Cookson is worse for cycling than McQuaid

Page 92 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Feb 21, 2017
1,019
0
0
Re:

Mayo from Mayo said:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/pooley-on-brailsford-a-fish-rots-from-the-head/

Is she talking about Brailsford here? Brian was the head of the stinking fish.
I'd like to think she's leaving it open to interpretation, but I'd say it's an indictment of BC in general despite the fact she points out not all the apples are rotten. It's seems to be a corporate culture issue at the heart of it.

Edited for grammar
 
Oct 6, 2009
5,273
0
0
How did Cookson come to be in charge of BC in the first place? I get how he got the UCI job, but who decided Cookie was such a dynamite administrator that he'd be perfect to head up British cycling?
 
Re:

Beech Mtn said:
How did Cookson come to be in charge of BC in the first place? I get how he got the UCI job, but who decided Cookie was such a dynamite administrator that he'd be perfect to head up British cycling?
It's a long story. Short version, back in the day Tony Doyle overthrew the old order, dummies were spat all over the place, conflicts of interest galore were revealed, British Cycling - or the BCF as it was then - was the laughing stock of the nation (questions were being asked in parliament) and beyond (Hein Verburggen publicly criticised them), Doyle was ousted and Cookson - a sort of least offensive alternative with no dodgy past - got the role of figurehead. But he was only a figurehead, no one saw him as having the real power.
 
Oct 6, 2009
5,273
0
0
Re: Re:

fmk_RoI said:
Beech Mtn said:
How did Cookson come to be in charge of BC in the first place? I get how he got the UCI job, but who decided Cookie was such a dynamite administrator that he'd be perfect to head up British cycling?
It's a long story. Short version, back in the day Tony Doyle overthrew the old order, dummies were spat all over the place, conflicts of interest galore were revealed, British Cycling - or the BCF as it was then - was the laughing stock of the nation (questions were being asked in parliament) and beyond (Hein Verburggen publicly criticised them), Doyle was ousted and Cookson - a sort of least offensive alternative with no dodgy past - got the role of figurehead. But he was only a figurehead, no one saw him as having the real power.
Thanks. Sounds not unlike how he ended up in charge of the UCI. Sort of a useful stooge to inoffensively keep up appearances and let things blow over while others keep hold of the real power behind the scenes.

Seems an odd way for a grown man to earn a living, but I suppose it pays well. You'd think he'd want to do something with his Presidency, though.

I wonder if Cookson knows, on some level, that he's being used? Or if he's naive and actually believes he may be helping clean up a messy situation? But then, given his lack of apparent action regarding the current BC inquiries and scandals, I'm also wondering if he doesn't really care so much about the institution, the sport, or his own reputation, but rather, likes money and non-conflict. Maybe he is one of those men of inactivity who thinks staying completely out of things is the ethical, correct course of action - being impartial as UCI President. Maybe he doesn't want to help attach his name to any of this or have to answer to the Parliamentary committee about lack of oversight of public resources (can't blame him for that).

I find Cookson's inactivity irritating. McQuaid often made a mess of things, but at least he had some fight to him and didn't hide when controversy struck. He'd be out there with the press hacking away in these interviews. Cookie is just blah.
 
Re: Re:

Beech Mtn said:
fmk_RoI said:
Beech Mtn said:
How did Cookson come to be in charge of BC in the first place? I get how he got the UCI job, but who decided Cookie was such a dynamite administrator that he'd be perfect to head up British cycling?
It's a long story. Short version, back in the day Tony Doyle overthrew the old order, dummies were spat all over the place, conflicts of interest galore were revealed, British Cycling - or the BCF as it was then - was the laughing stock of the nation (questions were being asked in parliament) and beyond (Hein Verburggen publicly criticised them), Doyle was ousted and Cookson - a sort of least offensive alternative with no dodgy past - got the role of figurehead. But he was only a figurehead, no one saw him as having the real power.
Thanks. Sounds not unlike how he ended up in charge of the UCI. Sort of a useful stooge to inoffensively keep up appearances and let things blow over while others keep hold of the real power behind the scenes.

Seems an odd way for a grown man to earn a living, but I suppose it pays well. You'd think he'd want to do something with his Presidency, though.

I wonder if Cookson knows, on some level, that he's being used? Or if he's naive and actually believes he may be helping clean up a messy situation? But then, given his lack of apparent action regarding the current BC inquiries and scandals, I'm also wondering if he doesn't really care so much about the institution, the sport, or his own reputation, but rather, likes money and non-conflict. Maybe he is one of those men of inactivity who thinks staying completely out of things is the ethical, correct course of action - being impartial as UCI President. Maybe he doesn't want to help attach his name to any of this or have to answer to the Parliamentary committee about lack of oversight of public resources (can't blame him for that).

I find Cookson's inactivity irritating. McQuaid often made a mess of things, but at least he had some fight to him and didn't hide when controversy struck. He'd be out there with the press hacking away in these interviews. Cookie is just blah.

Agree on all of this. McQuaid was a clown but at least he cared enough to make a comment. In saying that, Cookson is slimey. During this whole affair he's been busy out touring the globe securing votes for the next election from the Middle East and Asia. His tweets are obvious of a man willing to buy the next election with UCI money.
 
Re: Re:

thehog said:
Agree on all of this. McQuaid was a clown but at least he cared enough to make a comment. In saying that, Cookson is slimey. During this whole affair he's been busy out touring the globe securing votes for the next election from the Middle East and Asia. His tweets are obvious of a man willing to buy the next election with UCI money.
The thing about PMQ was that he actually had a vision for the sport - admittedly, it wasn't his own vision, it was HV's, but it was a vision nonetheless - whereas BC is ... well, blind. He's more interested in process - consensus - than progress. And yes, winning the election - or stopping an election from happening - is very much all he is doing right now. It's up to Lappartient (or Jean-Claude Van Damme) to take the British Cycling issue to Cookson, but that's not likely to happen until the next management meeting.
 
Re: Re:

fmk_RoI said:
thehog said:
Agree on all of this. McQuaid was a clown but at least he cared enough to make a comment. In saying that, Cookson is slimey. During this whole affair he's been busy out touring the globe securing votes for the next election from the Middle East and Asia. His tweets are obvious of a man willing to buy the next election with UCI money.
The thing about PMQ was that he actually had a vision for the sport - admittedly, it wasn't his own vision, it was HV's, but it was a vision nonetheless - whereas BC is ... well, blind. He's more interested in process - consensus - than progress. And yes, winning the election - or stopping an election from happening - is very much all he is doing right now. It's up to Lappartient (or Jean-Claude Van Damme) to take the British Cycling issue to Cookson, but that's not likely to happen until the next management meeting.
I didn't loath Mcquaid but his teathering to HV was his ultimate downfall. He also was stuck on USPS/Armstrong due to the same teathering. I would say that McQuaid wasn't adverse to punishing dopers not matter who they were - Contador, Ullrich etc. I won't say that Mcquaid was chasing down dopers but if the situation was presented he banned them. Whereas Cookson appears intent on ensuring no one in the ProTour ever tests positive anymore and if they do they get let off - Rogers, Impey etc.
 
Mar 11, 2009
1,005
0
0
Wasn't one gripe about McQuaid the denial of a conflict of interest when events like the Tour of Beijing were given UCI top status and happened to be operated by a company controlled by his brother, or am I misremembering?

Cookson is just a cardboard cutout.
 
Re:

Nick C. said:
Wasn't one gripe about McQuaid the denial of a conflict of interest when events like the Tour of Beijing were given UCI top status and happened to be operated by a company controlled by his brother, or am I misremembering?

Cookson is just a cardboard cutout.
No, that was the Richmond Worlds and the Tour of Ireland for Lance Comeback 2.0.

Tour of Beijing was run by a company owned by the UCI, which in some respects could be seen as a conflict. Cookson shut it down after year one and invested UCI money into the Tour de Yorkshire and events in the Middle East.
 
Re: Re:

thehog said:
Nick C. said:
Wasn't one gripe about McQuaid the denial of a conflict of interest when events like the Tour of Beijing were given UCI top status and happened to be operated by a company controlled by his brother, or am I misremembering?

Cookson is just a cardboard cutout.
No, that was the Richmond Worlds and the Tour of Ireland for Lance Comeback 2.0.

Tour of Beijing was run by a company owned by the UCI, which in some respects could be seen as a conflict. Cookson shut it down after year one and invested UCI money into the Tour de Yorkshire and events in the Middle East.
And Cookson added a Chinese WT race at the last minute for 2017, in an effort to be nice to Wang Jianlin and his impressively large bank balance. Which, when you consider the difficulties China's latest currency restrictions are causing Wanda's Hollywood expansion, may prove to be even dumber than the Tour of Beijing.
 
Feb 21, 2017
1,019
0
0
Re: Re:

thehog said:
Nick C. said:
Wasn't one gripe about McQuaid the denial of a conflict of interest when events like the Tour of Beijing were given UCI top status and happened to be operated by a company controlled by his brother, or am I misremembering?

Cookson is just a cardboard cutout.
No, that was the Richmond Worlds and the Tour of Ireland for Lance Comeback 2.0.

Tour of Beijing was run by a company owned by the UCI, which in some respects could be seen as a conflict. Cookson shut it down after year one and invested UCI money into the Tour de Yorkshire and events in the Middle East.
Correct on Richmond's WC, and I believe his brother's company suffered some massive setbacks in terms of setting up future planned races. Not sure how relevant that info is, but I often wonder how many bridges the McQuaid's burned along the way that may have tarnished their... ehrmm... legacy in the sport.
 
Aug 2, 2012
5,971
1
0
what? brian putting on a brave face...................while killing the myth that one can lead a camel to

water.............but not always get it to drink?

Mark L
 
Jul 5, 2011
858
0
0
Valverde, Gilbert, Sagan, LOL. Great to see that clean cycling is flourishing again since Cookson took over. All that hard work is really paying off. Big time.
 
Re:

rainman said:
Valverde, Gilbert, Sagan, LOL. Great to see that clean cycling is flourishing again since Cookson took over. All that hard work is really paying off. Big time.
I don't understand this comment, so could someone please help. I get the irony part, the airquotes-clean-airquotes cycling, it's actually not airquotes-clean-airquotes cycling at all, it's doped cycling. But the logic here appears to be winners (Valverde, Gilbert, Sagan, this LOL guy) equal dopers (Valverde, Gilbert, Sagan, this LOL guy) . But we had winners in cycling before Cookson, or at least I'm pretty sure we did. Or did we just have loads of bike races which no one won?

(This LOL guy, I'm getting confused with all the LRP and G/GT etc TLAing going on, so soz that I don't immediately know who's being talked about.)
 
Jul 5, 2011
858
0
0
We have to be witnessing the most obvious outrageous doping since the early days of EPO. Its on Cooksons watch, so what is going on?
 
Jul 21, 2016
913
0
0
Re: Re:

fmk_RoI said:
rainman said:
Valverde, Gilbert, Sagan, LOL. Great to see that clean cycling is flourishing again since Cookson took over. All that hard work is really paying off. Big time.
I don't understand this comment, so could someone please help. I get the irony part, the airquotes-clean-airquotes cycling, it's actually not airquotes-clean-airquotes cycling at all, it's doped cycling. But the logic here appears to be winners (Valverde, Gilbert, Sagan, this LOL guy) equal dopers (Valverde, Gilbert, Sagan, this LOL guy) . But we had winners in cycling before Cookson, or at least I'm pretty sure we did. Or did we just have loads of bike races which no one won?

(This LOL guy, I'm getting confused with all the LRP and G/GT etc TLAing going on, so soz that I don't immediately know who's being talked about.)
Winners used to be winners until we were told they were losers so the losers were the winners before we were told that the winners were winners again yay happyface but now the winners are losers again and it's all gone boo sadface

I think LOL is slang for the Frenchies
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY