Cookson V McQuaid who do you think ???

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Mar 25, 2013
5,389
0
0
I'm following it on twitter all morning and it's like a circus over there. Between amendments and proposals they don't know what they are voting on from one minute to the next. Embarassing to the sport.
 
gooner said:
I'm following it on twitter all morning and it's like a circus over there. Between amendments and proposals they don't know what they are voting on from one minute to the next. Embarassing to the sport.
How are you following? Any specific hashtag? Or just UCI election?
 
Mar 25, 2013
5,389
0
0
BroDeal said:
Is not McQuaid taking the position that his interpretation of the current rules allow him to run even without the proposed rule changes?

Let the post election lawsuits commence in three, two, one...
That's exactly what McQuaid is supposed to be saying.
 
Dec 27, 2010
6,674
0
0
King Boonen said:
I read somewhere that it should all be over by 1pm.
Based on the mass confusion over there at the minute it wouldn't surprise me to see them still going at it at midnight.

An absolute farce.
 
Jul 7, 2012
509
0
0
McQuaid must be relishing every moment of this. He has spent years trying to undermine the power of what he sees as being the 'mafia European nations', especially the French who he genuinely seems to hate. (Which is one reason he played along with Armstrong's distasteful French bashing.) One major tactic McQuaid has employed is to buy the loyalty of those nations without a tradition of cycling with funds for 'development. Ironically enough the UCI has bled this money from the very nations whose influence McQuaid is determined to undermine. If he wins, which he may well do, in his mind it will be, above all, a big 'told you so' to the traditional cycling nations that he, not they, run cycling.

If he does win I hope that every 'mafia European nation' will have the guts to break away from the UCI with immediate effect.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
2
0
Robert21 said:
McQuaid must be relishing every moment of this. He has spent years trying to undermine the power of what he sees as being the 'mafia European nations', especially the French who he genuinely seems to hate. (Which is one reason he played along with Armstrong's distasteful French bashing.) One major tactic McQuaid has employed is to buy the loyalty of those nations without a tradition of cycling with funds for 'development. Ironically enough the UCI has bled this money from the very nations whose influence McQuaid is determined to undermine. If he wins, which he may well do, in his mind it will be, above all, a big 'told you so' to the traditional cycling nations that he, not they, run cycling.

If he does win I hope that every 'mafia European nation' will have the guts to break away from the UCI with immediate effect.
The 'EU mafia nations' wont change cycling for the better. They wont stop the doping.

the pro sport is never gonna be more than it currently is lurching like a drunk from doping scandal to doping scandal......
 
Sep 23, 2011
536
0
0
The constitutional amendment will not happen today, which is good for Cookson. Now on to whether the nomination by Thailand is valid.
All of McQ's supporters would have voted for 'today' so he has 21 votes max, and possibly less if some people wanted the decision out of the way.
 
Jul 21, 2012
287
0
0
Benotti69 said:
If Crookson wins we get anglo saxons winning in July for foreseeable future with a Russian every few years.......


Crookson less of a clown but I dont see a cleaner sport on the horizon.
Are you saying Brian Cookson is a crook because surely that's a serious accusation to throw at someone or did you just spell it wrong
 
Robert21 said:
McQuaid must be relishing every moment of this. He has spent years trying to undermine the power of what he sees as being the 'mafia European nations', especially the French who he genuinely seems to hate. (Which is one reason he played along with Armstrong's distasteful French bashing.) One major tactic McQuaid has employed is to buy the loyalty of those nations without a tradition of cycling with funds for 'development. Ironically enough the UCI has bled this money from the very nations whose influence McQuaid is determined to undermine. If he wins, which he may well do, in his mind it will be, above all, a big 'told you so' to the traditional cycling nations that he, not they, run cycling.
Taking money from the priviliged elite to bribe the less fortunate parts of the electorate is standard democratic politics. I believe it's called Socialism.
 
Jul 7, 2012
509
0
0
Benotti69 said:
The 'EU mafia nations' wont change cycling for the better. They wont stop the doping.

the pro sport is never gonna be more than it currently is lurching like a drunk from doping scandal to doping scandal......
Depressing, but possibly true. On the other hand the legal authorities in places like France (and the USA, what with the Armstrong investigation) don't seem to have any reservations about cleaning up cycling. Perhaps what is needed is another Patrice Clerc to come along, someone from outside the sport with no emotional attachment to it.

I feel that this is where my doubts creep in about Cookson. He has to be a better bet than McQuaid, but I have my doubts as to how far his integrity would extend if, for example, hard evidence came to light of doping at Sky. Exposing this would effectively burn down British cycling for good and I somehow can't see Cookson being willing to do this.
 
Jul 7, 2012
509
0
0
Parker said:
Taking money from the priviliged elite to bribe the less fortunate parts of the electorate is standard democratic politics. I believe it's called Socialism.
If you do believe that, then your understanding of politics is woefully inadequate. :)
 
Correct me if I am wrong, but it appears that so far there was an open vote on whether or not to have a secret vote on whether or not to vote today on an ammendment that modifies who they can vote for. The result was that they voted openly to have a secret vote on whether or not to vote, which ended in a tie so they will not vote on the ammendment. Now they will have to decide (vote?) on whether or not McQuaid can be a candidate, after which there will be a vote for President of the UCI, unless McQuaid is deemed ineligible in which case there will not be a vote and Cookson will become president as the only candidate.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY