The UCI is anti-cycling...

[avanti]

The UCI should decide what license to grant a team by October at the latest. Otherwise it is grossly unfair to riders, team support staff, team owners, and sponsors.

The Pegasus saga is a good example of these people being screwed.

Not road related but the UCI is killing track racing by their agreements with the IOC, and in defining track as an winter sport.

 

[Barrus]

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.

Well, Colombia does have only two riders competing in the WC, Venezuela as well. I believe last year even Vnezuela had none, or perhaps it was Brazil as the national federation did not want to pay the expenses of sending a rider to the WC. This year many colombian riders decided not to even attempt to get a spot on the national team, as they had more important other engagements. So you could say no, they are not really interested in those events

 

[Wrecktangle]

I would stack the Roo-sters in the top 5 of cycling countries. Cadel has been near-super star status for a number of years and they have all sorts of Aussie riders on many teams.

Why not try to promote a team in Aussie-land and bring home a ton of new cycling sport enthusiasts like what happend with Lance and the USA? Then everyone can get richer; more teams, more riders, more venues, more cycling on TV, yadda, yadda...

 

[Night Rider]

I would stack the Roo-sters in the top 5 of cycling countries. Cadel has been near-super star status for a number of years and they have all sorts of Aussie riders on many teams.

Agreed. The UCI design the ranking system so the top ranked countries in teh world get the most riders in the World Champs. In the last two years Australia has qualified with the maximum number of riders, 9. This year they were as the other guys said 4th qualifiers.

In the last two years they have had consecutively the World Champion and the bronze medallist.

That’s quite a compelling case to say you are one of the top ranked cycling nations. And, we haven’t even started on track results yet.

 

[AussieGoddess]

But having lots of talented riders does not make us an important country in terms of world cycling.

We dont have lots of high-profile races. We dont get the audiences to make it a high profile sport. And that means we dont attract the sponsorship ...

It doesnt mean that we dont have our fair share (or more) of amazingly talented cyclists .... just that we havent promoted cycling as a sport.

I think the Pegasus team would have been absolutely fantastic for promoting pro cycling in Australia - but the UCI were right to pull the licence when they didnt have the funding. The fault is with Pegasus .... they knew they didnt have the funding. They are the ones who failed in sourcing more sponsors etc. I think Cycling Australia and the Australian Government should have done more to help them .... but thats not the UCI's job

 

[Martin318is]

Well, Colombia does have only two riders competing in the WC, Venezuela as well. I believe last year even Vnezuela had none, or perhaps it was Brazil as the national federation did not want to pay the expenses of sending a rider to the WC. This year many colombian riders decided not to even attempt to get a spot on the national team, as they had more important other engagements. So you could say no, they are not really interested in those events

So how do you get from that point to arguing that someone these are more important cycling nations than Australia (who attends every Worlds on road and track and figures in every ranking you'd care to mention).

Also, where do you get 'no riders interested in riding in the ProTour' from? thats a bit of a sideways generalisation isnt it?

 

[Barrus]

So how do you get from that point to arguing that someone these are more important cycling nations than Australia (who attends every Worlds on road and track and figures in every ranking you'd care to mention).

Also, where do you get 'no riders interested in riding in the ProTour' from? thats a bit of a sideways generalisation isnt it?

It was not only the riders, as I said. It is like Aussiegoddess said, the public, the races, the sponsors. Yet everybody just focused on the riders

Also the no interested in riding in protour also stems from the notion that Colombians have received offers to ride in the protour or the procontinental circuit and 9 out of 10 times they do not chose to ride there.

 

[Wrecktangle]

.... but thats not the UCI's job

Right, the UCI's job is to suck down lots of bux, squash any anti-Lance "propaganda", fight with the tour organizers, create twisted politics ala the Unibet scandal...but GOD FORBID they help the way-ward Roo-sters get a team going.

Sorry, but if they represent cycling, they MUST help teams get built, otherwise cycling will continue to be a bush-league sport.

 

[janraaskalt]

Sorry, but if they represent cycling, they MUST help teams get built, otherwise cycling will continue to be a bush-league sport.

You are just being frustrated. As a governing body the UCI must provide a level playing field for all teams. It would be unfair if crappy unfinanced teams can compete in the same races as teams which comply with the rules. It is also not good for the sport if those financially unstable teams go shipwreck somewhere in the middle of a season. The UCI made the right decision.

 

[hrotha]

Right, the UCI's job is to suck down lots of bux, squash any anti-Lance "propaganda", fight with the tour organizers, create twisted politics ala the Unibet scandal...but GOD FORBID they help the way-ward Roo-sters get a team going.

Sorry, but if they represent cycling, they MUST help teams get built, otherwise cycling will continue to be a bush-league sport.

Hello, they extended the deadline.

 

[BotanyBay]

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

I used to live about 10 miles from this location. It's not a real store. The crew just came and put up the signs up at the vacant location whenever filming was about to begin again. It's in Harrison NJ, not far from Newark.

 

[BotanyBay]

The UCI should decide what license to grant a team by October at the latest. Otherwise it is grossly unfair to riders, team support staff, team owners, and sponsors.

The Pegasus saga is a good example of these people being screwed.

Not road related but the UCI is killing track racing by their agreements with the IOC, and in defining track as an winter sport.

+1 on all counts. In my opinion, the UCI should divest itself of track racing and allow someone who actually cares about it to come in and nurture it again. Let "track cycling" be considered a different sport if we must.