I said I wouldn't react, but honestly, I can't take it anymore. While PL is far from perfect, we can at least, on this very forum, try to keep the standards just a bit higher than PL his standards.
So in order to have a somehow more factually correct discussion, I did the effort to try to translate his words verbatim (more or less: I am not a translator) and add some context, and discuss what cyclingnews has said that PL said (which is not always what PL said).
Here is the transcript, as close as possible to the original.
INT = interviewer (Stijn Vlaeminck)
PL = Patrick Lefevere
This took around 2 minutes in a podcast with a duration of 44 minutes. So 2 minutes of the time they talked about women's cycling, and it was near the very end of the talk.
39:22-41:20
the podcast can be listened here:
https://www.hln.be/wielrennen/een-v...ct-maar-ik-ben-ook-het-ocmw-niet-he~afebaf5a/
INT: Patrick: woman's cycling, when are you going to start with that?
PL: if there are good women in Belgium. But it doesn't have to be absolute a Belgian-centered squad imo.
But I sat in a program with Ine, and ofcourse this questions also comes from the sponsors, for clarity.
But I don't see them: Jolien D'hoore quits, Anna vdB stops
INT: that's a Dutch one.
PL: yes, but that doesn't matter. Only ... stays in the peloton, the one with Movistar...
INT: Lotte? (Kopecky)
PL: van Vleuten. Take that one out of the peloton... The Danish one I like (with Francais des yeux). She's funny and she's good. But then there is such a big gap.
I once was watching at a women's race in Italy on a Saturday afternoon where the Italian champion won.
INT: what's her name...
PL: Longo Borghini. And I think our first girl (= first Belgian) was between 40-50th at 5 minutes. Well... I found it entertaining but...
If you were watching the race in De Panne - I am involved in another company called Experza - and they sponsored a bit with the team of Rik Van Slycke, and you are watching the race
with 50 cyclists in the first group and nobody in that group (PL meant: nobody from the Experza sponsored team), then it's not fun, you know... with all respect...
I am not the public centre of social welfare (OCMW).
INT: but doesn't the level increase if there is more investment (in terms of sponsorship)? It's a bit the question of the chicken or the eg, no?
PL: with what do you have to start? First you have to convince them that they can become a (female) cyclist. But what should I recruit?
I don't have that experience and I don't have time and money and the motivation to invest 5 years if you don't know what you are going to achieve.
So a bit of personal interpretation:
They already talked about the TT, the road race, Evenepoel, WvA, Bennett,... and the interviewer comes up with his question about woman's cycling.
PL says that he (personally) doesn't see opportunities as there are too few (or no) big guns in Belgium, and the big guns overall are quitting. And in the same sentence, he added that others have already asked him, and sponsors as well.
He illustrates this with a race in Italy where he hardly didn't see a Belgian girl, and he illustrates it with a race in Belgium where he didn't have a girl in the first group from his Experza-sponsored team.
So he both argues that he doesn't see enough talent at this very moment he can get into his team (if he would build a team), and he says it's no fun when you sponsor a team with cyclists not getting results.
When the interviewer argues that there won't be talent without pro teams and good sponsors, PL says he doesn't have experience, and time/money/motivation to start up something with a lot of uncertainties.
So you have an interview with a 66-year old, who acknowledges that, even though his sponsors ask him to search for opportunities, he says he doesn't see them (either because he is not experienced / motivated ...) and gives some arguments.
It's actually very unterstandable that someone like PL doesn't need another project at his age, and probably doesn't have the energy to build something similar like the men's team, starting from scratch with regards to hiring female cyclists.
He himself acknowledges he is not experienced, and he doesn't see who he would hire. While everybody can suggest he is missing opportunities and he doesn't see the opportunities, well, maybe you are correct. But is this a reason to attack him for not doing what he doesn't see?
So what went wrong at cyclingnews?
They start their article with:
"In the latest of a string of controversial remarks "
First of all, this line prepares the naive reader that something controversial has been said. You don't even need to judge anymore. The judging is done for you.
Next they state that Lefevere his organisation won't launch a woman's top team (like there are many that mirror the man's team). That's good critique by CN. Because even if PL isn't the right guy to start a woman's team, PL himself says his sponsors are open to it, so maybe PL should look for guys in his organisation who can start up the woman's team.
CN (rightly) said that Lefevere didn't mention Kopecky, even if the interviewer tried to mention her name when PL listed what he named top riders.
Further on, PL illustrated the fact that there are hardly any Belgian big riders by the Italian race he mentioned. CN mentions that the first Belgian was helping Marianne Vos who ended up 2nd, but that's really reaching by CN: There still wasn't any Belgian rider with a result in that race, and that was the point PL was making with that example.
Next a very clear misinterpretation by CN: CN stated that PL neglected 2 Belgian women in the front group in the race at De Panne.
CN didn't have good translators, because PL was only talking about riders from his Experza team not making the front group.
So CN attacked Lefevere because they are simply prejudiced and lie about what PL really said.
And in that specific context (sponsoring a team with no one in the first group of 50) made him say he isn't sponsoring for welfare, implicitly saying that he expects results when he pays riders.
The CN article ends with:
"Lefevere's controversial comments regarding women's cycling are the latest ..."
I let you decide if what he says was controversial, but I feel it wasn't.
You could argue that, with another CEO, DQS would already have had a woman's team. PL clearly isn't the right person to start all of that. But that's not PL his fault: he himself admits he doesn't see opportunities, and he lacks experience.
So if his sponsors want a woman's team to happen, they should either take over an existing structure or suggest to PL that someone else will also be CEO for the woman's division.
I realize it's hard for non-dutch speaking people when the source of information is second hand, but may that always be a warning to be cautious if basing yourself upon those sources.
But I hope the discussion can be a bit more truthful and factual..