• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Really, McQuaid? Really.

Oct 29, 2009
77
0
0
Visit site
This from the latest story on the Armstrong investigation on ESPN.com:

"McQuaid said in the future the UCI "may deal differently" with a donation like Armstrong's. But he insisted that it depends heavily on donations from all riders and teams to support its annual $6.4 million anti-doping budget."

The UCI depends heavily on donations from riders and teams? Name me one other rider that has donated money to the UCI. It's odd that "all riders" donate to the UCI, and even more odd that 100% of them do so anonymously, apparently.
 
Jul 2, 2009
1,079
0
0
Visit site
images
 
May 25, 2010
149
0
0
Visit site
Prize money

I'm pretty sure the UCI takes/skims/steals (you decide the correct term) a small percentage of the prize money from all UCI races therefore you could say all riders donate into the anti-doping fund when they win prize money. Note the riders never voted for that system, the UCI decided at some committee level that was a good idea.

Also the bigger teams (Protour & some others) kick in a bunch of cash for the passport program.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
1
0
Visit site
Once again McQuaid needs to get his fact straight before he lies.

For the first time the UCI provided their financials to the public. They are hidden on their website.

http://www.uci.ch/Modules/ENews/ENe...s/UCI/UCI7/layout.asp?MenuId=MTI2Mjc&LangId=1


-The World Championships generates 9.1 million francs. It's the biggest source of income for the UCI.
-The second largest source of income comes from affiliations and race organisers.
-The next biggest source of money comes from the Olympic Games. The 2008 games brought in 3.5 million Swiss Francs.
-The UCI nets about 1.4 million from the Pro Tour

There is zero mention of "Donations" from riders or teams. Perhaps these donations go to McQuaid's private account?
 
May 5, 2009
696
1
0
Visit site
by telling that "cycling of today is completely different than the cycling of 2000, 2002 and 2003 which this investigation is talking about" McQuairruption says a lot with regard to LA between the lines... unwillingly probably...
 
Jun 12, 2010
1,234
0
0
Visit site
tofino said:
I'm pretty sure the UCI takes/skims/steals (you decide the correct term) a small percentage of the prize money from all UCI races therefore you could say all riders donate into the anti-doping fund when they win prize money. Note the riders never voted for that system, the UCI decided at some committee level that was a good idea.

Also the bigger teams (Protour & some others) kick in a bunch of cash for the passport program.

Yup, thats how I understand it + I guess a levy on all member cycling federations. In other words clubman who are licence holders.
With such an obvious conflict of interest between a sports regulating and promotion body its realy time sports bodies paid into state ran anti doping systems that have no vested interest in a sports promotion....oh, oops...then we get state sanctioned doping programs ( former Eastern block, USA college system etc)...doh.
******, who can we trust to get "the job done"?:rolleyes:
 
Darryl Webster said:
Yup, thats how I understand it + I guess a levy on all member cycling federations. In other words clubman who are licence holders.
With such an obvious conflict of interest between a sports regulating and promotion body its realy time sports bodies paid into state ran anti doping systems that have no vested interest in a sports promotion....oh, oops...then we get state sanctioned doping programs ( former Eastern block, USA college system etc)...doh.
******, who can we trust to get "the job done"?:rolleyes:
Someone with no vested interest in a particular sport or in the results of a particular country.

In other words, WADA.
 
“It’s an investigation that has taken place in the public arena, which was unnecessary,” said McQuaid.

- This line interests me. Before the leaked email Floyd had emailed UCI and USADA. The response from the UCI was a "cease and desist" letter! They had no intention of investigating any of the claims from Landis. Hence why you have to go public to have the issues investigated seriously.

Secondary point.

I've not heard how the various national federations have been going investigating the claims as McQuaid said that he had passed over. I wonder if they will let it blow over.
 

flicker

BANNED
Aug 17, 2009
4,153
0
0
Visit site
This is what I do not understand about the furor of Armstrongs "donation" to the UCI. If cycling is like say US politics you donate to say a congressman the congressman is obligated to return the favor in some way.
I have no doubt that there are many Armstronglike donations to the UCI right? By many teams and individuals. And from what I have heard the riders, DSs, team owners love their PEDs right. Why would Armstrong be extraordinary in his "contributions?
I personally believe Lance has not received special treatment.
 
flicker said:
This is what I do not understand about the furor of Armstrongs "donation" to the UCI. If cycling is like say US politics you donate to say a congressman the congressman is obligated to return the favor in some way...

But it isn't like US politics. The UCI is supposed to be the impartial arbiter and governing body of professional cycling. So Fat Pat and Friends shouldn't really be taking backhanders from anybody with an inside interest in professional cycling. Passing them off as 'donations' is a weak attempt to add a figleaf of respectability to the whole debacle.
 
flicker said:
This is what I do not understand about the furor of Armstrongs "donation" to the UCI. If cycling is like say US politics you donate to say a congressman the congressman is obligated to return the favor in some way.
I have no doubt that there are many Armstronglike donations to the UCI right? By many teams and individuals. And from what I have heard the riders, DSs, team owners love their PEDs right. Why would Armstrong be extraordinary in his "contributions?
I personally believe Lance has not received special treatment.
So far no other "donations" have surfaced. McQuaid saying they're common now contradicts what he's said before.
 
Jun 15, 2009
353
0
0
Visit site
hrotha said:
So far no other "donations" have surfaced. McQuaid saying they're common now contradicts what he's said before.

. . . not to mention completely contradicting reality! And all for the express purpose of causing more people to believe what flicker erroneously believes and continue to repeat it.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
Paddy McQuack, digging possibly the biggest hole in sporting federation history, boy it wouldn't take a 6 year long to figure he is lying through his ar$e hole and covering up a whole load of corruption, why the IOC let this guy open his mouth is beyond the pale. You think they'd hire someone with half a brain, but maybe they are too greedy to pay anyone....:rolleyes:
 
Cobblestoned said:
Another Lance Armstrong-thread

Great ! :D

Well I think this one is about corruption in the UCI which most cycling fans have believed for a long time.

It just so happens that Lance is the only rider we know of who made a large donation to the UCI. Add this onto the Landis accusations of the covering up of positive tests, the recent revelations of Hans Michael Holczer and its not that difficult to be cynical about the UCI.
 
Jun 15, 2009
353
0
0
Visit site
Cobblestoned said:
Another Lance Armstrong-thread

Great ! :D

No, it's a UCI thread. It started because the boss of the UCI just lied again (how many is that now? I'm losing count) about "donations" from riders. So far, LA is the only rider from whom McQuaid has admitted accepting a donation. Hence Pat's latest spew is yet another lie.

You can make it a thread about LA if you like, but I'm gonna stick with thoughts about liar McQuaid and the hopelessly corrupt organization that he leads.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Visit site
pmcg76 said:
Well I think this one is about corruption in the UCI which most cycling fans have believed for a long time.

It just so happens that Lance is the only rider we know of who made a large donation to the UCI. Add this onto the Landis accusations of the covering up of positive tests, the recent revelations of Hans Michael Holczer and its not that difficult to be cynical about the UCI.

You mean 2 donations ;)

Has anyone a link to the original article where Pats comments were made - I believe he is discussing how all riders (&teams) contribute to the Bio-Passport as opposed to seperate 'donations'.

EDIT: Ooops, just spotted it on the main CyclingNews page.
 

Barrus

BANNED
Apr 28, 2010
3,480
0
0
Visit site
flicker said:
This is what I do not understand about the furor of Armstrongs "donation" to the UCI. If cycling is like say US politics you donate to say a congressman the congressman is obligated to return the favor in some way.
I have no doubt that there are many Armstronglike donations to the UCI right? By many teams and individuals. And from what I have heard the riders, DSs, team owners love their PEDs right. Why would Armstrong be extraordinary in his "contributions?
I personally believe Lance has not received special treatment.

The problem is that no other "contributions" have been made public, by either the UCI, the rider/DS/team, or by the press. If there are more (and it frankly would not surprise me) these need to made public somehow. Best way to do this is for the UCI to be transparent for once, although I know this is an unlikely request. Really the best thing for the sport would be a complete restructuring of the UCI, with two seperate and independent entities, one to promote cycling and one to combat doping. BUt fristly there must be some form of transparency so that these type of situations, such as Armstrongs "donation" or possible bribe cannot happen in the same manner anymore and it would be clear who gave what and when
 
Mar 11, 2009
1,005
0
0
Visit site
Geez, McQuaid is truly a craven dolt. Almost every bit of what he says if either a lie or contradicts what he has said or done in the past. Its really maybe not depressing but something close that things like this can and do rise to positions of power.
 

TRENDING THREADS