Sorting out the UCI

[Darryl Webster]

Im geting the impression that theres no authority with the power to force change in the UCI structure?
Obviously individuals, Pat and perhaps some minnows can be brought to book but the structure remains intact and the board find another guy to put forward as there man.
UCI is like a ickle IOC and anyone with the power of observation knows what a currupt crock of **** that is.
By the rules would I be right in sugesting the only way`s to deal with the UCI are members boycott/ sanction call?.
Ultimatly perhaps Riders/ Fans/ Race organisers, boycotting and puting on alternative competition.

Any thoughts?

 

[goober]

Im geting the impression that theres no authority with the power to force change in the UCI structure?
Obviously individuals, Pat and perhaps some minnows can be brought to book but the structure remains intact and the board find another guy to put forward as there man.
UCI is like a ickle IOC and anyone with the power of observation knows what a currupt crock of **** that is.
By the rules would I be right in sugesting the only way`s to deal with the UCI are members boycott/ sanction call?.
Ultimatly perhaps Riders/ Fans/ Race organisers, boycotting and puting on alternative competition.

Any thoughts?

You are correct. Onlky a new UCI like organization would need to be created that again had no authority of power over it. Only laws all businesses and individuals need to follow can control this entity. Kindof like the World Wrestling Federation WWF lol.

 

[DAOTEC]

(afp)

This is what AC had to say about it at L'Equipe after today stage

Contrôleurs du dimanche

Contador : "Avec Andy, on se contrôle l'un l'autre" (AFP).
C'est beaucoup moins risqué que se faire contrôler par des inspecteurs UCI !

Source : L'Equipe

 

[Benotti69]

the future of pro cycling might be run by the organisers* who run the three major tours and then all the other races try and affiliate to them. why? so they can control the financial aspects of cycling from the tv rights to advertising to the structures the teams will take, all with input from the DS of the top 20 teams, maybe even form a league with a points system and the bottom team gets relegated and another team from a lower league gets promoted etc....
this way they cut out the BS of the UCI.

*for those who dont know ASO runs the TdF and 18 other major cycling races, (some for women included and juniors)

 

[brianf7]

Its the Grass Roots members that are supporting the UCI we all get kicked around but it is only the members who can change it.

Trouble is that if it was changed it would end up going back to a similar situation as now after a few years any organisation will become institutionalised.

We put up with it as we do with any Governing body but we do nothing because its too hard all we join clubs for is to ride our bikes.

If we dont join and mass exit the UCI would not exist how much of our fees go to national bodies to keep them going.

 

[Darryl Webster]

Its the Grass Roots members that are supporting the UCI we all get kicked around but it is only the members who can change it.

Trouble is that if it was changed it would end up going back to a similar situation as now after a few years any organisation will become institutionalised.

We put up with it as we do with any Governing body but we do nothing because its too hard all we join clubs for is to ride our bikes.

If we dont join and mass exit the UCI would not exist how much of our fees go to national bodies to keep them going.

Anyone know know what membership/ licence take out trends are standing up like around the major cycling nations?.
I get the impresion here in GB that actual full year racing licence take up has dropped.
Not actualy checked this but there does seem a lot of grumbling amonsgt grass roots especialy over race funding / support while such vast amounts are spent on the elite squads. "back in the day" , in my case the 80`s taking out a ful years licence wasnt realy given much consideration by most clubman I knew,,it was somat the great majority did, now it seems thats its somat a fair few only do if they realy must.
Just a few musings.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

As much as I am against the current UCI structure, there is a difficulty here - as has been pointed outI.
If the UCI goes, something else will have to replace it.

Cycling like all sports needs an orgaisation to act on its behalf, make and enforce rules, establish needs of the 'grass roots', promote and grow the sport at all levels and even do day to day administration like licence applications and updating points etc and this requires funding.

I don't believe a commercial int erst ie ASO/RCS/Unipublic would be interested in developing the sport.

For me -how any 'new' organization would work best.
The 2 big ones for me would be:
Anti-doping needs to be taken out of the hands of administrating authorities.
There needs to be a proper authority interested in the welfare and interests of the riders and teams (especially at elite level).

 

[Realist]

Its the Grass Roots members that are supporting the UCI we all get kicked around but it is only the members who can change it.

Trouble is that if it was changed it would end up going back to a similar situation as now after a few years any organisation will become institutionalised.

We put up with it as we do with any Governing body but we do nothing because its too hard all we join clubs for is to ride our bikes.

If we dont join and mass exit the UCI would not exist how much of our fees go to national bodies to keep them going.

Is this the case? How is the UCI financed? I can't imagine they get much of my yearly license fee, but if it is this way, maybe we really could effect some change. I suspect they are financed by team and race organiser's fees more than member's fees.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Is this the case? How is the UCI financed? I can't imagine they get much of my yearly license fee, but if it is this way, maybe we really could effect some change. I suspect they are financed by team and race organiser's fees more than member's fees.

No, not quite - your licence fee goes to your national Federation.

The UCI's main source of revenue is through 2 main points, TV rights of the World Championships and through its affiliation with the IOC.

Additional revenues are obtained from teams (ProTour etc) and Federations, these are more administration fee's and are not profit yielding.

 

[Realist]

No, not quite - your licence fee goes to your national Federation.

Yeah I got that but does my national federation pay anything to the UCI?

 

[Master50]

Sport federations

The comments posted here about the governing body of cycling are on the threads of soccer, baseball, hockey, track and field, swimming, cricket, field hockey, shot put, shooting, wrestling, etc.
We love to hate our governments.

 

[Realist]

The comments posted here about the governing body of cycling are on the threads of soccer, baseball, hockey, track and field, swimming, cricket, field hockey, shot put, shooting, wrestling, etc.
We love to hate our governments.

It's not just that - sporting administration is a niche that breeds a special type of nefarious, nepotistic, corrupt and incompetent person.

 

[tubularglue]

the Swiss Government would have to go in and gut the organization due to possible corruption, and criminal activity.

 

[Hillavoider]

i am not renewing my UCI license. no way. its just my little protest, i can't take the risk of even 1 cent going into fat pats pocket.

 

[brianf7]

Yeah I got that but does my national federation pay anything to the UCI?

The National Federation have to be affilaited and that is not free probably 20% of membership fees received.
in Australia we have to pay for insurance in our membership its part of the licence so if you get hurt you can claim some of the lost wages etc.

Total licence fee is $240.for club open licence.

The more members the cheaper it should be but it aint that way the more members the higher the fees go .

Its just one big body too big for the local club to be able to do anything.
they will never get enough money. Not for profit so there are no profits they spend it as fast as the get it. On What.

 

[Benotti69]

I don't believe a commercial int erst ie ASO/RCS/Unipublic would be interested in developing the sport.

nope i don't think they would at first. because they would mainly be interested in money, but then they would realise they need riders to be coming through and would organise 'amateur' events and possibly at ramshackle attempt at a federation.

can you imagine LA running the TdF? disaster on a global scale

 

[Benotti69]

i am not renewing my UCI license. no way. its just my little protest, i can't take the risk of even 1 cent going into fat pats pocket.

make sure and let them know that. and tell them you will be actively encouraging others to do the same and posting on forums similar

 

[Realist]

i am not renewing my UCI license. no way. its just my little protest, i can't take the risk of even 1 cent going into fat pats pocket.

I thought about this, but it hurts the clubs and the local events so much more than it could ever hurt the UCI. If you can get enough riders to organise insurance and run events under your own auspices... then your talking.

 

[unsheath]

Is this the case? How is the UCI financed? I can't imagine they get much of my yearly license fee, but if it is this way, maybe we really could effect some change.

Rider donations of course.

I can't believe this one slipped the net...

 

[smaryka]

Anyone know know what membership/ licence take out trends are standing up like around the major cycling nations?.
I get the impresion here in GB that actual full year racing licence take up has dropped.
Not actualy checked this but there does seem a lot of grumbling amonsgt grass roots especialy over race funding / support while such vast amounts are spent on the elite squads. "back in the day" , in my case the 80`s taking out a ful years licence wasnt realy given much consideration by most clubman I knew,,it was somat the great majority did, now it seems thats its somat a fair few only do if they realy must.
Just a few musings.

What do you mean exactly? That fewer people are racing now (relative to club membership) than before? Or fewer people in an absolute sense are racing?

I'm relatively new to racing in the UK, but it seems to me like there are more and more people racing (i.e. getting full-on racing licenses at the amateur level). Pretty cheap in the UK to get a full racing license for a year (less than 75 quid if I remember rightly, and that includes BC membership and insurance).

I can tell you that my club's membership has more than doubled since I joined 2 years ago and the number of new people racing this year vs last year has followed that trend.