The UCI is anti-cycling...

[Wrecktangle]

...this mess with Pegasus has convinced me.

Why don't these clowns help teams get formed and try to not drive off sponsors?

 

[ultimobici]

...this mess with Pegasus has convinced me.

Why don't these clowns help teams get formed and try to not drive off sponsors?

Probably because there wasn't an actual real live sponsor to scare off?

 

[janraaskalt]

This is the job of the UCI: make sure teams are solidly financed. Riders still have a possibility to go elsewhere, instead of finding out in March there is no money anymore. Thumbs up for the UCI.

 

[The Hitch]

Is the UCI anti cycling

No **** Sherlock (if the last 2 words have the same opening phonetic, you have the correct curse word)

But this incident with a 2nd tier team which was only hyped because it came from a certain country, has little to do with it.

Its that fat **** Mcquack (if the last 2 words rhyme, you have the correct curse word).


It is a organisation that is pro Doping, full of Idiots, rife with Corruption, ie a Kleptocratcy.

So they are ****s. (if the curse word matches the first letter of every crime, you have the correct curse word)

 

[Anonymous]

Probably because there wasn't an actual real live sponsor to scare off?

thanks for that. I now have hot tea all down my front

 

[ultimobici]

thanks for that. I now have hot tea all down my front

Happy to oblige!

 

[Mellow Velo]

The UCI rightfully take a load of shiite for usually being a load of shiite, but in Pegasus's case they have made the right call.
Team stability was a core reason for the introduction of the Pro Tour. Hence the need to fulfill certain requirements, one of which is a financial guarantee.
You can't issue a licence to a team that was funded with what amounted to an IOU, from an unspecified sponsor.

Far better for the riders and staff to seek new teams now, than to go unpaid and in a team that folds, mid-season.

 

[BotanyBay]

...this mess with Pegasus has convinced me.

Why don't these clowns help teams get formed and try to not drive off sponsors?

We've had some disasters in the past where teams came in under-funded and over-promised, and the riders ended up not getting paid.

Everyone needs to make money. The team owners, the director, the riders, and of course (and perhaps MOST significant) the UCI and Pat McQuaid himself.

If you think you're gonna create a Pro Team without kicking a huge cut right up to Pat McQuaid, you've been smoking the drapes.

 

[hrotha]

Another Pegasus thread! This is going to be the best Christmas EVER!

 

[Wrecktangle]

Sorry, maybe I should have said: why doesn't the UCI get their head out of their a$$ and help bring a cycling team to a very important cycling country like Kanga-land?

 

[Barrus]

Sorry, maybe I should have said: why doesn't the UCI get their head out of their a$$ and help bring a cycling team to a very important cycling country like Kanga-land?

Perhaps because that is not the duty of the UCI, also Australia is not what I would call a very important cycling country. Anyway, should they have given a team a pro-conti license on ifs and maybes? Off course not, it is necessary for a team to be financially stable before even attempting to get such a license. I certainly am not a fan of the UCI in general, but I believe that they did make the correct choice in this instance

 

[BotanyBay]

Sorry, maybe I should have said: why doesn't the UCI get their head out of their a$$ and help bring a cycling team to a very important cycling country like Kanga-land?

Considering McQuaid said this to John Wilcockson last week:

The other thing is to continue to create stars and try hard to find another global superstar. Despite everything that may be going on at the moment, Lance Armstrong was a truly global superstar for our sport who was a household sport and did a lot for cycling. We need to find one or two others who can communicate by their persona, their performances and the way they interact with the media to become international brand names. Because that’s what every sport needs to be a global sport.

Your point is a valid one. However, as is usually the case, we don't know the whole story here. Vaughters recently implied that the UCI is "less than fair" in how it awards ProTeam licenses.

It looks like we've got a team here that has some funding issues. But we don't know WHY they have funding issues. Could those issues be tied to corruption at the UCI? Sure they could.

But still, we're talking teams with $10MM budgets for a staff of 100 people. $10MMmight sound like a lot, but seriously, it's not, considering the current logistics of fielding a ProTeam.

 

[WonderLance]

Pagasis was an Australian team, they speak some english down there which tells me that they would not have lied or cheeted. Down with the UCI!

 

[biker jk]

also Australia is not what I would call a very important cycling country.

You've got to be kidding, right?

On Pegasus, it's a pity Australian corporates didn't step up to the plate with funding. The Australian dollar is at a 21-year against against a synthetically constructed Euro (peso), so it can't be that expensive.

 

[BotanyBay]

You've got to be kidding, right?

On Pegasus, it's a pity Australian corporates didn't step up to the plate with funding. The Australian dollar is at a 21-year against against a synthetically constructed Euro (peso), so it can't be that expensive.

I think what he means, is that Australia is not exactly ever going to pump mega dollars in McQuaid's direction. Australia might give him some damn good riders, but seriously, his eyes are on growth markets like the USA, Middle East (UAE) and China. He wants MONEY, not talent. The talent will come his way anyway, and they'll end up on whatever teams they end up on.

McQuaid could just focus on Texas, deal with the same population (that has more money) and he'd have to travel 1/4 the distance to do it. And Lance could set him up with all his favorite strippers at the Ritz Carlton.

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

Sorry, maybe I should have said: why doesn't the UCI get their head out of their a$$ and help bring a cycling team to a very important cycling country like Kanga-land?

 

[Barrus]

You've got to be kidding, right?

On Pegasus, it's a pity Australian corporates didn't step up to the plate with funding. The Australian dollar is at a 21-year against against a synthetically constructed Euro (peso), so it can't be that expensive.

No, I'm not kidding. Yes, Australia has some fine riders, but how many? Less than most European countries, less than some South AMerican countries. How many first grade races are there? How many do Australian companies invest in the sport?
Really internationally looking Australia is not that important in the cycling world. It might seem important to Australians and other ENglish speaking people, as the sports news in many of those countries focuses on English speaking riders, but in the grand scheme of things Australia is quite insignificant at the moment

 

[slartiblartfast]

No, I'm not kidding. Yes, Australia has some fine riders, but how many? Less than most European countries, less than some South AMerican countries. How many first grade races are there? How many do Australian companies invest in the sport?
Really internationally looking Australia is not that important in the cycling world. It might seem important to Australians and other ENglish speaking people, as the sports news in many of those countries focuses on English speaking riders, but in the grand scheme of things Australia is quite insignificant at the moment

...but happens to be fourth ranked nation in the men's Pro Tour.

Australia produces a lot of successful pro riders, more so than any South American country and indeed most European countries. However, it is true to say that cycling is not a mainstream sport in Australia. The big Australian corporates have never provided significant cycling sponsorship. In the end Pegasus failed because there was no Australian based headline sponsor.

 

[M Sport]

No, I'm not kidding. Yes, Australia has some fine riders, but how many? Less than most European countries, less than some South AMerican countries.

What criteria did you judge that on? Let's take the country world rankings heading into the WC race. Australia 4th, Spain, Italy Belgium filled the first three so all other countries you're alluding to were behind Australia.

To the OP. I'm glad Pegasus failed it's licence application, it would have been a shambles within two months and it wasn't even going to be a team representing Australia anyway. I'm all for bagging the UCI when it's justified but no complaints from me this time.

 

[Barrus]

...but happens to be fourth ranked nation in the men's Pro Tour.

That only takes into account the world ranking, which does not account for races outside of the protour. Which immediately ensures a bias against the South American countries, and to many other countries for which the majority of riders do not ride in the protour

 

[rxgqgxnyfz]

Don't care about Pegasus, just came here to boast that i recognized this bar from Soprano intro.
________
Michigan medical marijuana dispensary

 

[M Sport]

That only takes into account the world ranking, which does not account for races outside of the protour. Which immediately ensures a bias against the South American countries, and to many other countries for which the majority of riders do not ride in the protour

Ensures bias because a countries best riders aren't in a ProTour team? I don't think so. Natural selection would ensure the best ranked teams out of the ProTour ... were in fact the best teams. Quite simple really.

 

[Tuarts]

I'd like to know who the sponsor would have been, if that did get Pro-Conti status. Wonder if they'll stay with them

 

[Barrus]

Ensures bias because a countries best riders aren't in a ProTour team? I don't think so. Natural selection would ensure the best ranked teams out of the ProTour ... were in fact the best teams. Quite simple really.

Colombia has no pro tour team, nor any riders who have any interest to ride for foreign teams. Same with Venezuela. Which means that these countries will not be included in the protour ranking. With Italy, the Italian champion rides for a procontinental team and has received very little protour point. Vacansoleil wasn't protour last year and rode almost none of the protour races, yet crushed a lot of the races.

 

[slartiblartfast]

Colombia has no pro tour team, nor any riders who have any interest to ride for foreign teams. Same with Venezuela. Which means that these countries will not be included in the protour ranking. With Italy, the Italian champion rides for a procontinental team and has received very little protour point. Vacansoleil wasn't protour last year and rode almost none of the protour races, yet crushed a lot of the races.

This is getting a bit off the subject, but did any South American riders figure at the pointy end of things in the last couple of road world championships or the last Olympics or are they not interested in competing at these events either?

I mentioned in my last post the lack of significant cycling sponsorship from the big Australian corporates. In fact corporates have provided some significant naming rights sponsorship to major cycling events in Australia, but relatively little for pro cycling teams.