Cookson is worse for cycling than McQuaid

[bobbins]

Re: Re:

What would happen if Sky were faced with an Astana type situation? Was the first question that popped to mind and thinking dad might not want to shut down his sons's place of business.

The link says he is a "performance co-ordinator," Unless my interpretation of that job is completely off, it is hard to see how that is not an inherent conflict of interest.

indeed.

Dad is strikingly vague about his son's role at sky:

"However, considering his particular technical position with the team, I do not see any circumstances which could lead to a potential conflict of interest"
http://www.uci.ch/mm/Document/News/Organisation/17/41/07/RegisterofinterestsB.Cookson_Neutral.pdf

avoiding the elephant in the room much?

Oli Cookson is a decent lad but no way in a million years would he be in that role without his dads influence. He was an unemployed amateur bike rider on the dole in spain before sky came along.

 

[Benotti69]

Makarov and his teams Katusha and Gazprom are not seen as a conflict of interest by Cookson.............

There is a rule that prohibits connected teams from racing together in order to prevent a conflict of interest, but i guess money matters more than rules.

 

[King Boonen]

Re:

Makarov and his teams Katusha and Gazprom are not seen as a conflict of interest by Cookson.............

There is a rule that prohibits connected teams from racing together in order to prevent a conflict of interest, but i guess money matters more than rules.

What's the rule?

 

[fmk_RoI]

Re: Re:

What's the rule?

The rule is 2.2.001:

Riders belonging to teams with the same paying agent or main partner may not compete in the same race except in the case of an individual event. Furthermore, no more than one national team of each nationality may compete in an event. In addition, the participation of both a UCI WorldTeam and the development team supported by this same UCI WorldTeam in accordance with article 2.15.130 is prohibited

Katusha and Gazprom don't have the same paying agent or main partner so - according to the letter of the law - the two are not connected teams to be prohibited from participating the same races.

The same situation, in other words, as Sky and Team Wiggins.

(Gazprom have previously participated in WorldTour races including the Tour de Pologne in 2014. The conflict of interest thing also came up when the Katusha licence was revoked.)

 

[King Boonen]

Thanks. I don't understand the paying agent, I would have thought it meant sponsor but that seems to covered by partner. What does it refer to?

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

Makarov and his teams Katusha and Gazprom are not seen as a conflict of interest by Cookson.............

There is a rule that prohibits connected teams from racing together in order to prevent a conflict of interest, but i guess money matters more than rules.

What's the rule?

Those with money talk, those without walk......ask Savio

 

[fmk_RoI]

Re:

Thanks. I don't understand the paying agent, I would have thought it meant sponsor but that seems to covered by partner. What does it refer to?

Long answer:

Paying agent

2.15.057 The licence must be operated exclusively and directly by a paying agent.
The licence holder may himself act as paying agent.

If the holder entrusts the operation of the licence to a third party acting as paying agent, the holder is held jointly and severally liable for all the paying agent's obligations relating to the UCI WorldTour.

2.15.058 If the paying agent is not a principal partner of the team, the management of the UCI WorldTeam will be the paying agent's sole activity, unless an exemption is granted by the licence commission.

(text modified on 1.01.15).

2.15.059 Subject to the provisions for representation before the licence commission, the paying agent shall represent the UCI WorldTeam for all purposes as regards the UCI regulations.

(text modified on 18.06.07; 1.01.15).

2.15.060 The paying agent must be a trading company or other legal person authorised by the law in the country in which the company has its registered offices. It shall sign the contracts with the riders and the other persons under contract for the operation of the team.

So eg you had the situation with Bruyneel at Astana (?) where he held the riders' contracts but wasn't the licence holder. He was the de facto owner of the team, even if he was just an employee of the licence holder.

 

[King Boonen]

Re: Re:

Thanks. I don't understand the paying agent, I would have thought it meant sponsor but that seems to covered by partner. What does it refer to?

Long answer:

Paying agent

2.15.057 The licence must be operated exclusively and directly by a paying agent.
The licence holder may himself act as paying agent.

If the holder entrusts the operation of the licence to a third party acting as paying agent, the holder is held jointly and severally liable for all the paying agent's obligations relating to the UCI WorldTour.

2.15.058 If the paying agent is not a principal partner of the team, the management of the UCI WorldTeam will be the paying agent's sole activity, unless an exemption is granted by the licence commission.

(text modified on 1.01.15).

2.15.059 Subject to the provisions for representation before the licence commission, the paying agent shall represent the UCI WorldTeam for all purposes as regards the UCI regulations.

(text modified on 18.06.07; 1.01.15).

2.15.060 The paying agent must be a trading company or other legal person authorised by the law in the country in which the company has its registered offices. It shall sign the contracts with the riders and the other persons under contract for the operation of the team.

So eg you had the situation with Bruyneel at Astana (?) where he held the riders' contracts but wasn't the licence holder. He was the de facto owner of the team, even if he was just an employee of the licence holder.

Thanks for that, seems to almost contradict itself in places and looks very easy to work around.

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

Thanks. I don't understand the paying agent, I would have thought it meant sponsor but that seems to covered by partner. What does it refer to?

Long answer:

Paying agent

2.15.057 The licence must be operated exclusively and directly by a paying agent.
The licence holder may himself act as paying agent.

If the holder entrusts the operation of the licence to a third party acting as paying agent, the holder is held jointly and severally liable for all the paying agent's obligations relating to the UCI WorldTour.

2.15.058 If the paying agent is not a principal partner of the team, the management of the UCI WorldTeam will be the paying agent's sole activity, unless an exemption is granted by the licence commission.

(text modified on 1.01.15).

2.15.059 Subject to the provisions for representation before the licence commission, the paying agent shall represent the UCI WorldTeam for all purposes as regards the UCI regulations.

(text modified on 18.06.07; 1.01.15).

2.15.060 The paying agent must be a trading company or other legal person authorised by the law in the country in which the company has its registered offices. It shall sign the contracts with the riders and the other persons under contract for the operation of the team.

So eg you had the situation with Bruyneel at Astana (?) where he held the riders' contracts but wasn't the licence holder. He was the de facto owner of the team, even if he was just an employee of the licence holder.

Thanks for that, seems to almost contradict itself in places and looks very easy to work around.

Isn't that the point. They twist and bend the rules for those who can afford it and for those who cant, well throw the rule book at them.

 

[fmk_RoI]

Re: Re:

Thanks for that, seems to almost contradict itself in places and looks very easy to work around.

To work around to what end? As a legal document identifying the person pulling the purse strings, it's not unusual - not very strong (you can always put in front companies) but not totally weak.

The UCI's rules, in general, are old and out of date. They were written for a different world and are being updated piecemeal. They weren't written for a world of global cycling projects with representation at every level of the sport.

 

[fmk_RoI]

Re: Re:

They twist and bend the rules for those who can afford it and for those who cant, well throw the rule book at them.

But isn't the real point here that you were wrong in saying that the rule prohibiting connected teams from racing together in order to prevent a conflict of interest applied to Katusha and Gazprom racing together?

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

They twist and bend the rules for those who can afford it and for those who cant, well throw the rule book at them.

But isn't the real point here that you were wrong in saying that the rule prohibiting connected teams from racing together in order to prevent a conflict of interest applied to Katusha and Gazprom racing together?

The real point is the sport is corrupt, inherently, the rules point to that, the managementt of the sport points to that and the rules permit it.

Katusha and Gazprom are owned by the same person, Makarov. These teams racing together is an unfair advantage.

 

[fmk_RoI]

Re: Re:

The real point is the sport is corrupt

And I thought the real point was that everything, absolutely everything, can be twisted and turned to support the prevailing argument that cycling is rotten, rotten to the core and nothing will convince some that there is anything good in it.

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

The real point is the sport is corrupt

And I thought the real point was that everything, absolutely everything, can be twisted and turned to support the prevailing argument that cycling is rotten, rotten to the core and nothing will convince some that there is anything good in it.

Can you show the good?

 

[fmk_RoI]

Re: Re:

Can you show the good?

Could you see it with your blinkers on?

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

Can you show the good?

Could you see it with your blinkers on?

So no good?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Re: Re:

Can you show the good?

Could you see it with your blinkers on?

Oh yes attack the poster. Such debating prowess.

 

[fmk_RoI]

Re: Re:

Can you show the good?

Oh yes attack the poster. Such debating prowess.

Oh yes attack the poster. Such debating prowess.

Repeat to fade...

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Re: Re:

Can you show the good?

Oh yes attack the poster. Such debating prowess.

Oh yes attack the poster. Such debating prowess.

Repeat to fade...

So you got nothing then?

Not even a single "good" thing to share?

Kinda makes you wonder why you posted in the first place. Posturing?

 

[42x16ss]

Re: Re:

Can you show the good?

Oh yes attack the poster. Such debating prowess.

Oh yes attack the poster. Such debating prowess.

Repeat to fade...

So you got nothing then?

Not even a single "good" thing to share?

Kinda makes you wonder why you posted in the first place. Posturing?

STOP ATTACKING THE POSTER

 

[42x16ss]

Re: Re:

Can you show the good?

Could you see it with your blinkers on?

How about you don't attack the poster, point the "good" out and see what happens?

 

[bobbins]

Re:

..........we all watch cycling....for those who can't see any good at all...sorry!

i really can't help you................

Mark L

for those who don't believe in miracles, I'm sorry.......

 

[fmk_RoI]

Re: Re:

Can you show the good?

Could you see it with your blinkers on?

So no good?

We could do a trade. I show you the good when you show me your long requested stats proving Cookson has blocked use of the Cologne lab...

Or, you could save us both a lot of time here: do you accept that there is any good in cycling, or would I just be wasting my time and yours showing it to you?

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

Can you show the good?

Could you see it with your blinkers on?

So no good?

We could do a trade. I show you the good when you show me your long requested stats proving Cookson has blocked use of the Cologne lab...

Or, you could save us both a lot of time here: do you accept that there is any good in cycling, or would I just be wasting my time and yours showing it to you?

Still no good to show us?

The attempt at diversion is not working. I think we are experiencing another vortexing........

Riding my bike is good, but that is not part of the sport. From top to bottom i see corruption, from the UCI president to soigneurs and all in between. Those who ingore the problems of the sport and dont speak out are as culpable as those creating the problems in the sport. I dont see how it is possible to race in pro cycling without dope and if you do race clean you dont last, before teams apply the pressure to dope or leave.

So back to you showing us the good........

 

[fmk_RoI]

Re: Re:

From top to bottom i see corruption, from the UCI president to soigneurs and all in between.

So any attempts to show you the good is just wasting time, for both of us.

Is wasting time something you like to do?