Riders protest radioban in Mallorca

[ingsve]

The riders led by AIGCP have chosen to meet up at the start of the first race in Mallorca with radios.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/riders-protest-aganist-radio-ban-at-the-challenge-mallorca

I expected this to happen and it will be interesting to see what comes out of it.

 

[Waterloo Sunrise]

The riders led by AIGCP have chosen to meet up at the start of the first race in Mallorca with radios.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/riders-protest-aganist-radio-ban-at-the-challenge-mallorca

I expected this to happen and it will be interesting to see what comes out of it.

I'm not in favour of radios, but they clearly have a point in terms of governance. The time when a selection of 55 year olds with little discernable connection to a sport can rule it by whim, over and above the people with genuine sporting and financial interests, feels like it aught to be drawing to a close.

 

[ak-zaaf]

It's never going to happen the way the UCI wants it.

discussion before the start

...and the antenna is still there =/

 

[Descender]

Word is the referees abandoned their posts when riders started the race with radios, so there won't be official classifications.

 

[jens_attacks]

nice to see united pro cyclists fighting for their rights.they should do this more often.they are the centre of this professional sport,not uci or aso or wada or whatever.

 

[Bromers]

I just can't understand why the UCI has banned radios when pretty much all of the teams are against, it's absolutely ridiculous!

 

[hrotha]

nice to see united pro cyclists fighting for their rights.they should do this more often.they are the centre of this professional sport,not uci or aso or wada or whatever.

I agree. I'd prefer radios to disappear, but you can't just simply force your will on the riders when they overwhelmingly oppose the idea.

 

[Mellow Velo]

I agree. I'd prefer radios to disappear, but you can't just simply force your will on the riders when they overwhelmingly oppose the idea.

That could be said of what is debated over in the Clinic.

 

[Lanark]

I agree. I'd prefer radios to disappear, but you can't just simply force your will on the riders when they overwhelmingly oppose the idea.

Overwhelmingly? According to Hilaire van der Schueren 60% of the riders are in favor of radios, 40% want to ban them (survey of the CPA, the union of cyclists). A small majority, that's mostly much more vocal than the people who want to ban radios.

Besides, it's not even that important. Cycling, like any sport, is not a democracy. The UCI makes the rules. Of course they certainly have to listen to what the riders think and take their imput serious, but the UCI's decisions shouldn't be dictated by what the riders think.

I wouldn't be surprised if this protest was mostly instigated by the sporting directors, who are afraid they'll lose control of their riders during a rice.

 

[Waterloo Sunrise]

That could be said of what is debated over in the Clinic.

Good luck finding an overwhelming majority willing to go on the record in favour of that.

 

[Mellow Velo]

Good luck finding an overwhelming majority willing to go on the record in favour of that.

No, no, you miss the point. The riders, not the posters. Solidarity and all that.
Fanboys would find it compelling, though.

 

[Roland Rat]

According to @Vaughters, it's not just about radios but also that teams and riders must have a greater participation in the governance of cycling. Their licensing fees and passport contributions are massive and they must be represented.

Time for them to break away from the UCI. This, the bike tax, the olympic track programme, the WorldTour entry system farce and obvious corruption, I can't see a single good thing they do or a single reason to stay under their governance.

 

[Waterloo Sunrise]

No, no, you miss the point. The riders, not the posters. Solidarity and all that.
Fanboys would find it compelling, though.

No, no, I'm not - I meant a majority of riders - absolutely no chance, even if they privately thought that.

 

[Granville57]

According to @Vaughters, it's not just about radios but also that teams and riders must have a greater participation in the governance of cycling. Their licensing fees and passport contributions are massive and they must be represented.

Time for them to break away from the UCI. This, the bike tax, the olympic track programme, the WorldTour entry system farce and obvious corruption, I can't see a single good thing they do or a single reason to stay under their governance.

Agreed. I think this notion that the UCI can dictate whatever they like to the teams and riders must come to an end. Their perspective seems to be "We are the UCI, we make the rules, what they can they do about it?" Which is why I think these protests are good. It shows just what they can do about it. Nobody likes to be bullied. Nobody likes to be disrespected.

I was personally in favor of banning the radios, but if the riders genuinely feel that there are safety issues at stake, then who am I to suggest otherwise? This particular protest seems to be based as much on principal as the specific issues at hand, which is fine IMO. I think these little reminders to the organizers that the teams will need to be respected, from a governance standpoint, are a good thing. The more they expose the true colors of the UCI the better. The cracks are starting to show, and I'm sure we haven't seen or heard the last of it.

 

[RGScales]

According to @Vaughters, it's not just about radios but also that teams and riders must have a greater participation in the governance of cycling. Their licensing fees and passport contributions are massive and they must be represented.

Time for them to break away from the UCI. This, the bike tax, the olympic track programme, the WorldTour entry system farce and obvious corruption, I can't see a single good thing they do or a single reason to stay under their governance.

Couldnt have said it better!

 

[BroDeal]

It might help the riders' cause if they chose an issue that had support among the fans, race directors, and anyone else who does not think that DSes should be ordering the riders around like puppets.

It boggles the mind to think about how the riders managed without radios before the 90's when the roads were worse and a lot more "dangerous" than they are now. There must have been deaths every race.

 

[Granville57]

It might help the riders' cause if they chose an issue that had support among the fans, race directors, and anyone else who does not think that DSes should be ordering the riders around like puppets.

It boggles the mind to think about how the riders managed without radios before the 90's when the roads were worse and a lot more "dangerous" than they are now. There must have been deaths every race.

It reminds me of a quote from a young Vande Velde in the Road to Paris documentary. They are talking about the technical problems with the radios failing. CVV says, "What has happened is, you become dependent on these radios. All of sudden [when the radios don't work] you can't think for yourself. You're out there and it's just.....brain-dead."

So I have to wonder how much of the current radio "controversy" is based on the DS's motives, and how much is really "genuine." I would imagine that for young pros who have always used them, suddenly taking the radios away might leave them in that CVV state of bewilderment.

But of course the most valid counter-argument is the one that BroDeal stated: Was there really a serious problem without them for the previous 100 years?

 

[ingsve]

But of course the most valid counter-argument is the one that BroDeal stated: Was there really a serious problem without them for the previous 100 years?

Well, it surely must have been more random in the past with riders losing races because they couldn't get the help from the team car they needed in time and things like that. One of the arguments in favor or radios is that it makes the racing more fair. That to me is reason enough to keep the radios. I know that people like it when break aways manage to stay away but for me it always feels like an anti-climax when break aways hold out because of a fluke and not by their own power. I much prefer a flat stage ending in a spectacular sprint rather than some nobody winning a GT stage by simply being lucky enough to get away in a break. Especially since breaks usually form with riders that are not seen as a threat to anyone.

 

[Altitude]

F*ck radios.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

worthy protest?

Rider protest in Mallorca vs. radio ban...

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/riders-protest-aganist-radio-ban-at-the-challenge-mallorca

Not to open the radio issue (again), but rather wondering if the clinicians feel that this is a valid pursuit by the teams and the AIGCP. Don't they have bigger fights to pick? I'm thinking of the IO report from last year's tour, the legacy of riders not getting paid in a timely manner, contravening the rules when disclosing test results, etc etc...

The statement from AIGCP has a familiar pedantic ring to it. I wonder who their president is...

 

[ultimobici]

Rider protest in Mallorca vs. radio ban...

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/riders-protest-aganist-radio-ban-at-the-challenge-mallorca

Not to open the radio issue (again), but rather wondering if the clinicians feel that this is a valid pursuit by the teams and the AIGCP. Don't they have bigger fights to pick? I'm thinking of the IO report from last year's tour, the legacy of riders not getting paid in a timely manner, contravening the rules when disclosing test results, etc etc...

The statement from AIGCP has a familiar pedantic ring to it. I wonder who their president is...

I think it's still Gianni Bugno, isn't it?

While I understand their "concerns" over the radio ban, I don't agree with the riders & teams claiming that there are safety issues. If that is the case then why can't there be an open-channel system so there can be communication between riders and race officials so a situation such as Pedro Horillo's crash can be communicated back? I think that the lack of them suggesting a constructive alternative shows that the safety argument is BS.

 

[Ryaguas]

They are always talking about "safety issues"... but what kind of "safety issues"?? heart attacks? broken bones? what else?

mmmm I dnt know... I think that this is more a "DS thing" w/o radios they cant move their riders like pawns...

See the riders united fighting for the same cause is good but There are more important issues in the sport that they should fight against... but this is what we have... and I think that the UCI is not going to change their minds... at least for this year tho...

 

[flicker]

I just can't understand why the UCI has banned radios when pretty much all of the teams are against, it's absolutely ridiculous!

Cyclists now are wimps and princesses, where pray tell were Anquentil's, Fausto's and Merckx's radios. Cycling now days, really sad.

 

[bobbins]

I agree, they should be allowed to keep their radios but must wear a babies dummy (pacifier), bibs for their feed zone and only get pocket money instead of a salary.

 

[pedaling squares]

It might help the riders' cause if they chose an issue that had support among the fans, race directors, and anyone else who does not think that DSes should be ordering the riders around like puppets.

It boggles the mind to think about how the riders managed without radios before the 90's when the roads were worse and a lot more "dangerous" than they are now. There must have been deaths every race.

Excellent points. What if anything makes it more dangerous today is the lack of common sense and tactics among the riders. And I bet that would sort itself out in a couple of races and you'd see everyone feeling more comfortable without radios.