Cookson is worse for cycling than McQuaid

[the sceptic]

No, I had already provided commentary on the matter weeks ago. I was restating my position as I referenced, do you read?

Cookson, I believe has a master plan. That is to commercialize cycling for the masses - TV, internet etc. He has Murdoch and Vaughters on board to push it further.

Over to you..

This is my view as well. Cookson wants to kill off everything that isn't profitable, and he wants the same people winning everything.

Cookson is selling the soul of cycling.

 

[Benotti69]

This is my view as well. Cookson wants to kill off everything that isn't profitable, and he wants the same people winning everything.

Cookson is selling the soul of cycling.

Cycling's soul was being flogged a long time ago, Cookson wants to make it final.

 

[ebandit]

No, I had already provided commentary on the matter weeks ago. I was restating my position as I referenced, do you read?

Cookson, I believe has a master plan. That is to commercialize cycling for the masses - TV, internet etc. He has Murdoch and Vaughters on board to push it further.

Over to you..

Not yet.

Please justify how the proposed changes will bring this about............not trying to catch you out. ....genuinely interested.

MarK L

 

[thehog]

This is my view as well. Cookson wants to kill off everything that isn't profitable, and he wants the same people winning everything.

Cookson is selling the soul of cycling.

He is a landscape gardener. Never seen a bigger patsy in my life. Commoditise, package, sell off and move on. World Series Cricket incarnate.

Cycling is one of the few sports to hold its roots courtesy of the race owners. Cookson is about to rip its heart out.

 

[TheSpud]

Even when Mark L called me a troll and said I have an anti Cookson agenda I stuck to my opinion that McQuaid was better. Appears I might not have been that far off after all.

On what basis, that your friend (or should I say puppet) Hog has said something you agree with???

 

[the sceptic]

On what basis, that your friend (or should I say puppet) Hog has said something you agree with???

ball, not man.

 

[ebandit]

ball, not man.

You being somebody who consistently trolls and baits Spud by calling him 'Martin'.....despite direct instruction from mods not to do so..... perhaps ought to get your house in order before casting stones

Mark L

 

[TheSpud]

ball, not man.

Ha ha what a surprise with that retort.

You need to learn that rule as well.

 

[Mellow Velo]

Ha ha what a surprise with that retort.

You need to learn that rule as well.

Yes, you very quickly find out that the sceptic is obsessed with men and balls.

Having said that, he's on solid ground this evening.
Ripping the guts out of the old calendar and selling seats and popcorn on enclosed circuits is the reform Cookson is proposing.
Some people see this as a good thing; the way forward.
Others, like me, will see it as the (another) sport being dumbed down to sell to the masses.


Flo: Fillet steak with Roquefort sauce is not clinic fish bait.

 

[thehog]

Yes, you very quickly find out that the sceptic is obsessed with men and balls.

Having said that, he's on solid ground this evening.
Ripping the guts out of the old calendar and selling seats and popcorn on enclosed circuits is the reform Cookson is proposing.
Some people see this as a good thing; the way forward.
Others, like me, will see it as the (another) sport being dumbed down to sell to the masses.


Flo: Fillet steak with Roquefort sauce is not clinic fish bait.

Landscape Gardener Cookson will sort it

On the vanguard of anti-doping according to Walsh.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Ripping the guts out of the old calendar and selling seats and popcorn on enclosed circuits is the reform Cookson is proposing.
Some people see this as a good thing; the way forward.
Others, like me, will see it as the (another) sport being dumbed down to sell to the masses.

For the casual reader, this UCI roadmap has been in deployment mode since McQuaid's last term. When Cookson was on the management committee, this was okayed.

The UCI has been quietly implementing it demoting many races that could have had a chance at either "tier 1" and "tier 2" a dozen different ways.

The UCI, ASO, RCS, and the Classics cooperative are the huge winners. Athletes and team sponsors are the losers. The UCI is indifferent about the fans and athletes and have been for quite a while now.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

For the casual reader, this UCI roadmap has been in deployment mode since McQuaid's last term. When Cookson was on the management committee, this was okayed.

The UCI has been quietly implementing it demoting many races that could have had a chance at either "tier 1" and "tier 2" a dozen different ways.

The UCI, ASO, RCS, and the Classics cooperative are the huge winners. Athletes and team sponsors are the losers. The UCI is indifferent about the fans and athletes and have been for quite a while now.

Do any of the teams or riders have any recourse for disagreement?

I get the impression if anyone complained about the lack of consultation or apparent value in this change they would struggle with their license renewal, although that's conjecture, clearly.

 

[Granville57]

I get the impression if anyone complained about the lack of consultation or apparent value in this change they would struggle with their license renewal, although that's conjecture, clearly.

Clearly. As would be the suggestion that a rider who complained might find himself under closer scrutiny with regards to his bio-passport.

Warning letters, etc. That would never happen.

 

[LaFlorecita]

By the way, this was posted on another forum:

1st it was drawn up in Pat's time as one idea, he is on record as saying it will be the death of cycling.

Not sure if true, but interesting if it is

 

[LaFlorecita]

It would be interesting if someone could articulate why they think these changes are a bad idea.

Of course! You could also get out of the clinic and find out that in the Road Racing section, plenty of people have articulated why they find these changes a bad idea.

Firstly, the shortening of the GTs (Giro and vuelta to 2 weeks) and stage races (max of 6 days, also for TDS which is normally 9 days) and the downgrading of historical races to a lower level (Catalunya 3rd division, Pais Vasco 2nd division). This completes screws up future results and how we should regard them from a historical perspective. And the question here is, why? Why does this need to change?

I also have no idea why races can no longer overlap. It seems to me like, for example for the Dauphiné and TDS this will mean only one of them will be used as preparation for the TDF, because the other is too far away from/too close to the start of the Tour.

Secondly, team sizes down to 22(/24?) riders. Obviously this means lots of riders will end up on the streets. 90, for that matter. 90 top level cyclists. It also means teams will be less likely to pick up promising youngsters.

Thirdly, the fact that Qatar, Dubai and Oman are on the same level as Pais Vasco and Romandie, and on a higher level than Catalunya and Trentino, makes me want to cry my eyeballs out. For christ's sake.

And, I just wish we'd get some more information. What is the deal with the race days cap? Will first division riders be able to ride as many 1B races as they want? Will they be able to ride category 2 races? What is up with the Challenge Tour? How do the rankings work? So many questions, so little answers. And the main question is, why? Why, for the love of god, does this so desperately need to happen?

 

[Ferminal]

This is the problem with focusing on the individual. The idea that McQuaid leaving the sport was going result in an overwhelmingly positive change of direction was ludicrous. The incentives for Cookson are no different than they were for McQuaid. People don't get involved in these things without having a commitment to money and power, for themselves and their organisation (or faction within organisation). Sports administrators are rarely the friend of a fan and it's not just blatant corruption that is the problem.

Luckily for cycling the UCI is pretty powerless outside of doping. That said there aren't really any strong groups of stakeholders. No unions, the teams associations are lame ducks and Amaury is the only organiser that matters. This makes it very easy for parts of the sport within the sphere of control of one entity to sell it out at the right price. But maybe it's these weaknesses that are what keep the sport going in a sound direction, no one is big enough to really make a meal of it.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Secondly, team sizes down to 22(/24?) riders. Obviously this means lots of riders will end up on the streets. 90, for that matter. 90 top level cyclists. It also means teams will be less likely to pick up promising youngsters.

Not only riders but less support staff required.

The math is useful - imagine this: the UCI are effectively shutting down 3 - yes 3 entire teams through this move of decreasing team sizes.

Consider that.

Hands up all the pro cyclists who are happy that the UCI is going to be responsible for 3 teams closing up shop.

*crickets*

 

[thehog]

But mine has excellent Cookson reasoning

Actually you're right. When you couple this strategy with taking anti-doing away from the national federations, you have it all controlled by the UCI

Quote:
I think it is important that everyone buys into what we come up with at the end of the day and has ownership of it, because some changes will be required,” Cookson told Cyclingnews recently, refusing to go into detail.

Quote:
I don't want to comment on any one issue.

Quote:
“I also don't want to give any specific.....................
I'm not going to be a hostage to fortune in that way,

Quote:
Perhaps it's a little archaic in the way its democratic structure operates but if you're a member of a national federation, you have a voice. I urge people to join their national federations around the world rather than send angry tweets.

Quote:
We have the final word
__________________

 

[mrhender]

Actually you're right. When you couple this strategy with taking anti-doing away from the national federations, you have it all controlled by the UCI

He does not present himself or his organazation very well in that interview.

Where is the dialogue? The embracing of fans?
The transparency mantra is also as good as dead...

Instead he has resorted to bullying and mocking/generalising concerned fans...
All while centralizing all power within the UCI and it's independent branches

He displays that there is no middle-ground...
No discussion, and no information....

it is the Cookson way or the highway.....

 

[Benotti69]

He does not present himself or his organazation very well in that interview.

Where is the dialogue? The embracing of fans?
The transparency mantra is also as good as dead...

Instead he has resorted to bullying and mocking/generalising concerned fans...
All while centralizing all power within the UCI and it's independent branches

He displays that there is no middle-ground...
No discussion, and no information....

it is the Cookson way or the highway.....

Following the lead of Samaranch, Blatter, Verbruggen and other presidents.

 

[sniper]

...
Give Parisotto a break. The sports federations are his employers. His comments about Honer's values were very useful. It certainly wasn't something he had to do.

fair enough of course. No hard feelings about Parisotto. Fully understand where he's coming from.
My issue is more with journalists failing to interview independent specialists, instead time and again presenting the opinions of obviously biased parties/persons as if they were objective opinions.

 

[mrhender]

And as usual it's about the old generation:

http://www.cyclingquotes.com/news/cookson_a_reduced_ban_for_armstrong_is_possible/

"Early this year, I have created an independent commission (CIRC) to launch a major doping investigation. They were given sufficient resources but otherwise the UCI is not involved. The results should give us a better look at the" old " cycling."

CIRC is up to 2013... Is that old cycling?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

did you ever read 1984? well worth it, imo.

 

[TailWindHome]

Luckily for cycling the UCI is pretty powerless outside of doping. That said there aren't really any strong groups of stakeholders. No unions, the teams associations are lame ducks and Amaury is the only organiser that matters. This makes it very easy for parts of the sport within the sphere of control of one entity to sell it out at the right price. But maybe it's these weaknesses that are what keep the sport going in a sound direction, no one is big enough to really make a meal of it.

http://cyclingtips.com.au/2014/11/p...s-top-teams-combine-as-new-stakeholder-group/

 

[keeponrollin]

Following the lead of Samaranch, Blatter, Verbruggen and other presidents.

Well McQuaid was displaced because he lost his national association ... that's the last kind of democracy that Cookson wants !