Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[thehog]

Dont worry, as soon as Cookson becomes UCI president he will make anti-doping independent.

I heard he's going to put cameras on bikes. Can't wait for cameras on bikes. Everyone wants cameras on bikes.

 

[bobbins]

What exactly is the conflict of interest?

 

[sniper]

What exactly is the conflict of interest?

not sure if I get your question. Is it a sarcastic comment or do you honestly not see it?

and as has been pointed out, there is not one COI, there are several.

 

[Mellow Velo]

I think this is the best post I have ever seen in the clinic....by some margin.

LS writes like a politician speaks.
Looks and sounds moderate, but has actually attacked the entire UK cycling system, for what amounts to being a "small pool".
Root for McQuaid? Sure. No family COI there.

 

[Mellow Velo]

not sure if I get your question. Is it a sarcastic comment or do you honestly not see it?

and as has been pointed out, there is not one COI, there are several.

Have you not read Bobbin's previous posts?
Seems to have some inside tracks and is absolutely no fan of Sky
He sees no COI.
He is being realistic.

 

[sniper]

Have you not read Bobbin's previous posts?
Seems to have some inside tracks and is absolutely no fan of Sky

i know.

He sees no COI.

i don't know, which is why I just asked him to make sure.

 

[bobbins]

not sure if I get your question. Is it a sarcastic comment or do you honestly not see it?

and as has been pointed out, there is not one COI, there are several.

Can't honestly see one. I take it that Olly Cookson only got the job because of who his father is but to be fair, he does speak Spanish and knows cycling so is as qualified to do the job. I've only heard good things of Olly too so he's obviously not out of his depth or unqualified.

Making a big deal of this just strikes me as weird, there are far more valid conflicts - the most obvious one has ceased now that Dave B has stepped down from BC but no one was screaming about that when it was blatantly obvious. A performance director sharing performance data with the head of a pro team - an obvious advantage, yet nothing was ever said about it.

Personally, I think that the Olly Cookson situation is a non-issue unless someone can enlighten me as to what the conflict is?

 

[sniper]

I take it that Olly Cookson only got the job because of who his father is but to be fair, he does speak Spanish and knows cycling so is as qualified to do the job. I've only heard good things of Olly too so he's obviously not out of his depth or unqualified.?

while this is interesting info, it is completely irrelevant to the question of whether there is a COI.

Making a big deal of this just strikes me as weird, there are far more valid conflicts

i don't get this. you seem to imply that it is a COI after all, just not a very important one? (we could agree on that)

- the most obvious one has ceased now that Dave B has stepped down from BC but no one was screaming about that when it was blatantly obvious. A performance director sharing performance data with the head of a pro team - an obvious advantage, yet nothing was ever said about it.

Interesting indeed, but irrelevant to the oliver-COI-issue.

Personally, I think that the Olly Cookson situation is a non-issue

could be, but it's still a COI.

unless someone can enlighten me as to what the conflict is

you really aren't kidding me?
i'll try to break it down into digestible units:

(a) if you have a son, your interest is he makes as good a living as possible
(b) if you're president of the UCI, your interest is - I mean, should be - to find cheats and throw them out of the sport.

The conflict between (a) and (b) is rather obvious.
It may or may not be a non-issue. Bottom line: it's a COI.
Recall, a COI doesn't mean corruption has taken or will take place. It merely means the connections are such that they allow for/facilitate corruption. (see also the last paragraph of Libertine's formidable post, two pages back)

 

[Spencer the Half Wit]

Can't honestly see one. I take it that Olly Cookson only got the job because of who his father is but to be fair, he does speak Spanish and knows cycling so is as qualified to do the job. I've only heard good things of Olly too so he's obviously not out of his depth or unqualified.

Making a big deal of this just strikes me as weird, there are far more valid conflicts - the most obvious one has ceased now that Dave B has stepped down from BC but no one was screaming about that when it was blatantly obvious. A performance director sharing performance data with the head of a pro team - an obvious advantage, yet nothing was ever said about it.

Personally, I think that the Olly Cookson situation is a non-issue unless someone can enlighten me as to what the conflict is?

There is a potential COI. However, this is quite common in politics, business and the law and as long as the COI is managed correctly i.e. Cookson snr. has nothing to do with issues regarding SKY and BC then I can't see a problem. Frankly, all he needs to do is to make testing and sanctioning independent and that should allay any issues.

 

[bobbins]

I don't think that OC is high enough up the food chain at Sky.

I might be wrong and am happy to be proved wrong but I'm not convinced.

That fact that BC is UCI president shouldn't have an impact on his son who is a low level team employee and he shouldn't have the influence to solely make an impact.

There are bigger problems to sort out that this. This seems to be a desperate attempt to show an issue where there is none.

 

[sniper]

I don't think that OC is high enough up the food chain at Sky.

I might be wrong and am happy to be proved wrong but I'm not convinced.

That fact that BC is UCI president shouldn't have an impact on his son who is a low level team employee and he shouldn't have the influence to solely make an impact.

you're reversing the issue.

it's not about cookson jr. being compromised.
it's about cookson sr. being compromised.

it's very simple: his son's sky-affiliation may interfere with his duty to properly police sky. (nb: it may, i.e. it need not, but that's what a COI is about: it may, but need not, lead to improper conduct)

There are bigger problems to sort out that this.

obviously.

This seems to be a desperate attempt to show an issue where there is none

the attempts to deny this is a COI seem desperate to me. The issue may be a non-issue, but it's a classic COI, and simply disappointing (nothing more nothing less) considering the history of the sport.

There is a potential COI. However, this is quite common in politics, business and the law and as long as the COI is managed correctly i.e. Cookson snr. has nothing to do with issues regarding SKY and BC then I can't see a problem. Frankly, all he needs to do is to make testing and sanctioning independent and that should allay any issues.

agreed.

 

[bobbins]

you're reversing the issue.

it's not about cookson jr. being compromised.
it's about cookson sr. being compromised.

it's very simple: his son's sky-affiliation may interfere with his duty to properly police sky. (nb: it may, i.e. it need not, but that's what a COI is about: it may, but need not, lead to improper conduct)

obviously.
the attempts to deny this is a COI seem desperate to me. The issue may be a non-issue, but it's a classic COI, and simply disappointing (nothing more nothing less) considering the history of the sport.

agreed.

Seems fair enough, thanks.

 

[stutue]

not sure if I get your question. Is it a sarcastic comment or do you honestly not see it?

and as has been pointed out, there is not one COI, there are several.

 

[Mellow Velo]

you're reversing the issue.

it's not about cookson jr. being compromised.
it's about cookson sr. being compromised.

it's very simple: his son's sky-affiliation may interfere with his duty to properly police sky. (nb: it may, i.e. it need not, but that's what a COI is about: it may, but need not, lead to improper conduct)

obviously.
the attempts to deny this is a COI seem desperate to me. The issue may be a non-issue, but it's a classic COI, and simply disappointing (nothing more nothing less) considering the history of the sport.

agreed.

Out of interest, what do you see as the solution to this perceived COI?

A further question:
Why is it only now become viewed as a COI when Cookson jnr's job with Sky has been well documented (eg Walsh's book) in the past?

 

[simoni]

Brian Cookson should be setting up processes where no single individual is responsible for policing decisions. The processes should remove all room for any objective interpretation. Either you're a cheat or you're not. Grey areas shouldn't exist. Frankly, i've not really followed the reforms he's made closely enough to know if he's getting there or not but he certainly appears a more trustworthy and better intentioned person than the people he replaced.

If he is doing this and has successfully moved away from the McQuaid/Verbruggen style approach then there is no issue whatsoever. If he isn't then whether his son works for a team is a potential problem unless the appropriate DOIs are in place and any conflict is managed appropriately. That said, it could be viewed as borderline irrelevant - the system would still be crooked anyway.

 

[bewildered]

If I am a judge sitting in court and I know the defendant, I stand down and cannot hear the case because there is a COI, or 'potential' COI as Cookson calls it.

It is completely irrelevant as to whether my judgment in the case would be any different. It mightn't affect my judgment one bit but the facts of the relationship are enough to make it improper for me to take the case at all.

That is what a conflict of interest is. Cookson calls it a 'potential' conflict and says that it can be 'managed'. If you want to be seen to be fair and transparent, you cannot 'manage' a COI. That is the exact opposite of fair and transparent; cloak and dagger.

Removing the conflict completely as soon as it is recognised is the only fair thing to do. Nobody has to lose their job, Cookson just has to deliver on his promise of independent testing.

At the time of his nomination, most people had major concerns about roles as UCI Pres and those at Sky/BC but we were told at the same time that independent testing would follow with him and that allayed all of those fears and more but he has to date reneged on that promise.

He is rightly being criticised about it now and he is the only person who can remove the COI. Olly leaving Sky doesn't remove the more important COI at all.

 

[sniper]

Out of interest, what do you see as the solution to this perceived COI?

three options:
1. cookson jr. resigns
2. cookson sr. resigns
3. fully independent testing

the third option i guess is preferable for the sake of anti-doping.

(btw, we´re only speaking about the COI that exists wrt antidoping. In reality the COI might extent to other cycling issues, e.g. the allocation of WT points)

A further question:
Why is it only now become viewed as a COI when Cookson jnr's job with Sky has been well documented (eg Walsh's book) in the past?

Here on the forum the possible COI has been pointed out as soon as it became known that jr. works for Sky. It raised eyebrowes immediately.
It has now become more relevant because of the Henao issue.

I don't know when kimmage found out. The fact that he chose to tweet about it only recently doesn't mean he didn't know before.
Perhaps he too finds the relevance of the COI to have increased due to the henao issue.
I can´t speak for kimmage or for his timing, but i think it´s excellent he brought it up on twitter.

 

[Avoriaz]

it's very simple: his son's sky-affiliation may interfere with his duty to properly police sky. (nb: it may, i.e. it need not, but that's what a COI is about: it may, but need not, lead to improper conduct)

Disagree. BC is the head of the food chain. Systems and controls should be in place to ensure that there is no conflict. BC personally does not police the sport. The policing is part of his remit and he has a team to do this. This is a layer of protection, and if said team thinks BC is demanding leniency on SKY because of his son, it should be raised within. Now if BC were UCI pres, his daughter was head of doping section, and his son was high up in SKY, then definite conflict.

The situation as it stands is small fry - greater potential than my dad being Prime Minister and me being a tax payer, but less than my dad being a bank manager and me being a bank robber

 

[sniper]

Disagree. BC is the head of the food chain. Systems and controls should be in place to ensure that there is no conflict. BC personally does not police the sport. The policing is part of his remit and he has a team to do this. This is a layer of protection, and if said team thinks BC is demanding leniency on SKY because of his son, it should be raised within.

indeed, should be.
anyway, we never knew exactly how the uci under verbruggen and mcquaid went about their corrupt business, but we knew it was corrupt.
we don't know exactly how the uci under cookson is going about its business, but such details as cookson jr. working for sky simply do not bode well.
It's not in cookson sr.'s interest to bust sky as it would reflect badly on his son. So as long as antidoping isn't fully independent, there is a (potential) COI.
Also, other UCI anti-doping employees might be more lenient towards Sky, simply because they want to make a good impression on their boss, whose son is with Sky.

The situation as it stands is small fry - greater potential than my dad being Prime Minister and me being a tax payer, but less than my dad being a bank manager and me being a bank robber

we don't know if it's small fry. Cookson sr. may or may not be more lenient towards sky than towards other teams. We can't really know, can we, as long as testing isn't fully independent. The COI is there. The thing with a COI is that it facilitates improper conduct. The improper conduct needs not yet have occured.

If the gutfeeling of several posters on this forum is correct, Sky are about as big a cheats as USPS were. If the fact that the UCI president's son is working for that bunch of cheat is preventing the bunch of cheats from being caught, that's not small fry.

 

[Avoriaz]

indeed, should be.

And that should be is outside of any COI, as it would be neither Cookson Jnr nor Snr.

Of course, there is a greater conflict anyway irrespective of who the UCI President is, and that is that the UCI President is a fan of the sport. He/she will always have as first priority a desire for the sport to thrive. The conflict is that multiple drug busts send it downwards not upwards.

Hence why all anti dopage should be run independently for all sports.

 

[sniper]

And that should be is outside of any COI, as it would be neither Cookson Jnr nor Snr.

Of course, there is a greater conflict anyway irrespective of who the UCI President is, and that is that the UCI President is a fan of the sport. He/she will always have as first priority a desire for the sport to thrive. The conflict is that multiple drug busts send it downwards not upwards.

Hence why all anti dopage should be run independently for all sports.

fair points

 

[Benotti69]

I heard he's going to put cameras on bikes. Can't wait for cameras on bikes. Everyone wants cameras on bikes.

Why when I read this, i hear it in the voice of Homer Simpson....

 

[Mellow Velo]

I think we can all agree that fully independent testing is a desired outcome, regardless of this current issue.
Indeed, it is something that can and should be achieved, in time.

I'm not sure how having a Son in a lowly position at Sky would effect the allocation of WT points, or other administrative issues.

It is disappointing to think that it seems some folks believe this perceived
COI necessitates the removal of Cookson Snr from his post.
Just this week we have seen the inaugural Women's TOB; the first female race to match their male counterparts in prize money.
Also, this week, we have the UCI rectifying the Olympic track selection process that was a shambles at London.

Direct, major improvements, as opposed to highly speculative possibilities.

 

[webbie146]

I heard he's going to put cameras on bikes. Can't wait for cameras on bikes. Everyone wants cameras on bikes.

yes shaky, ****ty cams on bikes is what I've always wanted

 

[sniper]

I think we can all agree that fully independent testing is a desired outcome, regardless of this current issue.
Indeed, it is something that can and should be achieved, in time.

I'm not sure how having a Son in a lowly position at Sky would effect the allocation of WT points, or other administrative issues.

It is disappointing to think that it seems some folks believe this perceived
COI necessitates the removal of Cookson Snr from his post.
Just this week we have seen the inaugural Women's TOB; the first female race to match their male counterparts in prize money.
Also, this week, we have the UCI rectifying the Olympic track selection process that was a shambles at London.

Direct, major improvements, as opposed to highly speculative possibilities.

Sky doping is not highly speculative. It is highly likely.
It is sad to realize that the current UCI president is one of their biggest fans and has clearcut reasons to protect sky should any unfortunate issues threaten to come to light.

I don't think he should stand down, as there is unlikely to be a decent replacement.
But it's disappointing nonetheless.