The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
the asian said:What should really happen is the drugs testing be carried out by a separate independent entity.
You can't expect the UCI to go after the big marketable stars who get them revenue.
the big ring said:Whilst I agree that the drugs testing should be handled by someone other than the UCI, the system in place is so deeply rooted and carefully configured (think ASO + Sky + UCI) that splitting UCI in 2 won't work or won't change anything.
And letting UCI remain in its capacity as supreme overlord and enforcer of level saddles, sock length, bidon size less than 800ml, zipped up jerseys, etc, is IMO still ridiculous and unncecessary.
It's a cancerous growth feeding on the lifeblood of cycling and needs to be removed entirely and binned.
ETA: I do not hate any riders, but I do hate the UCI.
User Guide said:Voted no as I think it should be abolished.
the big ring said:1. leave as is
2. split into rules & testing as separate, independent body
3. nuke it and start again
x0einstein0x said:I choose option 3.
Maxiton said:I voted yes, but what really needs to happen is for UCI to be abolished, any criminals within it to be prosecuted, and its headquarters demolished (or, better, turned into a prison where the criminals can be housed). Ideally a new organization would take its place, and doping controls would be handled by a reputable third party.
icefire said:A prison in Switzerland would be better than they actually deserve.
Promotion of the sport should be separate from testing, but it should also be separated from technical regulations.
Maxiton said:I voted yes, but what really needs to happen is for UCI to be abolished, any criminals within it to be prosecuted, and its headquarters demolished (or, better, turned into a prison where the criminals can be housed). Ideally a new organization would take its place, and doping controls would be handled by a reputable third party.
the big ring said:Whilst I agree that the drugs testing should be handled by someone other than the UCI, the system in place is so deeply rooted and carefully configured (think ASO + Sky + UCI) that splitting UCI in 2 won't work or won't change anything.
And letting UCI remain in its capacity as supreme overlord and enforcer of level saddles, sock length, bidon size less than 800ml, zipped up jerseys, etc, is IMO still ridiculous and unncecessary.
It's a cancerous growth feeding on the lifeblood of cycling and needs to be removed entirely and binned.
ETA: I do not hate any riders, but I do hate the UCI.
D-Queued said:There are two things that the UCI does really well:
1. Protect dopers and corruption
2. Introduce absolutely absurd rules with respect to equipment
The only explanation on #2 is that there must be a link between #2 and #1. How much money is the UCI getting for its new 'UCI Approved' sticker program on bike frames?
The UCI is in the twilight zone, completely out of touch with its membership and its sport, and fundamentally corrupt.
If we were to split it into two, would one of the halves decide that they needed to start a 'UCI approved' sticker program for handlebar tape, valve extenders and spoke nipples?
I say that and realize that it is almost certain that there is a plan at UCI HQ to do exactly that.
Dave.
Darryl Webster said:Medical control should be a public health issue carried out to an internationally agreed standard and in the case of pro sport positive tests punished with suitable "sporting fraud" legislation. Providing details of others complicit in supply and usage that leads to further prosecutions should be seen as mitigation that may lead to a reduction in sentencing. Particularly strong punishments should be handed to all 3rd parties found to be complicit. Few at the really sharp end of elite sport who dope are able to without others complicity.
Darryl Webster said:Medical control should be a public health issue carried out to an internationally agreed standard and in the case of pro sport positive tests punished with suitable "sporting fraud" legislation. Providing details of others complicit in supply and usage that leads to further prosecutions should be seen as mitigation that may lead to a reduction in sentencing. Particularly strong punishments should be handed to all 3rd parties found to be complicit. Few at the really sharp end of elite sport who dope are able to without others complicity.