselves to do so... That is the Vaughters explanation of current era aside from the odd case her and there but only a few believes that fairytale..

The "sport" of cycling is highly resillient... Maybe even more so because it has endured so many scandals over the years.. Doping has become "part of the game" -Even for the casual cycling follower...
Cycling can recover from the occasional scandal now and then... But constantly reminding the world of it's problems by popping anyone reaching a top ten is not going to help the sport because it woul make all sponsorship and TV deals drop to half (hyperbole)...

I don't think anyone dares to gu full genius on the dopers and start over...
Because naturally as in any sport, the dopers and enablers would have the upper hand as they know what they are fighting....

Blaming and flaming Cookson is fair, as he himself chose his position with a "promise" of change...
that he could/can not deliver is necessarily not because he is ill-intended...
I would actually argue that the more you are anti-doping as UCI president the more obstacles and resistance you may face... Hence the "I wouldn't like to be in Cooksons's shoes" comment...

All of that is just a pov or a theory of course...
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Will Cookson listen to what WADA are saying;

There are two other areas where media can really have an impact on the anti-doping cause. Firstly, in reporting instances of doping publicly at the appropriate time, and with the athlete having a fear of being “named and shamed”, the media can help significantly in deterring athletes and their entourage from doping in the first place. WADA believes that, in many instances, the thought of being announced as a doper would strongly dissuade athletes from contemplating doping. In other words, the risk would outweigh the reward.
https://www.wada-ama.org/en/media/news/2015-05/wada-op-ed-media-the-4th-estate-in-anti-doping

Doubt it. Cookson shall be judged on his actions and to date that have been few and not in a manner of leading the fight against doping.

A bit of joke for WADA asking the media to get involved.
 
Re:

Skybot Cookson is a belieber in his own work and are at the same time angry on the sceptics. Dismissing everything we know about climbing records over selected cols, how everyone pulling on a Sky-jersey turns into Armstrong, outright lies about Froomes values et.al

“I think we saw riders during the last Tour de France were very tired and one of the causes, in my opinion, is the increased efficiency of doping controls,” Cookson said during an IOC session in Kuala Lumpur. “No one likes to see someone exhausted, but I think that this is a demonstration that we have constantly tightened the meshes of doping controls.

“People must have this in mind when they launched allegations and aspersions on any rider and any team.”

Thus far there has been one positive test from the race with Luca Paolini (Katusha) testing positive for cocaine in the opening week. He has been provisionally suspended from his team. The second week of the race saw doping allegations and innuendo thrown around though, following the release of a video of Froome’s ascent of Mont Ventoux in 2013 with his data overlaid – data Sky claimed was hacked.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/cookson-rider-fatigue-at-tour-de-france-shows-doping-controls-work/


Change? Not under Cooksons watch.
 
Jul 17, 2015
771
0
0
It'll take more than a Cookson to shake up cycling. In fact, it is really hard to foresee who could ever have enough leverage or will to do it. The Cookson/Sky alliance makes for uncomfortable viewing when Sky are winning.

Whilst I think he is right about this bit:

"“I think we saw riders during the last Tour de France were very tired and one of the causes, in my opinion, is the increased efficiency of doping controls,” Cookson said during an IOC session in Kuala Lumpur. “No one likes to see someone exhausted, but I think that this is a demonstration that we have constantly tightened the meshes of doping controls."

...and the era of rest day blood bags looks to be over, it isn't news and nor is it any of his doing I think.

Bit of a lame duck, especially over Astana. If he had wanted to he could have stamped a message right in the face of cycling.
 
Apr 7, 2015
656
0
0
Cookson is a bureaucrat. Any change will be slow and in safe distance from any controversial area.
 
Aug 2, 2012
5,971
1
0
a team suspended following 2 positives.........making teams accountable has to be

an improvement?

Mark L
 
Re: Re:

No_Balls said:
Skybot Cookson is a belieber in his own work and are at the same time angry on the sceptics. Dismissing everything we know about climbing records over selected cols, how everyone pulling on a Sky-jersey turns into Armstrong, outright lies about Froomes values et.al

“I think we saw riders during the last Tour de France were very tired and one of the causes, in my opinion, is the increased efficiency of doping controls,” Cookson said during an IOC session in Kuala Lumpur. “No one likes to see someone exhausted, but I think that this is a demonstration that we have constantly tightened the meshes of doping controls.

“People must have this in mind when they launched allegations and aspersions on any rider and any team.”

Thus far there has been one positive test from the race with Luca Paolini (Katusha) testing positive for cocaine in the opening week. He has been provisionally suspended from his team. The second week of the race saw doping allegations and innuendo thrown around though, following the release of a video of Froome’s ascent of Mont Ventoux in 2013 with his data overlaid – data Sky claimed was hacked.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/cookson-rider-fatigue-at-tour-de-france-shows-doping-controls-work/


Change? Not under Cooksons watch.
At least Walsh is on the payroll. What is Cookson's excuse ?
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Re: Re:

Eyeballs Out said:
No_Balls said:
Skybot Cookson is a belieber in his own work and are at the same time angry on the sceptics. Dismissing everything we know about climbing records over selected cols, how everyone pulling on a Sky-jersey turns into Armstrong, outright lies about Froomes values et.al

“I think we saw riders during the last Tour de France were very tired and one of the causes, in my opinion, is the increased efficiency of doping controls,” Cookson said during an IOC session in Kuala Lumpur. “No one likes to see someone exhausted, but I think that this is a demonstration that we have constantly tightened the meshes of doping controls.

“People must have this in mind when they launched allegations and aspersions on any rider and any team.”

Thus far there has been one positive test from the race with Luca Paolini (Katusha) testing positive for cocaine in the opening week. He has been provisionally suspended from his team. The second week of the race saw doping allegations and innuendo thrown around though, following the release of a video of Froome’s ascent of Mont Ventoux in 2013 with his data overlaid – data Sky claimed was hacked.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/cookson-rider-fatigue-at-tour-de-france-shows-doping-controls-work/


Change? Not under Cooksons watch.
At least Walsh is on the payroll. What is Cookson's excuse ?
Cookson is aiming for a knighthood.

Cookson is a bigger joke than McQuaid.
 
I really wish journalists would take the time to ask follow up questions to answers that, on the surface, don't appear to make a lot of sense.
Cookson claims the reason why riders were tired in the third week was due to the increased efficiency of doping controls.
I'm genuinely curious to know what he means by that.
Have the controls themselves changed? If so, how?
I don't recall reading about a whack of doping suspensions being handed down due to this new technology; so how do the riders know about it?
Did Cookson visit every camp and say, "listen boys, we have some radical new technology that will be able to detect what you're on, so you better watch out."
Also, please stop publishing the urine throwing incident as fact. No one except Vroome seems to recall it happening.
 
Jun 8, 2015
306
0
0
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/cookson-rider-fatigue-at-tour-de-france-shows-doping-controls-work/

Well, things don't add up do they. It just sounds more like a another plea to believe the new clean narrative. Just be a belieber, please, everyone, I beg you.

Rider fatigue. okay, that can be a symptom of clean.
Luca Paolini busted for cocaine = transparency and proof of testing.
Nope, it's not, not even combined with rider fatigue, it isn't, sorry we know about scapegoats. But it's something to say:

“I think we saw riders during the last Tour de France were very tired and one of the causes, in my opinion, is the increased efficiency of doping controls,” Cookson said during an IOC session in Kuala Lumpur. “No one likes to see someone exhausted, but I think that this is a demonstration that we have constantly tightened the meshes of doping controls."

How about how clean Froome equals or beats known doper times - present and past. Just publish the test results of stage 20 (if they did them). Hold the testers and doping control mesh tighteners accountable. Be accountable yourself, please, not so...vague and wishy/hopeful that this pig flies.

Publish in a timely way, not months or years later when time has been taken to work it all out behind closed doors, by then, it's not very transparent or truthful. Hey, it didn't take long for Paolini to be busted and booted.

Otherwise, lots of suspicion also falls back on how things played out with Astana and Kreuziger over the past year or two. Why is Astana still a team riding in the peloton? Why was the Kreuziger case dropped suddenly? Why is he riding in the 2015 TdF - why, for that matter are Nibali and Astana? Why are you sidestepping, Cookson, and why do your hands appear tied behind your back while attempting to move forward with a new a brighter narrative for cycling?

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/cookson-i-dont-want-a-war-with-aso-but-cycling-must-reform/

sidestepping
hands tied

He pleads with us to believe the new and stronger global narrative. But it's 1) hard to quantify and 2) ASO get in the way. Says Cookson, I'm trying, so have faith in me for now:

BC: What we’re trying to do is have a stronger global narrative to the sport. We want to enhance the development and the pathways so that the teams can offer more sustainable returns to their sponsors and investors. Those things are hard to quantify. ASO are in a great position and they have a great series of events and many of those events that they’re developing would love to be part of the WorldTour as well but they should have an interest in making the WorldTour reforms work as well as anyone else.
People must have this in mind when they launched allegations and aspersions on any rider and any team.”

Well, anyway...
 
Yeah, rider fatigue in week three is a perfect illustration of the new clean cycling era.
A cynic might say everyone save for Vroome were still trying to recover from the first mountain stage, when Sky's domestiques managed to blow every opposing team leader out the back door mid-way through the climb.
 
Re: Re:

doperhopper said:
Everybody fighting each other, ASO pushing to kill Giro and Vuelta by shortening them - as Vuelta organizers!
guess this is off topic but I think that's a good direction to explore. What is magical about three weeks? I get fatigued just trying to follow a single race for three weeks... especially when it's decided on the first MTF. Also, why do we as fans care who can ride the fastest after three weeks of serious overtraining? To me stage racing is more interesting as a way to determine who can ride the fastest over a variety of terrain.

A three week stage race is probably just as unhealthy as three weeks of doping, and to me, rider health is the only reason doping should be banned.
 
Apr 20, 2012
6,321
0
0
Re:

the delgados said:
I really wish journalists would take the time to ask follow up questions to answers that, on the surface, don't appear to make a lot of sense.
Cookson claims the reason why riders were tired in the third week was due to the increased efficiency of doping controls.
I'm genuinely curious to know what he means by that.
Have the controls themselves changed? If so, how?
I don't recall reading about a whack of doping suspensions being handed down due to this new technology; so how do the riders know about it?
Did Cookson visit every camp and say, "listen boys, we have some radical new technology that will be able to detect what you're on, so you better watch out."
Also, please stop publishing the urine throwing incident as fact. No one except Vroome seems to recall it happening.
that moron Danie Benson only cares about hits, dont worry, his adds will pay for his salary
 
@ Fearless Greg Lemond:
Maybe a "Ask a Reporter" thread is in order.
I understand that everyone needs to make a living, and I would never call Benson et al a moron, but it never ceases to amaze me why an obvious follow-up question isn't asked.
I always tend to give the benefit of the doubt by thinking the interview was conducted amongst a scrum of reporters and s/he didn't have an opportunity to follow-up, etc. Also there's the fact that CN is not an investigative news web site. Benson et al knows which side their bread is buttered on. But c'mon. Sometimes a follow-up question is too obvious to ignore.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
BlueRoads The Clinic 1

ASK THE COMMUNITY