They have a spot.
But it's Bora probably, like Ive posted here at the beginning of October (when i first got te message). You know the team of Ralph Denk the guy who cried in the press last year cause Visma did it to him.
-
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!
They have a spot.
But it's Bora probably, like Ive posted here at the beginning of October (when i first got te message). You know the team of Ralph Denk the guy who cried in the press last year cause Visma did it to him.
If contested EU rules will always take precedence, no sports organization is above that.
The “fair” next step would be giving the teams a possibility to break the contracts as well I suppose…
All blame is on [politics] and the UCI not sufficiently adjusting to that.
Van Gils should not be allowed to participate in any UCI event for a team other than Lotto for the original duration of his contract with the team (as long as the team doesn't break the rules of the sport) unless being granted that by Lotto. And if he breaks the terms of his contract in a manner against the rules of the sport, he should also not be paid while he cannot race.
The extension was before important results he rode the past season. He’s worth more, and Lotto isn’t able to pay him.
Sure you can blame the rider for not properly negotiating a higher contract, and that Lotto got him on the cheap. But don’t blame him if he tries to leave because of that, when he has the chance to.
Did he give Lotto the opportunity to match the Bora contract?
Yeah no way?? That's the whole point of doing a good job as a smaller cycling team yk? Extending someone before he blows up, cause if you wait you can't anymore. It's literally the reason why Lefevere got QS as big as he did. Underpaying riders, he literally bragged about it for years, everyone applaud him for it.
There is no way for smaller teams to match offers from rich teams, it's just not possible. You know that, you're not stupid. The whole system collapses if you make this a normal thing. Rich teams can just not only snatch everyone they want now, but at any given time. Hell what's next. Leader injured before the Tour, let's buy out a leader of some smaller team?
Van Gils signed his contract early so that he had security, and had a mind at peace before the classics. There is absolutely 0 reason for teams to even try to extend them early on a season if they can just ditch whenever they want more money.
UCI can do something, but it probably wouldn't be legal (see Diarra ruling). Anyways no one will look at them cause it will be handled behind the scenes and legally and the whole cycling world will stop caring in a week. Hell, fans will probably start screaming for more money in the sport next week again, not realizing it only helps the rich, and they are the ones who will just be paying more and more for this sport.
Lotto should just never offer more than 1 year contracts to young riders then.
I agree that the system is *** and it’s not fair towards Lotto. They should be compensated for all the years of effort they put into him. I’m just saying that I also understand Van Gils. And that neither underpaying your best riders, nor leaving without compensation is fair. Thus the system needs to change. Which people like Lefevere have said for a very long time now. UCI is just UCI.
I feel that this behaviour comes down to a certain agent. Agents in the end just wants to make more money, that is their sole purpose of existence, this specific agent took that to heart. UCI in my opinion can't do much about this specific area, it's down to EU labour law and that will always take precedence, when contested. UCI could i guess lobby for new laws together with some other sports organization like UEFA. But if they actually succeed we might not like the results.
Teams and riders can still chose to respect each other. But i know, that is rather naive take on it, agent will always piss on that and laugh, when taking the money.
Teams and riders can still chose to respect each other. But i know, that is rather naive take on it, agent will always piss on that and laugh, when taking the money.
Van Gils finessed the team. That's my problem. He signed a new contract in March for having security (he is safe is he gets injured, he has a peace of mind going into the classic season) AND for getting more money immediately (from the moment his contract was signed his salary multiplied by 10). Just to break that contract half a year later to again get more money. No that's not normal, it's just being a complete ***.
As a result Lotto couldn't extend Campenaerts, Kron, Moniquet, .... (Vermeersch was leaving anyways) with the extra money they were giving to Van Gils and now they can't even replace him cause he does it in november (he made sure to do it after the season so he couldn't get punished by his team of course). It's just sick. I no way will I ever understand Van Gils, he could've just perfectly waited with extending till after the classcis and then leave and I would have 0 problems with it, even if it would've also been for the money.
And the transfer system Lefevere has wanted for so long has just been deemed "inherently wrong" by the European Court so no the UCI can't do that. The UCI had a system, one that actually worked, you just don't break your contract without an agreement. It was fine even tho it wasn't perfect for teams that develop riders.
That system wasn’t fine because you get in situations where you have a rider being paid underneath market value. That Van Gils already extended his contract in March doesn’t change that he should get paid more now.
Last edited:
And by this logic it would be more than fine if teams just lowered the salary of riders underperforming?
Evgeni Berzin: Russian Roulette | Cyclingnews.com
A look back at the 1994 Giro d'Italia and the fallout with Gewiss
www.cyclingnews.com
Evgeni Berzin: Russian Roulette | Cyclingnews.com
A look back at the 1994 Giro d'Italia and the fallout with Gewiss
wow, first time I read the Berzin-Gewiss saga!
the behind the scenes secrets are always the best.
my sister raced (in 1994-95, she was 7-8 years old) with a little local team sponsored by Gewiss (that team would later become the pro women team Chirio-Forno d'Asolo) we met Bombini and co in winter 94-95, woulda been fun to know about Evgenyi's antics
Oficially I think their roster is full. Umba had confirmed his extension on August despite not being listed on PCS, unless the deal has been cancelled or there is another free spot which i'm unaware of.
Anyways being Astana I'm sure they would find a way to make room for Van Gils if needed.
You’d assume van Gils’ contract extension in March had bonuses based on his performance. Same with clauses for renegotiation or right to void the contract.
Either the agent made an absolute asshat of the terms/clauses in March and is doing it again now, or there are clauses that the agent/rider is arguing that the team hasn’t upheld.
Either the agent made an absolute asshat of the terms/clauses in March and is doing it again now, or there are clauses that the agent/rider is arguing that the team hasn’t upheld.
This is an argument for a transfer fee like in football. I don't like it, but I understand it. If Lotto are going to develop a rider then can't pay them their full market value, why not have a formal process whereby Bora etc. pay Lotto X millions of euros or whatever?
Careers are short and uncertain, so why should a quality rider like Van Gils be yoked to a troubled team that's not even on the WT in his prime earning years?
Lotto will be WT for the next 3 years, 2026-27-28. but I get what you say. they have just lost their second sponsor Dstny and it's November and no other sponsor is coming. I think they'll hope that with their 2026 WT license they can get another sponsor
It isn't underpaying though. You can't pay a rider exactly what they're worth, because you can't see into the future. The thing about contracts is both parties take a risk. The rider can blow up and suddenly be worth a lot more or he underperforms while getting big bucks (ahem, Froome). Well, tough luck in both cases: that's the chance they took when signing the contract.
And of course it happened after he signed with a new manager, the Carera brothers.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread- Started by DNP-Old
- Replies: 29K
-
Teams & Riders The Great Big Cycling Transfers, Extensions, and Rumours Thread
- Started by RedheadDane
- Replies: 11K
-
Teams & Riders Tadej Pogačar discussion thread- Started by Lequack
- Replies: 23K
-
Top 10 current cyclists outside of the 'big 6'
- Started by cyclingfan3
- Replies: 46
-
-
-
Teams & Riders Everybody needs a little bit of Roglstomp in their lives- Started by johnymax
- Replies: 19K
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram